Jump to content

BankFodder

Site Team
  • Posts

    49,624
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    254

BankFodder last won the day on February 28

BankFodder had the most liked content!

Reputation

3,349 Excellent

Location

  • Location
    Virtually everywhere

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19 In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck! Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
  2. Okay. Have you inform the police that it was sold by John Pye auctions? This would be a good thing to do. You can certainly recover your money from parcel2go. I would have your chance of success is almost 100%. I'm afraid that the purchaser will have a lot more difficulty in terms of any auction fee et cetera that he paid. If you want to proceed then draft a letter of claim and post it here. You have to do a lot of reading of the threats in this sub-forum. Being the claim will be straightforward but you should know what you are doing in order to have confidence
  3. Okay well the easiest thing to do would be to go against P2G. Do you have a crime reference number?
  4. By the way, did you receive any email updates about the progress of your parcel from EVRi? If you did, then it will be important to include these in your bundle because it will show even more clearly that EVRi were perfectly aware that you were the intended beneficiary of the delivery contract.
  5. Paragraph 9 – "shipper" entered into an agreement… – Shipper in inverted commas Paragraph 10 clearly the claimant was the shipper and the defendants contracting partner… Paragraph 10 – is clearly an attempt to derail the claim against them by clutching at straws Paragraph 13 the defendant has since remove the tracking information evidence from the claimant's account. Fortunately the claimant has retained a copy of this (is this correct?) Paragraphs 15 to 17 – emphasise standard industry practice by putting it in bold Paragraph 16 – what you mean by "full colour policy"? All of these paragraphs concerning the insurance decisions should come after the arguments, no compensation list. The order of argument should be – identity of the claimant no compensation list insurance requirement If at the order of your witness statement seems to be a little chaotic. You deal with the identity of the claimant You refer to the binding or non-binding nature of the judgements which relate to the insurance question – which is not the central issue of this case. Then you go onto the no compensation list You then go back to the insurance issue. Unless I have misunderstood the logic trail in your witness statement, I think that you need to reorder it by moving some paragraphs around. Paragraph 20 – by identifying a list of items which is so extensive that it almost includes the kitchen sink and which they say that although they are prepared to accept those items for delivery, in the event that the defendant's breach the delivery contract causing loss or damage, they will not accept liability for their breach and will not provide compensation. Paragraph 23 – what are "Boston stolen items"? This is my dictation error and it should be lost and stolen items. Although this is my carelessness in not checking my dictation, it worries me because you have simply copied this down when clearly it is meaningless and yet you have simply accepted it. This is going to lead you into trouble if you go to court like this. I can imagine that if I'd written "balls to the judge", you would have copied down "balls to the judge" and sent it off to the court and to the defendant! Paragraph 26 in the event that they breach the delivery contract and the parcel they are carrying is lost or damaged. Paragraph 28 the defendant's insurance policy operates to support the exclusion of their customers rights under section 57 and as such is a secondary contract within the meaning of section 72 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 Paragraph 29 – the defendant justifies their exclusion of customers statutory rights and the use of a section 72 secondary contract by saying that this is standard industry practice. (Don't bother to put this in bold) Paragraph 31 – renders unenforceable any contractual term… Paragraph 32 the defendant is also attempting to shield themselves from liability… Paragraph 33 – although not specifically relevant to this case, I further submit… Markets act 2000.… Defendants are committing an offence although the defendants justify this by saying that this is in line with standard industry practice. Despite this, the defendant's insurance product is unlawful in any event as it seeks to exclude or limit liability contrary to section 57 and is also unfair within the meaning of the unfair terms provisions of the consumer rights act 2015 if you are going to use the Telegraph article then you must include a copy of it in your bundle Let's have a look at version 5
