Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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

Using telephone recordings as evidence in court


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2795 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

 

Have been reading with interest about the issues around the recording of telephone calls. Apparently, to use these as evidence in court you would need the permission of the person/organisation you are recording (confirmed by Home Office). Obviously, no DCA is going to do this. I have heard that a transcript of the conversation can be used as evidence.

 

Does anyone know how this can be achieved or in what circumstances transcipts can be used as evidence.

 

Has anyone had experience of this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see a source for the information which you are giving in relation to the need to obtain permission.

 

The position so far as I am aware is that a private individual can record calls for his own purposes without permission.

Using the material as evidence in a court claim falls within this.

 

If you want to use recordings, you would need to inform the court beforehand, provide equipment and transcripts of the calls

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I sent an enquiry to a general info e-mail address on the Home Office website ([email protected]:). I've copied and pasted their replies below:-

 

Me - "

Dear Sir/Madam

 

I would like to know if it is legal to use a taped telephone conversation as evidence in Court? I am currently being harrassed by a debt collection agency and understand that I am able to record their telephone conversations for my own personal use. Does this extend to being able to use this as evidence in Court?

 

Any advice you can give would be greatly appreciated.

 

 

1st reply -

It is legal to use a taped conservation in court, if you obtain consent from the other party ( in this case the debt collection agency) you are recording that you are intending to use it as evidence in court.

Hence it will be illegal to use the taped conversation as evidence in court if consent from the other party is not obtained.

Regards

Commsdata

 

and "Further to my enquiry, do I need consent for a transcript of the conversation to be used as evidence in court?"

 

 

Their reply - "

 

Yes consent would need to be obtained to use a transcript of the conversation as evidence in court, as the same principles apply.

Regards

Commsdata

 

I'm not actuall being harrassed by a DCA at the moment but am 'preparing the ground' as I think I might be and will be recording calls if I am. Just wanted to be absolutely shure of the legal position in case this kicks off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm suprised. I don't agree with them.

I don't think that they have reearched it.

 

I would be interesting to ask them for the authority for their opinion

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many years ago, before my kids became of age, I have used transripts in Court in relation to matrimonial proceedings. (Namely she will claim harrassment when I go to collect my children when it was not true. She would then stop contact on the basis of her claims). I provided transcripts and offered the playback of the recording. The judge accepted it and reinstated my contact.

 

IF you phone anybody and as soon as the phone is answered and it states that "This telephone call may be recorded for training or monitoring purposes" then you automatically have the right to make your own recordings.

 

Then again, in my humble opinion, UNLESS you are after tricking somebody into saying something (e.g. make them so angry that for example they will swear at you so you claim abuse) why do you not tell them that the conversation is being recorded???????

 

If I have nothing to hide and they have nothing to hide then it should be ok. Or are we becoming close to Big Brother and the Secret Service?

If I have helped you or made you laugh by some witty remark and brightened your day................ the scales to click are over to your left hand side. :D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Home Office is wrong! You can record a telephone conversation at any time for your own personal records. You are under no obligation to tell the other party that you are recording the call.

 

However, there are issues when entering the content of the call into evidence. It is permissable to issue a transcript of the call in evidence, though you may prefer to initially enter it as your version of the discussion. If the other party denies the evidence, simply state you have a full transcript of an actual recording made for your own records. Any judge worth his/her salt would admit the transcript and/or recording as evidence to clarify issues. In this respect, there are no hard and fast rules about the use of recordings in court where the other party wasn't informed of the recording in advance, so you do need to be careful about how you introduce it. It's about intent, especially if you're goading people to say something they otherwise wouldn't.

 

The continuing confusion surrounding this relates to the old telecommunications act, where it was illegal to literally attach a recording device to the PSTN (public service telephone network), ie. by hard wiring. If you're using an acoustic bud or Skype or some other non-invasive system, you have no problem.

