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 
        • 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

Taking action against local council-any help appreciated!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6544 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, im currently into my fourth month of a dispute between myself and leicestershire county council regarding an accident which damaged my car.

 

Basically to cut a long story short, i hit a plastic bollard which had been pushed into the road by a lorry exiting a building site opposite. It was dark and the bollard was free of reflectors which are apparently a legal requirement ( i have photographic evidence of the bollards free of reflectors ). the accident broke my front bumper, i went down all the official routes of getting the repair work quoted-having a council representative inspect the vehicle etc. But as i suspected the council have denied liability, i have written two further letters contesting this but I'm just getting standard replies and not being taken seriously.

 

The only way to resolve this situation seems to be with legal action, my insurance company say i'm unlikely to win as the courts and the councils are in each others pockets so to speak.

 

I feel stuck, i want to stick to my guns and not pay out of my own pocket because i dont think its my fault. But on the other hand i dont want to take it to court if i'm wasting my time.

 

If anyone has any advice for me it would be GREATLY appreciated.

 

Regards

Ross

Link to post
Share on other sites

Been in a similar situation myself, although against a private company, not the council.

 

My insurance company hired solicitors after I complained that they had not pursued my claim, but were advised (as I was) not to pursue the claim as they/I would probably lose. I'm fully comp so the car was fixed but I paid £200 excess and £350 for a hired estate car (the Daewoo Matiz they offered at no further cost to me was not big enough to carry all my equipment in and the insurance company verbally gave me the go ahead to hire what I needed because I would get it back); it cost me a further £360.

 

I'm not going to hijack another thread :) but I was just wondering; don't we have the right to expect the insurance company to at least fight the claim rather than just "give up", regardless of the probability of them losing? Isn't that what we are paying for?

 

I didn't concede, they did. They should reimburse me, and all of us in a similar situation.

I only mouth my opinion, please look elsewhere for sensible advice! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

my insurance company say i'm unlikely to win as the courts and the councils are in each others pockets so to speak.

 

And how would the insurance company know that? Are we in conspiracy theory country now?

Whereas I could believe it in small villages where the mayor and the local JP (if not one and the same) used to eat at each other's table and do one another favours, I doubt very much that this is still the case, or certainly not in such an open way.

 

What I do believe is that your insurance company don't want to get involved into such a small claim. Are you fully comp? Or do I get the feeling you're TPFT?

 

Either way, it's nonsense. If your insurance company refuses to get involved, sue the coucil (small claims, not expensive), and complain to the Insurance Ombudsman about your insurance. It seems to me they're failing in their fiduciary obligation towards you by not defending YOUR interests when YOU're the client.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible to take the council to a county court?

 

I didn't think it was, as it's a 'government agency' or some such rubbish.

If you feel that we have helped you, or you would like to help keep this web site running so that others can continue to get their money back, please click the donate button at the top of the forum.

Advice & opinions of Dave, The Bank Action Group and The Consumer Action Group are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability.

Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you have any doubts.

 

------------

 

 

Add me as your friend on FaceBook - I need all the friends I can get :-(

 

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=577405151

 

------------

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really should know the answer to this but I'm not absolutely certain.

 

However, I'm pretty sure Crown Immunity doesn't apply in general to local councils. If it did, people wouldn't be constantly suing over paving stone trips. Whether it would apply in this case is something I don't know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Local Councils definitely do not have immunity from legal proceedings.

 

Your insurers' comments that the Courts and the Council are in league with each other is silly, its not worth commenting on further. The insurers don't want to do anything because it will cost them about three times as much as the value of the claim - it would be cheaper to just give you the £450.00.

 

However, the same applies to the Council. Even if you lost the case, it would have cost them more to defend it than the value of the claim. So you could try.

I'm not sure on the facts you've given where the evidence of liability is though. It was a council lorry? and a council bollard ? and you or a reliable witness saw the bollard being knocked into the road? This being a negligent act by the local authority who should have known the bollard was there and wouldn't be seen by motorists? Its a tricky one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi and thanks for all the helpful support.

 

Today i spoke to my insurance company and made it clear that i was looking to persue the case even if my chances were poor. They were actually more helpful this time and said that i could persue legal action and not have to make a claim even if i was found to be at fault.

 

I am going to write a further letter to the council explaining my intentions to take legal action-this is my last attempt to get them to pay up before it goes through the legal team at my insurance company.

 

I will keep you updated on what happens with the case but thanks to anyone who has posted on it, only just started using the site but already finding it extremely useful.

