Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • OK.  All of us here have made mistakes in legal dispute - the important thing is to learn from the mistakes and get it right the next time.  So for future reference - 1.  Not a good idea to ignore a Letter of Claim.  The PPCs are on the look out for people who don't reply, as they think there is a good chance that the person won't reply to the claim form either, gifting them an easy default win. 2.  Not a good idea to fail to send a CPR request.  As they usually don't reply this gives you a chance to wallop them in your WS for not producing the correct legal permissions. 3.  Not a good idea to play your cards so early in your defence.  They will know how you mean to defend and will prepare accordingly to rubbish your arguments. Anyway, spilt milk and all that ... So what arguments do you plan to put in your WS?  You can't say "a bloke told me I could park there" as your opponent will just ridicule you for believing a load of baloney and not bothering to read the car park signage. I see you have questioned their right to bring claims under their own name (defence point 1) which is a start - but unfortunately you can't show them up for refusing to show their contract with the landowner following a CPR request. Who is this mysterious owner of the car park then who gave the permission and can they be involved? Your arguments about POFA (4) will fail as you've outed yourself as being the driver in your defence (3). You question their signage (17, 20).  Good.  Have you got photos of the rubbish signage? I'm afraid you don't seem to have real defence arguments that will stand up in court. dx is right - let's see the original PCN and any correspondence with UKPC.  
    • Thank you HB, I’ll speak to them. 
    • You need to speak to the student welfare people. They aren't the people who decide if you stay or not, they should be there for students. HB
    • I’m worried that if uni will expel me after knowing the shoplifting thing. I feel shameful about what I’ve done and I was kind of out of mind when I need money to survive. I will never do this again. 
    • There won't be any more amendments but please do upload The final version because other people who need similar help might find some of the contents useful
  • 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

Mitsubishi L200, too attractive for Churchill?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5366 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

Hi all.....

I firstly want to thank you all, the information on here has helped a great deal already.

Here goes....

Last month I was burgled, my Dad's van keys were stolen along with his L200 Trojan (06) that was parked in the driveway. My parents were abroad at the time and I was sound asleep in bed.

 

The van was recovered within days and has this week been declared a write-off. The offer Churchill have made him is £5k less than what he paid for it only a year ago. Im am trying my best to deal with all this for him as illness prevents him doing it himself, I dont drive so have very little experience in this area.

Churchill have also charged him an extra £311 this week to prevent his policy being invalid. This is due to not declaring the van had a truckman style back on it (already fitted when bought), this they say is a modification and makes the vehicle more attractive to the thieves, my Dad thought they where fitted as standard.

....Can I just add that when the van was found it was without the back and the back has never been recovered.

Ive now hit a brick wall and dont know how to handle this situation, any help and advice would be very kindly received.

Thank You

[COLOR=Red][B][I]If the world were to blow itself up, the last voice to be heard would be that of an expert saying it couldnt be done![/I][/B][/COLOR]

Link to post
Share on other sites

With regards the value of the vehicle, you will need to get evidence showing its worth.

Parkers / Glasses are a starting point, followed by examples of similar vehicles for sale in your area.

 

With regards to the modification, the insurer is entitled to charge the extra premium it would do had it known about it. I presume it is a modification - you would have to check.

 

The fact that the back has not been recovered is really quite irrelevant - it had one. An argument saying that there is now none will be quite futile.

 

Not exactly what you want to hear, I'm sorry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your much needed reply.

 

I have already sent Churchill evidence of vehicles with similar spec that have been sold and for sale in the area along with a recent photo of our vehicle and most recent mot/service receipt as proof of condition.

 

Im in agreement about the back, its just knowing that my Dad would never have agreed to an £800+ per year policy that annoys me.

 

I have tried finding out if the back is a modification but with so many vans like ours with various trims and extras it proved impossible with my limited knowledge.

At least I can ask them now for a review of their offer with the additional value of the back added.

 

Is there anything else I have overlooked or need to be doing?

 

I have my driving test in a couple of weeks I'm trying my best not to let this deter me from becoming a car owner :|

[COLOR=Red][B][I]If the world were to blow itself up, the last voice to be heard would be that of an expert saying it couldnt be done![/I][/B][/COLOR]

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only other thngs I can think of is to make sure they include the "modification" in their valuation, seing as they have asked for the premium for it. As to getting the original spec of the vehicle, I can't help much there but maybe some car fancier can come along and help.

 

As to yourself, don' let it deter you! I'm having plenty of problems myself and only passed my test recently, so I know how you feel.

 

All I can say is when you do get a car, keep it simple and do your research. Buying a basic low insurance group car will keep your premiums down. Think of what you want from a car, price etc and do research before buying.

 

And remember with the test that the examiner does not want to fail you - just keep relaxed and if you make a mistake on a manouver, attempt it again. I messed up a reverse park but tried it again and got it right. The examiner said most people just leave it and he has no choice but to mark down.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi Rainproof, the truckman style back is an optional extra, therefore the insurer are correct in that it is a modification.

 

As Gyzmo says, make sure the back is taken into account, these sale at around £400 for the new shape.

 

Hope this helps

Insurance Guy

If I can offer any help I will....

I have experience in Fault, Non-Fault & Disputed Liability Motor Claims for vehicle damage and hire, and some experience in Personal Injury Claims

 

 

If I've helped- please click my scales :D

 

ANY ASSISTANCE IS GIVEN ENTIRELY WITHOUT PREJUDICE- YOU SHOULD SEEK INDEPENDANT LEGAL ADVICE TO CONFIRM ANY ADVICE GIVEN

FEEL FREE TO PM ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD IF YOU WOULD LIKE ADVICE 8-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info guys

Unfortunately the wording on the claim form says modifications or extras, so the extra premium is justified. The vehicle is an 06 plate L200 Trojan old shape I dont know where or when the back was fitted as it was done before we bought it.

So....

Ive replied to churchill stating I will accept their pitiful offer only as part settlement and asked for various considerations to be taken into account such as the truckman top, low milage and pre theft condition of the vehicle.

Its my understanding that the claim should more or less put me in the position I was in before the theft....so I stated this and politely threatened them with the FOS ;)

We paid almost 14k for the vehicle 12 months ago and the amount offered is only half of this. We arent looking for financial gain just the capability of replacing the vehicle with a half decent motor.

Fingers crossed now for a better outcome.

[COLOR=Red][B][I]If the world were to blow itself up, the last voice to be heard would be that of an expert saying it couldnt be done![/I][/B][/COLOR]

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks gyzmo

 

I had already found your post and it was a great source of info and argument in my reply to Churchill.

 

Thanks again

[COLOR=Red][B][I]If the world were to blow itself up, the last voice to be heard would be that of an expert saying it couldnt be done![/I][/B][/COLOR]

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

WOOHOOOO!!

 

A BIG Thank you to Gyzmo and everyone who offered advice, I am happy to say the amount we finally accepted was a £3K improvement on Churchills original offer.

 

My advice to everyone else in similar situations is......Persevere!!

 

Alix :D

[COLOR=Red][B][I]If the world were to blow itself up, the last voice to be heard would be that of an expert saying it couldnt be done![/I][/B][/COLOR]

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...