Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4664 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

In May of this year, I had a minor bump. I was in Tescos fuel station and reversed into another car that was behind me. The car in question was a MG sports car. I checked my rear view mirror, saw nothing so started to reverse. I hadnt moved more than 1 ft when I felt the collision. I honestly hadnt seen this car behind me, it was that low to the ground. There was no damage at all to my car, not even a scratch, but the other parties car was slightly damaged in that it had a bent front bumper and the indicator lens was smashed.

I admitted liability straight away and passed my details onto my insurance. No problem. Back end of May, i recieved a letter from the other parties insurance stating that I owed him £777 + Vat etc, for car hire!! And unless this was paid withing 14 days, I would be taken to County Court to claim the money owed!.

I contacted my Inusrance (Swiftcover) and they said not to worry, forget about it can you pass the letter on to us, which I duly did.

Yesterday, I recieved a County Court summons for the amount, plus an extra £150 for expenses etc!!

 

Is this normal ? I will be sending these forms to Swiftcover, but I feel that my insurance should be dealing with this, not me! And that I shouldnt be recieving any correspondance at all. After all, Its what I pay fully comprehensive for! IMO, this is not acceptable. What I dont want, is for 14 days to lapse and then to recieve another letter informing me that I now owe £900+

 

I think myself, that £700 car hire is a bit exsessive and can see why my insurance are questioning this and it looks like his insurance are not happy with my insurance, so they have gone direct to me to try and scare me into paying. Just exactly where do I stand with this ?

 

Help as this has me worried to death! I didnt sleep last night thinking I was going to be getting a bill for £900, which I dont have !!:-(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Suggest that you send it onto Swiftcover urgently by recorded delivery, with a covering letter asking them to deal with it as a matter of urgency and to reply to you in writing stating what actions they will be taking.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have a court date, do not ignore and attend if Swift have not confirmed they will be dealing with it; defend it and take all correspondence with you.

Email them as well amd keep doing so untill you get a response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would guess that at least part of the problem here lies with your insurance company. If they're not dealing with the other party as quickly as they would like or are querying the hire charges for example, the other party might feel they have no choice but to issue proceedings and, since you are the liable party, the proceedings have to be issued in your name.

As has already been advised, contact your insurers urgently and keep on top of them to make sure they are dealing with this properly. Ultimately, if they can't agree then it may go to court and you may be required to attend.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the speedy replies and apologies about posting this in the wrong section:oops:

 

There is no court date on the forms that came through the post that I can see, its seems it a claim form via the courts ?Only date on it I can see is the 13th of July, the issue date and forms asking me my personal details and how much I earn monthly.

Attending court would be out of the question as I live too far away, plus work would not allow me the time off to attend

Link to post
Share on other sites

Contact your insurers first thing tomorrow. When you send the papers to them, keep a copy for yourself.

 

If a defence is issued then the claim will be transferred to your local court.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i guess reasonable costs for car hire...

my question ould be what car did he hire, and which garage did he go to that cudnt do the work for weeks!! a standard car you could rent for £150 pw so he is saying for a standard saloon he had a rental for 5weeks.

 

he should only be renting a small call imo cos in an MG sports he only gets 2 seats, so a ca hire is almost an upgrade as it gives 5 seats! lol upgrades arent covered lol!

 

cheeky man!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Spoke to the insurance today and they have said just send all paperwork to them and in the meantime, they will contact the third parties insurance and say that all future dealing should be dealt directly with them and not me.

 

Also found out that he is claiming almost £1600 worth of damge to his car as well ? And due to this his car was written off. Cannot understand this, my car bumber is plastic and not a sctatch on it. His damage at the time, was a dent in his bumper and broken indicator lens, his headlamps were fine as was his radiator, in fact, he went on to fill his car up and I watched him drive it away !

 

Be interesting to see the photos he has submitted for the damage as I reckon there is something going on here and he is trying to pull a fast one, using his insurance

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update:

All paperwork recieved from the 3rd party and his insurance have been passed onto my Insurance, Swiftcover, who are acting on my behalf ( which they should tbh) and up to now, have been nothing short of brilliant. Thier manner when dealing with me and this have been nothing short of 100% proffesional.

 

Top marks up to now for them

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...