Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
    • too true HB, but those two I referred for starters - appear to be self admitted - One to excuse other lockdown law breaking, by claiming his estate away from his consistency and London abode was his main home the other if he claims to have 'not told the truth' in his own words via that quote - to have mislead his investors rather than broken lobbying rules   - seem to be slam dunks - pick which was your law breaking - it seems to be both and much more besides in Jenricks case Starmer was director of public prosecutions yet the tories are using seemingly baseless allegations for propaganda and starmer is missing pressing apparent blatant criminality in politics
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4284 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

Hello,

i am worried about court because I have received a letter from RLP saying that if they take me to court it will cost loads more.

 

I have been to see a solicitor and he said to pay because if I keep denying it and they have proof and take me to court I will have to pay their court costs which can be in the thousands.

 

I'm really reluctant to pay though because they sent my grandmother a letter and it was only when I showed them a copy of her passport

to show that she is 67 years old that they said they would suspend the case but that if she did it again they would reopen the case!

 

I know I did wrong but all she did was point to the items and it was me who took them.

 

I took full responsibility and they still wrote to her.

 

I hate them and they disgust me.

 

If I thought they would take me to court then I would pay because I can’t afford to pay thousands.

 

My solicitor has said that the claim has been issued.

 

Not sure what this means,

but really would like to find out if they will actually take me to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 398
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi jonny

 

Welcome to CAG

 

You've got your own thread. What documents have you received? and from whom?

 

To date RLP haven't taken anyone to court, they do like to send out letter's which are speculative invoices.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by the following:- 'My solicitor has said that the claim has been issued.'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with Rebel - you say that the solicitor said that "....they will take you to court" then that the solicitor said that "...the claim has been issued". Which is true?

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

He said that I have to give my defence by next week. He said that I can say that because I'm on benefits, I can't afford to pay, and that I need my car to take my grandmother to and from her hospital appointments. I haven't got any documents, but I don't know what documents my solicitor has.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This doesnt make sense.

 

Have you received a claim form from the Court ?. or have you only received a letter from RLP ?

 

Many of us here would be very surprsied if you have actually received a court claim, for us to help you we will need more info, a scan of letters/court docs (with names & address redacted) would help.,

 

Benfits and cars/granmdmothers are irrelevant at this stage, lets deal with the facts.

 

Why do you not know what doc your solicitor has ?, surely the only docs he has are ones youve given them !?

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, I too am worried about court because I have received a letter from RLP saying that if they take me to court it will cost loads more. I have been to see a solicitor and he said to pay because if I keep denying it and they have proof and take me to court I will have to pay their court costs which can be in the thousands. I'm really reluctant to pay though because they sent my grandmother a letter and it was only when I showed them a copy of her passport to show that she is 67 years old that they said they would suspend the case but that if she did it again they would reopen the case! I know I did wrong but all she did was point to the items and it was me who took them. I took full responsibility and they still wrote to her. I hate them and they disgust me. If I thought they would take me to court then I would pay because I can’t afford to pay thousands. My solicitor has said that the claim has been issued. Not sure what this means, but really would like to find out if they will actually take me to court.

 

RLP won't take you to court - they haven't suffered any losses.

 

You haven't really said what happened, but if you were stopped and any goods taken were recovered then it's difficult to see what the store's losses were. In general, you would not be responsible for paying any of the store's security costs

 

How much are RLP asking for? Most amounts they claim would be covered by the small claims court where costs cannot be claimed.

 

Any claim should have been sent direct, so you should know what is happening.

 

You will have to provide more detail of what has happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for all your comments.

I called my solicitor and told him what you have all said.

 

He said that the claim is not against RLP but against TK Maxx and that if I want to deny liability

then there is a chance that the case will go to the fast track instead of the small claims court where I will have to pay TK Maxx costs if I lose.

 

He said that once he has submitted my defence the court will give him a date for the hearing when we find out which court it is in.

 

I asked him why I didn't get the forms and he said because he is my solicitor and that everything has to go to him.

 

He also said that he is acting pro bono so I won't have to pay any solicitor costs but that the amount would be higher.

I know he's (the solicitor) not trying to [problem] me because he's a friend of a friend.

 

He said that they have offered to close the case if I pay £100.00 and he thinks I should pay because otherwise it will be more.

 

He is going to send me a copy of the claim.

 

Really don't know what to do...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, 2 grumpy, I think your information about going to court is out of date. I've also received court papers about a shoplifting in TK Maxx and the amount they are now claiming is the original £137.50 plus £80 court fees and £35 solicitor fees, so the bill is now £252.50. I looked on RLP's website and they show the cases they have taken to court recently. I don't know what to do now because one person has to pay £1900.00. I wish i'd paid the £137.50 now. I don't know what to do either :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to be some confusion here, No-one has ever actually seen a legitimate court claim from RLP, so would be very useful if the above posters would scan and post up the claim forms.

 

It is worth noting that claims under £5000 are allocated to the small track (where costs are limited to smallish fixed costs), as far as I'm aware denying libailty doesnt mean the case will go on the fast track, in fact, I'd strongly argue that it shouldnt, after all, the small track is 'designed' for low cost claims such as this.

 

No-one has any idea whether any of the court claims on the RLP are indeed true , there is no way of check county court claims, so they may all be fabricated.

 

Jonny..You still seem a bit confused as to what exactly your solicitor is doing, you really should be kept inthe loop and see all the forms, all he is doing at this stage is just the basic form filling that really anyone can do, its not that difficult.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes come-on

 

POST THE COURT PApers

 

urm.......thats two people saying they have them BUT NO PROOF YET..

 

here's the link to post up your PROOF

of court papers. or claim forms...

 

scan the required letters/agreements/sheets

as a picture[jpg] file

remove all pers info inc barcodes etc using paint program

but leave all figures and dates.