 

Regards, Ross

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really should know the answer to this but I'm not absolutely certain.

 

However, I'm pretty sure Crown Immunity doesn't apply in general to local councils. If it did, people wouldn't be constantly suing over paving stone trips. Whether it would apply in this case is something I don't know.

 

Quite right. Except in my case, it was a hole left by a removed wooden post, filled with leaves from the previous autumn (this was in May, and I had my then 5 weeks old baby in my arms) in which I tripped and broke my ankle. And baby bumped his head against kerb. Still makes me shudder when I think of it.

Before the days of no claim, no fee, still went for it. Hole was filled within 1 week of lodging my complaint. Got just over 4k for ankle, which was nowhere near the hassle it caused me, but there you go. Councils are definitely not immune from County Court claims.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that they're not immune and the points about personal injury claims are valid but in a way thats part of whats annoying me.

 

A more dishonest person might have claimed injury from the accident (granted there are many valid injury claims but there are also many dubious ones) but i have never tried to do this.

 

i consider myself to be an honest decent person who is just looking to repair the damage to my car which i feel was caused by someone else's negligence nothing more nothing less.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Today i spoke to my insurance company and made it clear that i was looking to persue the case even if my chances were poor. They were actually more helpful this time and said that i could persue legal action and not have to make a claim even if i was found to be at fault.

 

I am going to write a further letter to the council explaining my intentions to take legal action-this is my last attempt to get them to pay up before it goes through the legal team at my insurance company.

 

Why don't your insurers, or thier legal dept; write the letter?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have in the past sued the council for a personal injury claim ( a genuine one lol ) and won .So yes you can sue the council they don't have imunity.

When you want to fool the world, tell the truth. :D

Advice & opinions of Janet-M are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you have any

doubts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't your insurers, or thier legal dept; write the letter?

 

One reason may be that you have to pay them extra because of a reduction in any NCD.

PUTTING IT IN WRITING & KEEPING COPIES IS A MUST FOR SUCCESS

Link to post
Share on other sites

my insurance company have assured me that even if they are unsuccesful i will not be obligated to make a claim against my insurance and will not lose any no claims bonus. i think this is the best result i could have hoped for-lets just hope i have some success.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading a book I have on litigation in general -

 

Public authorities definitely have to act within the law, and can be taken to the high court for judicial review, which is where they have 'acted improperly in exercising their powers'. This specific case can only be taken to the high court.

 

I don't think your case would be an application for judicial review though so I see no reason why you can't take them to small claims. Plus you wouldn't have much to lose anyway by doing this.

If you found this post useful please click on the scales above.

 

Egg - £400 - Prelim sent. On hold.

Mint - On the list Est £800

GE Capital - On the list (3 accounts!) Est £4000

 

MBNA - £545 Prelim sent 13/11/2006

LBA sent 1/12/2006

£350 partial payment received 18/12/2006.

Full settlement received 20/1/07

 

NatWest - Est £4000 not incl interest

Data Protection Act Sent 10/1/07

Statements received 24/1/07

Prelim sent 3/2/07

Full Settlement received 22/2/07

 

The contents of this post are the sole opinions of The Cornflake and not necessarily the opinions of any other members of this group. They do not constitute sound legal or financial advice and if in doubt you are advised to seek advice from a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Is it possible to take the council to a county court?

 

I didn't think it was, as it's a 'government agency' or some such rubbish.

 

Oh indeed it is. :D

If it wasn't then the firm I work for would be totally stuffed.

 

People sue local authorities, education authorities, health authoirities and police authorities for any number of reasons ranging from medical negligence to bullying to tripping over a wonky pavement.

[FONT=Arial][SIZE=1]Proceedings issued....and acknowledged. [/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial][SIZE=1]Counting down to the 21st....[/SIZE][/FONT] [URL="http://thebighub.co.uk"]http://thebighub.co.uk[/URL]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really should know the answer to this but I'm not absolutely certain.

 

However, I'm pretty sure Crown Immunity doesn't apply in general to local councils. If it did, people wouldn't be constantly suing over paving stone trips. Whether it would apply in this case is something I don't know.

 

Hi You can sue your council but the court will have expected you to exhaust every avenue.

 

Crown Immunity does not apply to such authorties & the government has waived its rights to allow for civil action in many other areas. You still can't sue the Queen

 

If your a past or present service person you can even sue the armed forces for negligence

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 09 March 2019.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6544 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...