  6. I will have a look at your version for and get back to you. You say that the bundle must be filed by April 4. I'm sure earlier on you said that it was April 8. You might find it helpful to make a court familiarisation visit. I'm not sure what you say they will concentrate on the insurance. You purchased their insurance and so there is no issue there. Their issue will be that although you bought the insurance, you should have read there no compensation list which apparently excludes that item. Your argument is that this is simply a device to exclude liability contrary to section 57. Your argument is also that the nature of the item has no bearing on the risk of it being lost or stolen. It might be vulnerable to some special kind of damage – but that has not happened here so it is not part of the argument. The insurance issue here is really just a sideshow and we are hoping that in the judgement in addition to the court saying that the no compensation list is contrary to section 57 and also unfair, that the judge may make additional remarks concerning the lawfulness of the insurance. But that won't be particularly relevant to your case. Have you included a copy of their no compensation list in your trial bundle?
  7. Their defence is predicated on two points only. First of all that you are not the contracting partner. This is easily rebutted by the fact that you tell us that you have an invoice in your name – correct? The second point is that the item you sent appears on their no compensation list. I hope that you understand the argument that I have put above. I hope you won't mind too much if I say that I feel that you haven't been as thorough in your reading as you should have been. You been missing important documents which were easily discoverable in our pinned threads and you have really relied on copy and paste jobs of the witness statement – your first version and then subsequent versions – and I'm afraid that you are going to have to show that you understand what you are doing rather more than you have done so far This is an easy case to win. As usual the EVRi arguments are extremely weak – but you need to be on top of them. The post which I have made just before this, involves a fair amount of arguments broken up into several points. You really do need to rethink them carefully and maybe make your own notes about them so that you understand exactly what is being argued here. I have heard that quite often now EVRi are starting to be represented by a professional advocate instead of the poor quality people they have sent along so far. The arguments you are putting here will be far superior to anything that a EVRi defence advocate might be able to present – but on the other hand a professional advocate may be able to present their case in a rather fluid and competent/confident manner. This is no criticism of you – you are simply litigant in person he don't have any experience of this. However you have to make up for this by starting getting in control of the documents you are relying upon and the efficacy you are referring to. This means that you got to start understanding what you are saying and not simply repeating what we have put up here for you. I can't remember if you've given us a court date yet – but you have got plenty of time to get a handle on things that the exercise of putting this witness statement together presents an excellent opportunity for understanding the issues and the order of importance. I'm sure you are finding this to be a bit of a nuisance – but at the end of the day I think you'll find it useful if you get yourself into this position again with some other company whether it is parcel delivery or some other bunch of bullies.
  8. The defendant at various points in its defence from paragraph 2.19 to 2.21 attempt to justify its unlawful or unfair practices on the basis that they are apparently in line with "standard industry practice". 2.19 of the defence… "Limit of liability for loss or damage parcel… In line with standard industry practice" even though this is contrary to section 57 CRA 2015 2.20 of the defence… "The defendant offers full colour policy in line with standard industry practice" even though this is contrary to section 72 CRA 2015 2.21 of the defence… "Defendants non-compensation list… In line with standard industry practice" even though this effectively is contrary to section 57 and section 72 CRA 2015. The defendant is effectively arguing that the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and other parliamentary legislation is subordinate to standard industry practice. Despite this, at paragraph 2.22 of the defence the defendant refers to 3 judgements which have been provided to them and which are included at (XXX and XXX and XXX of this bundle) and says that they are not binding. It is accepted that these judgements are not binding. However they may be persuasive but the defendant appears to be saying that these County Court judgements are also subordinate to standard industry practice. The no compensation list The Defendant operates a no compensation list which effectively runs contrary to section 57 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 by identifying an extensive list of items which they say they are prepared to carry but in the event of loss or damage they will not provide any compensation. It is submitted that not only does this list run counter to section 57 of the Consumer Rights Act, the list amounts to an unfair term within the meaning of the 2015 Act. Furthermore, if the no compensation list is applicable then the claimant's position is that this list would only be applicable in cases of damage where an inherent fragility – such as glass – of an item might render it particularly vulnerable to damage and therefore should be carried out the sender's own risk. The characteristics of an item for carriage – with a fragile are not – are completely irrelevant to the risk of the item being lost or stolen and therefore the non-compensation list is unfair at least in respect of Boston stolen items or indeed where items may have been damaged in a way which was not influenced by their inherent fragility. In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was properly declared. