Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Better version attached with the late appeal explained more clearly for the judge. This will sound silly, but I think it would be a good idea to e-mail it to the court and UKPC on Sunday.  It's probably me being daft, but Sunday is still March, and as it's late, sending it in March rather than April will make it sound like it was less late than it really is.  if you get my drift. You can still pop in a paper version on Tuesday if you want. E-mail address for the court: [email protected] And for UKPC: [email protected]   [email protected] Defendant WS.pdf
    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Defendant is going to contest jurisdiction?


debt_mountain
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6262 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Happy new year all,

 

I am starting a new claim against someone (leaving them nameless at the moment as I think they read this site). But I received a letter from their solicitor saying they acknowledge the claim but will be contesting jurisdiction. I live in Scotland and the company I took out the finance was in Scotland but each time I wrote a letter (Prelim / LBA and any serious complaint letter ) I got a reply from an English address.

 

I had the papers served on an English address.

 

do I simply write to the court telling them why I opted to go for an English court?

 

The T/C are also writtne under English Law and the CRA info stored is also an English address.

 

Thanks

If I have helped click my scales....

 

Find my threads by clicking here

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately it is difficult to help you without you naming the company concerned.

 

The defendant must be based in England either at the time the contract was signed or currently, or that the contract was signed within England.

 

You cannot use English law when they only have an office in England.

 

There may be ways round this but without further information it would be very difficult to know.

 

If it helps, so far we have had no trouble with people naming the banks/institutions and so far the banks haven't used it against any member and would be very unlikely to in your case.

BEFORE starting your claim read through the FAQ's and if there's something you aren't sure of then ask.

If you win, donate to this site

Contents of my posts are purely my own personal opinions, some formed by personal experience and some from research. If in doubt seek qualified legal advice.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe you are always supposed to either use your local branch address or their Edit i meant registered office

 

I would always recommend the registered office, if this is in england then i don't see they have a claim.

 

If you haven't served it either your local branch or the registered office then they may have a case i believe.

 

FWIW local branch is always dangerous for serving claims because some people may take this to mean any branch which is convenient to them rather than the one closest to them.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

the company is Blackhorse whose registered office is in Cardiff but every reply I have received back even when I have sent a letter to my local office, is sent from the Cockfoster address in Barnet.

 

My local office is in Scotland, this is where I signed the latest document (not included in the claim) but previous contracts were signed at home and posted in.

 

Thanks

If I have helped click my scales....

 

Find my threads by clicking here

Link to post
Share on other sites

the company is Blackhorse whose registered office is in Cardiff but every reply I have received back even when I have sent a letter to my local office, is sent from the Cockfoster address in Barnet. I believe that you should have used the cardiff address.

 

My local office is in Scotland, this is where I signed the latest document (not included in the claim) but previous contracts were signed at home and posted in. I dont believe this has any bearing on where you file your claim.

 

Thanks

Hold on a mo, i presumed you were suing then in an english court, are you suing them in a scottish court?

If so ill bow out because i havent looked at scots law in this respect.

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Glenn I am suing them in an english court.

 

Got the letter today saying the judge was going to review the request blackhorse made to have the case kicked out for me being in scotland but claiming in england.

 

Is there anything I can do to prevent this? The papers were not signed on blackhorse property, always posted to my home and as I was travelling a lot I will have signed them in England and posted them there. Can I use this as a cause for it being in an english court?

 

the agrement does say that it is english law so does that men I can chiise if it is to be heard in england or scotland?

 

any more ideas?

If I have helped click my scales....

 

Find my threads by clicking here

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think that you have to reside in england to sue in england and so its normal to 'have' an english address for the service of papers.

 

Im not an expert on this issue have you asked in the forum specific to the scottish claimants?

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

I went into the Scottish section and the GovanLawCenter and got some info on jurisdiction

 

I will be sending this off late afternoon so any comments before then would be good?

 

thanks

 

So in addition to my initial letter (at bottom of this post) I will send the following--

 

Dear Sir/Madam

Thank you for your letter of 15th January 2007. Further to my letter of 3/1/7 I would like to request the court consider the enclosed information when reviewing the defendants application for an order challenging jurisdiction.

1 – It is my understanding that the rules on where I can raise proceedings (jurisdiction) - are set out in the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982, as amended by the Civil Juridiction and Judgments Order 2001. Schedule 4 of the 1982 Act (as amended) regulates the court's jurisdiction over consumer contracts. This includes a consumer's bank or building society account.

Importantly, para 8 of schedule 4 provides that a customer is entitled to sue their bank where they live (where they are 'domiciled') or where the bank is domiciled.

A company 's domicile is usually established from where it has its 'seat', that is usually its 'registered office' or the place where its central management and control is exercised: section 42, 1982 Act. Blackhorse’s registered address is in Wales but all communications received regarding my claim have been sent from one of their English addresses - 116 Cockfoster Road, Barnet,EN4 0DY.

2 – Should the defendant be trying to claim that a clause in the terms and conditions of the agreements state that, as I have a Scottish address, then the agreement is governed by Scottish law, then I believe that does not confer exclusive jurisdiction.

Paragraph 9 of Schedule 4 allows parties to agree that one part of the UK has 'exclusive jurisdiction'. That is known as 'prorogation' of jurisdiction. In other words, that proceedings must be raised either in England, Scotland or Northern Ireland.

