Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Should this to be take into court with him or should he send something in earlier?
    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
  • 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
      • 161 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

Tesco trolley hit my car - car ins is with Tesco's


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6521 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

I have also started this thread in General - not sure which was best place to put it.

 

 

Can anyone give me advice?

 

My car was hit by a Tesco Trolley on the weekend. It has a huge dent.

Noticed that all the trolley bays were overflowing and there were clumps of trolleys situated all over the car park and not a Trolley person to be seen.

 

Off I went into the store and asked for the Manager. He came out inspected my car took me back in store and took my details. Then along came a stuck up *$"& and told me Tesco do not accept liability. I said I would fight hard to try and get them to accept liability (this would cost me £150 plus two years no claims) she then said scaristically "Best of Luck".

 

My arguement with the store is that there were trolleys all over the car park and there was no trolley person there. She told me that he was probably around the side of the building. One trolley person at a Tesco Extra on a Friday teatime. They are having a laugh! I videoed and took photos of the car park and trolleys.

 

Mt car insurance is with Tesco so I put in a claim Friday evening and was told that it is very unlikely that Tesco Insurance will support my claim as there is no negilance on the supermaket.

 

Can this be right, I have proof that the trolleys had not been collected and Im sure they have CCTV footage of what happened. Has anyone ever claimed against a supermarket and won? Do you think it is worth going it alone without the support of the insurance company? Are Tesco insurance only saying that they will probably not support me because it is Tesco Supermarket I want to sue.

Is it worth trying to get the CCTV footage - find the driver and sue him/her or is that a bit far fetched?

Halifax Data Protection Act requested 5/4/06

Prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £2299.00

£219.00 offer 20/5/06

LBA sent 22/5/06

Moneyclaim filed 5/6/06:) Settled in full

 

Barclays prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £150

LBA sent 22/5/06

Moneyclaim filed 5/6/06:) Settled in full

 

Barclaycard 1 prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £100

LBA sent 22/5/06

£50 rec'd back

Last request for remainder 5/6/06 :)Settled in full

 

Barclaycard 2 prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £160

LBA sent 22/5/06

Last ditch attempt letter sent 5/6/06 :)Settled in full

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure where you would stand legally as many car parks have disclaimer notices to say they won't accept liability for any damage to your vehicle etc so you are basically parking there at your own risk.

 

Another thing to add is that you state your car has a "huge dent" - if this is the case then to me that would suggest the damage was caused by something more substantial than a single stray trolley hitting your car - it would hav either been a trolley full of shopping which somebody has bumped into your car, or even that another vehicle has hit your car. (I may be wrong but I just don't think an empty trolley would cause a "huge dent").

 

I assume you did not see the incident? If so, what makes you so sure it was a trolley. Please provide as much detail as possible so we can assist.

 

I have closed the duplicate thread you made elsewhere - please stick to one thread.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I am aware notices that state no liability are not worth the paper (or whatever) they are printed on!! The supermarket have a responsibility to ensure that they look after their customers. It is the same with signs at dry cleaners saying they will accept no liability for damage how so ever caused. If you can show negligence then you have a case against them, the sign will not hold up in court!

 

At the same time you would have to show that they were negligent in not looking after their trolleys. While I agree it is unlikely that one trolley would cause the damage you speak of possible several together could do so.

 

You mention you would like to try and find the driver which one?

 

Were there any witnesses? Have you taken photos of the damage?

 

 

Woolfie?

Advice & opinions given by Woolfie are my own, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your quick reply Barracad, I know it was a trolley that hit the car as it was still against it when I returned. The only explanation for the size of the dent is that it must have hit on impact and quite a speed. On Friday evening it was extremely windy and the car park is slightly sloped (only slightly). As I approached the car from the distance it looked like the trolley was in the next parking space but as I got closer I realised it was right up against it. I had parked towards the back of the car park like I always to do. I try and park away from other cars so that my car is not in a position where other car doors or trolleys scratch against it. Dont get me wrong I dont own a flash car it is only a KA but I have looked after it and I don't want it damaged. i have consideration for other peoples cars but not all people are like me. Therefore I know it was a Trolley. It is a person (not a driver sorry bookworm) that left the trolley there and I am just angry that Tesco have not got adequate staff on shift to tackle the problem.

Halifax Data Protection Act requested 5/4/06

Prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £2299.00

£219.00 offer 20/5/06

LBA sent 22/5/06

Moneyclaim filed 5/6/06:) Settled in full

 

Barclays prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £150

LBA sent 22/5/06

Moneyclaim filed 5/6/06:) Settled in full

 

Barclaycard 1 prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £100

LBA sent 22/5/06

£50 rec'd back

Last request for remainder 5/6/06 :)Settled in full

 

Barclaycard 2 prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £160

LBA sent 22/5/06

Last ditch attempt letter sent 5/6/06 :)Settled in full

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right with regards to the disclaimers being pointless.

 

First of all, you say the trolly park was overflowing... The trolley that hit your car, did that come from a trolley park?

 

If yes, did the trolley park have these "speed bumps" at the entrance to it?

 

I feel that if the answer to the first question is yes, but the 2nd is no, then you should have a case against Tesco.

 

If the trolley did not come from a trolley park, but was left by a customer, then I feel that you dont really have a case from Tesco, as they were not negligent. They do not have a legal requirement to put these trolley parks in the car park. They put them there for shoppers convenience. However, if it was there then they do have to put safeguards down that they dont damage vehicles - eg the speedbumps.

 

As for chasing the person who left the shopping trolley there, If it was not left in a trolley bay then you do have a case. However, you would really only get youtr money back if the person had Contents Insurance, & it would take a lot of time trying to find the owner of the trolley, etc.

 

Hope this helps

Abbey - owed £3260 - Paid up.

 

Barclays owed £2500 - Paid up.

 

Halifax, Mint & Egg - next on the hit list

 

Dont click on the scales - I'm quite proud of my little red dot! - As the little red dot has gone - click away!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for all your replys.

 

The latest is that we have found someone to do the body work who is reasonable and we have decided to not claim through our insurance. However I will be seeking reimbursement from Tesco Supermarket as my insurers have said they probably would have supported us if I had photographic and cctv footage. Therefore I will be writing to Tesco with the evidence I have and requesting footage if any. It is worth a try.

Halifax Data Protection Act requested 5/4/06

Prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £2299.00

£219.00 offer 20/5/06

LBA sent 22/5/06

Moneyclaim filed 5/6/06:) Settled in full

 

Barclays prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £150

LBA sent 22/5/06

Moneyclaim filed 5/6/06:) Settled in full

 

Barclaycard 1 prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £100

LBA sent 22/5/06

£50 rec'd back

Last request for remainder 5/6/06 :)Settled in full

 

Barclaycard 2 prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £160

LBA sent 22/5/06

Last ditch attempt letter sent 5/6/06 :)Settled in full

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose contributory negligence, but they could argue that there is a big place for the trolleys to go at the front of the supermarket...

 

Then probably settle out of court!

Abbey - owed £3260 - Paid up.

 

Barclays owed £2500 - Paid up.

 

Halifax, Mint & Egg - next on the hit list

 

Dont click on the scales - I'm quite proud of my little red dot! - As the little red dot has gone - click away!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...