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. So it is clear that in any event, the defendant accepted the risk of carriage and it is disingenuous for them now to try and resile from that position. I think you should incorporate this into your witness statement. I think this should all come before the insurance arguments. The insurance arguments are not part of their defence – and in fact they could possibly be because they sell you insurance. The references to unlawful insurance which you have taken from other available documents has really been of use where insurance has not been purchased. However it is certainly important to refer to the insurance and point out the fact that the insurance was unlawful but despite this you went ahead and bought it. However the most important aspect of the insurance which you purchased is that it shows that they were fully aware of what they were carrying and they were even prepared to sell you an insurance for it – and of course if the delivery had been successful they would have been happy to keep the premium and it is only now that you are making a claim that they are trying to wriggle out of it. Typical of EVRi – professional wrigglers. Try and incorporate all of this into version 4 and let's have a look
  9. They are insane. The people who drafted this really wouldn't get a job as a paralegal any other company. So what you have to say about my comment about the position of your paragraph 22?
  10. 10. Clearly the Claimant was the defendant' s contracting partner and the sender of the item because they organised the carriage and is they who and entered into the agreement with the Defendant under agreement number C00. The invoice in the claimant's name evidence is included in the court bundle (at location of document). The defendants assertion that it was the competition organiser who was the contracting partner is clearly an attempt to derail the claim against them. It is untrue. The defendant has no evidence to support their position and the attached invoice (at location XX in the court bundle) shows clearly that the defendant's contract was with the claimant and that the defendant is fully aware. It is a matter of concern that the defendant has signed a statement of truth that states otherwise. I'm a bit mystified why you are at your paragraph 22 trying to say that the defendant is also relying on a no no compensation list. If you paid insurance then it seems to me that that is the principal reason for trying to deny your claim. What do you have have to say about this?
  11. Please can you identify the paragraph in the defence which tries to say that you are not the contracting partner and also please can you copy the words used into a post.
  12. Paragraph 13 Where is this reference from? If it is reference from a paragraph in their defence then we need to refer back to that. For instance – at paragraph XX of the defence, the defendant attempts to deflect liability to the claimant on the spurious basis that they were not the contracting partner: – Mr Christopher …. Was the competition organiser and was simply kind enough to drop off the parcel the parcel with agreement number C00. but was not the contracting partner and the defendant is fully aware of this. Something like that Can you remind me – did you purchase insurance? What was the reason for refusing to reimburse you? Was it the no compensation list?
  13. Yes, I think we can probably help you get the money back from John Pye auctions. Have you put them on notice that the painting was stolen? Can the purchaser of it provide you with any receipts or other evidence? This person is obviously extremely decent about this and it sounds to me as if you have been pretty lucky. What is the value of this painting? I think you will be looking at recovering the sale price, and also any other auction fees et cetera which will have to be returned to the purchaser so in fact I think that you both are a position where you need to recover some money. Maybe you should tell the purchaser to come to this thread and join in. It might be an interesting project. Of course if John Pye are a thoroughly reputable firm of auctioneers then they will want to distance themselves from this completely and not cause any problems about refunding all monies.
  14. Paragraph 7 The Defendant amount of full cover which you have taken out for a parcel, if at all start of the second person finishes in the third person – this is to be taken out of context. You need to say what this is Paragraph 12 and?or negligence. this is not in the correct place. This is evidence to support your arguments. Your arguments should be in the witness statement and references to the cases should be made during the argument and pointed to the place in the bundle.
×
×
  • Create New...