 

goto one of the many free online pdf converter websites

it would be better to upload a multipage pdf

than many single ones

or if you have PDF as an installed printer drive use that

or use word and save as pdf

open a new msg box here

hit go advanced below the msg box

hit manage attachments below that box

hit the add files button on the top right

hit select files, navigate to your file on your pc

hit upload files

NB:you can set where it goes in the post by hitting insert inline.

then hit reply button

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, 2 grumpy,

I think your information about going to court is out of date.

I've also received court papers about a shoplifting in TK Maxx and the amount they are now claiming is the original £137.50 plus £80 court fees and £35 solicitor fees, so the bill is now £252.50.

 

I looked on RLP's website and they show the cases they have taken to court recently.

 

I don't know what to do now because one person has to pay £1900.00.

 

I wish i'd paid the £137.50 now.

 

I don't know what to do either :(

 

they HAVEN'T taken anyone to court

 

those reports are NOT TKmaxx

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone getting court papers for a claim initiated by RLP should definately contest the entire amount.

 

If the store is doing it, then you should also contest the entire amount, but make a cpr request to get all of the information and details and a breakdown of the amounts claimed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, 2 grumpy, I think your information about going to court is out of date. I've also received court papers about a shoplifting in TK Maxx and the amount they are now claiming is the original £137.50 plus £80 court fees and £35 solicitor fees, so the bill is now £252.50. I looked on RLP's website and they show the cases they have taken to court recently. I don't know what to do now because one person has to pay £1900.00. I wish i'd paid the £137.50 now. I don't know what to do either :(

 

1. The cases RLP took to court - and there are very, very few of them - all relate to employee theft.

 

2. Post up the court papers so we can see them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for all your comments.

I called my solicitor and told him what you have all said.

 

He said that the claim is not against RLP but against TK Maxx and that if I want to deny liability

then there is a chance that the case will go to the fast track instead of the small claims court where I will have to pay TK Maxx costs if I lose.

 

He said that once he has submitted my defence the court will give him a date for the hearing when we find out which court it is in.

 

I asked him why I didn't get the forms and he said because he is my solicitor and that everything has to go to him.

 

He also said that he is acting pro bono so I won't have to pay any solicitor costs but that the amount would be higher.

I know he's (the solicitor) not trying to [problem] me because he's a friend of a friend.

 

He said that they have offered to close the case if I pay £100.00 and he thinks I should pay because otherwise it will be more.

 

He is going to send me a copy of the claim.

 

Really don't know what to do...

 

£100 is not going to be fast-tracked.

 

Without you scanning a copy of the court claim we can't really help much more

 

n.b. what type of work does your solicitor normally work in?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My solicitor told me he sent me the papers on Fri, so they should be here by tomorrow at the latest.

 

I asked him about what you have all said and he said that TK Maxx have already applied to the court for damages and that I need to make a decision about the case this week.

 

I don't appreciate the slurs against my solicitor.

 

He is a genuine bloke and helping me as a friend.

 

He also said that the cases shown online on RLP's website are public record and hardly likely to be made up.

 

I'll post the claim forms when I get them but I think I'm just going to pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My solicitor told me he sent me the papers on Fri, so they should be here by tomorrow at the latest. I asked him about what you have all said and he said that TK Maxx have already applied to the court for damages and that I need to make a decision about the case this week. I don't appreciate the slurs against my solicitor. He is a genuine bloke and helping me as a friend. He also said that the cases shown online on RLP's website are public record and hardly likely to be made up. I'll post the claim forms when I get them but I think I'm just going to pay.

 

Hello again.

 

You asked the guys here for their opinions and they've told you. Depending on what the claim forms say, hopefully they will have more advice for you and then you may have to decide between the advice here and your lawyer friend.

 

I'm happy to be proved wrong, but I don't remember anyone from this forum who received the same advice as the guys gave you ending up in court with RLP. You don't say how many similar cases your lawyer has dealt with.

 

Your friend may be right that the cases on the RLP website aren't made up, but the point being made here. was that the cases seemed to relate to theft by employees and not members of the public.

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My solicitor told me he sent me the papers on Fri, so they should be here by tomorrow at the latest. I asked him about what you have all said and he said that TK Maxx have already applied to the court for damages and that I need to make a decision about the case this week. I don't appreciate the slurs against my solicitor. He is a genuine bloke and helping me as a friend. He also said that the cases shown online on RLP's website are public record and hardly likely to be made up. I'll post the claim forms when I get them but I think I'm just going to pay.

 

The advice you will get on here is DIRECTLY related to what the court claim forms say, like Ive said earlier..NO_ONE HAS EVER SEEN A VALID CLAIM FORM FROM RLP/TK MAXX, thats why people are very curious to see one.

 

If you are determined to pay and already have a solictor, Im a bit puzzled as to why you are asking for advice, its no skin off your Solicitors nose if you pay up, it wont cost him anything but it may not be the right choice.

 

Why do you need to know this week, IF a valid court claim has been served, you have 14 days or even you send an acknowledegemnet of service (which you or your solicitor SHOULD of done) you will have 28 days before you send in a defence, even then its only the begininng there wil still be allocation.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

My solicitor told me he sent me the papers on Fri, so they should be here by tomorrow at the latest.

 

I asked him about what you have all said and he said that TK Maxx have already applied to the court for damages and that I need to make a decision about the case this week.

 

I don't appreciate the slurs against my solicitor.

 

He is a genuine bloke and helping me as a friend.

 

He also said that the cases shown online on RLP's website are public record and hardly likely to be made up.

 

I'll post the claim forms when I get them but I think I'm just going to pay.

 

have already applied to the court for damages ...........

 

 

really

 

something smells here.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...