Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Your page numbers should run through your WX and exhibits so im concerned its page x of 9.
    • The CMA’s latest monitoring report on road fuel shows that prices at the pump have risen since late January, accompanied by above average margins and spreads.View the full article
    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • UK travellers have been turned away at airports because their passports are not valid for EU travel.View the full article
  • 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

A few questions re raising actions in Scotland


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6288 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

First of all a leeetle bit embarrassng that I need to post this as I am a Scottish qualifed solicitor :p not practising just now this is my excuse for my cluelessness hee hee.

 

First of all am I right in thinking that I can raise the action in any Sheriff Court in Scotland provided the bank have a place of business within the Sheriffdom, and not (a) in the Sheriff Court covering the bank's head office or (b) in the Sheriff Court covering the area where I have the account? Our accounts are in 3 separate branches but I want just to raise all our actions in Paisley Sheriff Court.

 

Second, matthews dad is at the stage of raising his actions. His charges exceed the summary cause ceiling so he was going to raise 2 actions. I have "advised" him against raising both at the same time or near each other in case the bank apply to have the claims "rolled" together and therefore fall under the Ordinary Cause rules. Am I correct in my worry that this could happen? Also the summary cause limit of £1500, does this relate only to the principal sum or does it have to include the interest?

 

Also I will have to instruct Sheriff Officers to serve the summonses as I am not practising ATM. I take it the Sheriff Officers can serve these postally ie at £12 cost as opposed to the £40 or so it would cost to have them serve it personally?

 

thanks in advance

 

MM

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Haha 1

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

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

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

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

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Matthew's mum, I was just reading your questions and hoped you (or anyone else?) might be able to answer one of mine. I am claiming just under £1500 back from BoS and would like to know if it would be best to make one Summary Cause claim or two Small Claims? I understand that the expenses payable for a Small Claim would be limited, but does the Summary Cause procedure work in the same way? How much do I stand to lose from each of these two options if my claims are unsuccessful?

 

Any advice would be appreciated, cheers!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I'd go down the Summary Cause route. You will get your money a lot faster than spliting two small claims. I was told if you loose using Summary Cause the most you would loose was hundreds rather than thousands !

My first claim against BOS was for £720 plus interest plus £39 court fee.

They phoned me on my court return date to make sure I had received their offer of the full amount claimed. I had and accepted it.

This morning I went down to Edinburgh Sheriff Court and filed my first Summary Cause claim. The sheriffs clerk said I would have to be the most unluckiest person on the planet if I lost my claim as he had yet to hear of a case that had went to court. They have all been settled before the court date set. The only thing with Summary Cause is that the court will send your papers back to you and you will have to get a Sheriff's Officer to serve your claim on the bank. Was told this would cost about £15.

Also you cannot go over the £1,500.00 Limit.

 

Oh Miss Universe, You will get more help if you start your own post, this one will get lost.

Hope this helps

 

Best wishes.

 

Scott.

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...