In general, paragraph 9 can only apply if both you and your bank were domiciled in the same part of the UK when the account was opened (i.e. either both in England/Wales, or both in Scotland, or both in NI) and the contract contains a clause conferring exclusive jurisdiction to one part of the UK.

Firstly, such clauses do not deal with exclusive jurisdiction - they simply deal with the application of common law rules. The courts have held that such clauses do not go far enough to confer exclusive jurisdiction.

For example, in the case of McGowan v. Summit at Lloyds 2002 SC 638, 2002 SLT 1258, an insurance policy contained a clause which said: 'this Document shall be governed by the laws of England, whose courts shall have jurisdiction in any dispute arising hereunder'. An action was raised in Scotland and Lloyds defence was the case was incompetent as the Scottish courts had no jurisdiction in light of the clause. However, the Inner House of the Court of Session (Scotland's highest court) held (applying the English case of S&W Berisford plc v. New Hampshire Insurance Co Ltd [1990] 2 QB 631) that the clause did not create exclusive jurisdiction in England, and only created concurrent jurisdiction i.e. proceedings could be raised in either Scotland or England in terms of the clause and the 1982 Act.

In the English High Court case of S&W Berisford plc (cited above) a clause in an insurance policy stated that 'This insurance is subject to English jurisdiction'. Justice Hobhouse (as he then was) held that those words 'were inept' to create an exclusive jurisdiction clause.

I also believe that any such clause in an agreement is an unfair term of contract in terms of UTCC Regulations 1999. Paragraph 1(q) of Schedule 2 to the 1999 Regulations provides as follows:

SCHEDULE 2

INDICATIVE AND NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF TERMS WHICH MAY BE REGARDED AS UNFAIR

1(q) excluding or hindering the consumer's right to take legal action or exercise any other legal remedy, particularly by requiring the consumer to take disputes exclusively to arbitration not covered by legal provisions, unduly restricting the evidence available to him or imposing on him a burden of proof which, according to the applicable law, should lie with another party to the contract.

CIVIL JURISDICTION AND JUDGMENTS ACT 1982 AS AMENDED

SCHEDULE 4 AS AMENDED BY CIVIL JURISDICTION AND JUDGMENTS ORDER 2001

Jurisdiction over consumer contracts

 

7. - (1) In matters relating to a contract concluded by a person, the consumer, for a purpose which can be regarded as being outside his trade or profession, jurisdiction shall be determined by this rule and rules 8 and 9, without prejudice to rule 3(e) and (h)(ii), if -

 

(a) it is a contract for the sale of goods on instalment credit terms; or

 

(b) it is a contract for a loan repayable by instalments, or for any other form of credit, made to finance the sale of goods; or

 

© in all other cases, the contract has been concluded with a person who pursues commercial or professional activities in the part of the United Kingdom in which the consumer is domiciled or, by any means, directs such activities to that part or to other parts of the United Kingdom including that part, and the contract falls within the scope of such activities.

 

(2) This rule shall not apply to a contract of transport other than a contract which, for an inclusive price, provides for a combination of travel and accommodation, or to a contract of insurance.

 

8. - (1) A consumer may bring proceedings against the other party to a contract either in the courts of the part of the United Kingdom in which that party is domiciled or in the courts of the part of the United Kingdom in which the consumer is domiciled.

 

(2) Proceedings may be brought against a consumer by the other party to the contract only in the courts of the part of the United Kingdom in which the consumer is domiciled.

 

(3) The provisions of this rule shall not affect the right to bring a counter-claim in the court in which, in accordance with this rule and rules 7 and 9, the original claim is pending.

 

9. The provisions of rules 7 and 8 may be departed from only by an agreement -

 

(a) which is entered into after the dispute has arisen; or

 

(b) which allows the consumer to bring proceedings in courts other than those indicated in those rules; or

 

© which is entered into by the consumer and the other party to the contract, both of whom are at the time of conclusion of the contract domiciled or habitually resident in the same part of the United Kingdom, and which confers jurisdiction on the courts of that part, provided that such an agreement is not contrary to the law of that part.

For the above reasons I would dispute the defendants rights to contest jurisdiction.

 

The original letter I sent was--

 

 

I have received a letter from the defendants solicitor informing me that they are intending to contest jurisdiction for this case.

I would like to detail why, although I live in Scotland, I have chosen to serve papers on the defendant through an English court.

1 – All replies to my correspondence asking for our personal data not to be shared was replied to from the Cockfosters address.

2 – All references in the credit reference agencies systems state an address in Wales.

3 – Any letter of a serious nature sent to my local office was forwarded to an English address by the local office and the reply was sent out by the English office.

4 – The terms and conditions document attached to each agreement was in English law.

I have a very detailed file of every communication sent to the defendant and a copy of their reply, detailing what address they have replied from.

For the above reasons I would dispute the defendants rights to contest jurisdiction.

If I have helped click my scales....

 

Find my threads by clicking here

Link to post
Share on other sites

As i said i am no expert and this looks good to me.

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

There is no reason why your case cannot & should not be heard in England.

 

Also if they have expressed their contract to be subject to English Law I can't understand what they are playing at other than they are hoping to put you off by claiming they can litigate in Scotland where the costs regime kicks in much sooner.....after £750.....Obviously someone at BH needs to read their own agreements.

 

Pass their fancy Newport offices regularly & take great pleasure, at rush hour (or as I prefer crash hour) in not letting them out into the busy flowing traffic. In fact I go out of my way whenever lawfully possible to block their passage.....& being a mean sod it gives me great pleasure

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...