 

It's a bit like CCTV (without the civil liberties issues) - if you're not doing anything wrong, what are you afraid of? If DCAs want to lie then deny it, they'd better look out!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Thank you for taking the time to reply xx :)

 

I agree basically you can use them and basically it is after all the judge who has control of his/her court re wether they see them as valid, well works for judge judgy and I am her fan:lol: (I know that does not count in UK:madgrin:)

 

Thing is I also agree with when ringing them unless tricking them if they give an experience of themselves which is not acceptable, then more fool them, for instance ringing orange sales and the way they behaved when you could almost taste their keeness to get the sale, that they chose to behave that way and chose to in my opinion mis leed.

 

Thanks again, any further responses always welcome xx :)

 

Orange need to put their 'listening ears' on that is is not acceptable to mislead if they dont want an annoying customer like me who wont accept being ripped off, truecall rules xx

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 years later...

Late to be contributing to this thread but have just had surprising and fascinating webchat with ICO regarding this.

 

The reason I contacted them was because a retailer who sold me dud product got difficult when I mentioned that I was recording the call. They refused to speak to me.

 

Since I was recording the call in order to be able to use the contents in what promises to be a future dispute, I didn't want to be hampered in my use of the content of the conversation so I went to the ICO in order to ask whether they had the right to 'refuse' to talk to me if I was recording (as they do) the conversation.

 

I use an app on Skype which is simple and saves the agony and time spent on SAR.

 

It turns out that this kind of issue falls under the domestic purposes exemption of the DP act.

 

If you, as a consumer, record a conversation with a retailer's customer service dept for use in dispute resolution (ie to prove what was said) you are entitled

 

a) to do it without informing the other side, on the assumption that they have already advised you that the call is being recorded by them.

b) use its contents in negotiations with the company in question and with any legal adviser/court the dispute goes forward to.

 

This was a revelation for me and I believe a lot of us have been ignorant of this.

 

If you want a copy of the web chat, please pm me.

 

All the best,

Edited by Andyorch
Paras
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

What I have seen done by a solicitor friend was the following.

 

His client had recorded telephone calls without telling the other party (a company that records calls when you contact them)

When the solicitor issued court papers he asked the company for the recordings.

Of course they misplaced these recordings, so the solicitor wrote back and informed them that his client had recorded the calls and asked permission to use them in court.

 

The company refused permission.

 

The solicitor in his client statement quoted the important bits of the conversations word for word.

 

Once in court the company denied that such things were ever said but the solicitor pointed out to the judge that recordings were available, the company didn't give permission to produce them in evidence and the company had misplaced their own recordings.

 

The judge allowed the recordings to be played.

 

At this point the company solicitor asked for 15 minutes break in which the settled the claim outside the courtroom.

So my understanding is that a 'cute' way to produce the recordings in court is to ask permission from the other party, if they refuse then you can use their exact words to make a statement of facts.

 

If this statement is challenged in court you can advise the judge that a full recording is available but the other party refused permission to produce it in evidence.

 

Even if the judge decides not to allow the recording, he/she will be inclined to believe that the other party is at fault, otherwise they would have no objection to the recording.

Edited by Andyorch
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, king12345.

This kind of thing must be an increasingly frequent issue in disputes.

 

This whole thing started for me 5 years ago when a bank (my bank........) gave a rate for a forex transaction that I agreed to over the phone and that was then 'not used' (to my detriment, obviously).

 

It was all 'deny, deny, deny' with the bank; long story short, I knew exactly what had been said but when I asked for the copy of the recording it had been 'lost'.

You don't want to hear the rest of the story, it went on for 8 months, but what it truly brought home to me was the absolute helplessness of the customer/client/consumer in the face of institutionalised bad faith. It's not the exception - it's the new normal.

Therefore I systematically record my calls, both inbound and outbound. However, the issue of 'usability' has always been there as a stress factor. The simple solution of announcing that you (also) are recording the call can work against you also, as I and others have experienced.

 

Both the discussion with the ICO and your very pertinent and useful post help confirm my belief that recording ones calls is an essential precaution to take.

Thanks very much for your relevant and interesting post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...