Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Agree it is not a modification that needs to be disclosed to Insurers as changing the seats has not changed the risk.  
    • Frpm David Frost and Robert Jenrick: 'Conservatives must show we respect the votes in 2016 and 2019 and not give the Opposition the chance to undo the benefits of leaving the EU'   Sweep away the Brexit gloom – or Labour will unravel a huge gain ARCHIVE.PH archived 22 Apr 2024 05:47:50 UTC  
    • Please please help we were miss sold full fibre by EE July 22  Install couldn’t go ahead no equipment sent and no. Survey it was hell  foind out no full fibre in road so we had to go back to cooper no choice we involved. Ceo and they put in a man from customer resolution s  he was vile he told me I had to go to engineers  something very odd about the ex resolution s in bt basically they took my drive up said they Would put ducting in ready for full fibre we have got £ 40 for a hours upon hours phones stress and more told to go to ombudsman  then bill was £35 we called twice told it was that price as they had treated us appalling two weeks later all sky package gets pulled we call again our bill goes to 165 the next two weeks was hell trying to get yo bottom why it’s off our package it was all on in the end I spent a day on the phone  341 mins was the call anyway I got to the bottom it was this resolution man coveting up the other issue another deadlock  to cover it all up  they hide data  ee did so couldn’t get the miss sell in writing I have now only from sept  Basically now we tried getting full fibre and they have found my drive had to be taken up again which has sunk .  The engineer has placed the wrong ducting again under my drive and need s to be taken to again apparently and the pipe sticks up middle of the drive near gate not behind look so odd it’s a big as a drain pipe open to water and it’s below touching the electrical cables to hot tub . I was sent a letter from the ex resolution to say I had stopped the work  I haven’t  it’s so sadistic she covering up for her mate in that team as the orginal install he didn’t check it had been done correctly  I took to Twitter and posted on open reach they ignored me then after 3 calls of two weeks they sent a engineer bt ignored me ceo emails blocked tag on Twitter unanswered then we get someone from twitter send a engineer he written report to say it’s dangerous since we have  had a  letter to say our problem can not be resolved  then a email to say sorry we are leaving and we can’t get into our account Bt will not talk to us ofcom tells us nothing they can do Citzens advice said go to the police  we can’t go back to virgin due so mass issue with them only option is sky  but point is they make out we have canceled we haven’t we have this mess on our drive dangeous work we are in hell  it’s like she covering up for this collegue it’s all very odd I am disabled and they like played mentaly with me open reach say bt resolved the issue no they have not  I recon they have terminated us making our we have  to hide it from mgt  Help it’s hell I don’t sleep we have 29 may we have tried  calling they just ignore me  at first they are so lovely as they say I am then they go to nnamager and say we can’t say anything to you end call  Scared police are rubbish I need help even typing is so painfull  Thankyou  anyone hello be so grateful     
    • There's a thread somewhere about someone sending the baillifs against Wizzair that is quite hilarious. I would love to see someone do the same to Ryanair. Question is, should you be the one to take that role. You are entitled to the £220, if your flight was from the UK. If it was TO the UK I suppose it is more of a grey area... though the airlines I know have been using £220 as standard. Not that surprising for Ryanair, the worst cheapskates in the universe, to go for the lower amount, and if you forward this to the CEO he will probably have a jolly good laugh and give his accountants a verbal bonus. After all he's the one who said and I paraphrase "F*** our customers, they'll fly with us again anyway". While we would all love to see Ryanair get wooped in court again, I have to join my fellow posters in thinking it's not worth the hassle for (hypothetically) £7 and not sure it will expedite the payment either. It's already an achievement that you got them to accept to pay.
    • The US competition watchdog has taken legal action to stop Tapestry's $8.5bn takeover of rival Capri.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
      • 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

RBS Defence Recieved


verity
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6423 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

Have recieved a defence from RBS via Cobbetts Solicitors, with a request under CPA part 18. This is a letter I have drafted in reply. Any opinions please?

Dear Sir or Madam

 

I am writing regarding correspondence received from you today consisting of your defence and request for further information in accordance with CPR part 18.

 

As you are probably aware CPR part 18 is not applicable to claims under the small claims track, and only the court can request this information. I find your reference to this and your deadline of 5th July a deliberate attempt to intimidate and mislead me as you are aware I am self representing.

 

I am enclosing information from the DCA website in relation to the Civil Procedure Rules and Small Claims Track for your information.

 

I am more than willing to provide the requested information if the court deems it necessary.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't let them intimidate you ,sit tight, refuse any offers they make untill you get the one for the full amount. trust me you WILL get all your money.not too sure what the cpa 18 is all about but i'd bet it's just another angle theyr'e trying to pull good luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

RBS have requested loads of further information under the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) part 18 however on this site and according to the department for constitutional affairs website CPR part 18 does not apply to the small claims track.

 

RBS has sent these requests to other claimants and also they put in a deadline for responding and make out it has come from the court. Only the court as far as I can see are allowed to request further information -hopefully someone will correct me if I'm wrong before I send this letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Part 18 does not apply to the small claims track. Therefore there is no need to respond to any inquiries made under part 18

 

I see no point in responding to a part 18 inquiry other than to point out that you consider that the inquiry is intimidatory as part 18 is excluded and that you intend to bring the intimidation to the notice of the court.

 

Hopefully this would deliver a little shock to the solicitors

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am responding with the following letter. Is it ok?

 

Dear Sir or Madam

 

I am writing regarding correspondence received from you today consisting of your defence and request for further information in accordance with CPR part 18.

 

As you are probably aware CPR part 18 is not applicable to claims under the small claims track, and only the court can request this information. I find your reference to this and your deadline of 5th July a deliberate attempt to intimidate and mislead me as you are aware I am self representing.

 

I am enclosing information from the DCA website in relation to the Civil Procedure Rules and Small Claims Track for your information.

 

However, as a matter of good faith, I have attached a breakdown of the charges that I am reclaiming. To avoid any further confusion on your part I have included the account name, number and sort code. However, I would have thought that, as your client is the provider of this account, that they would have access to this information.

 

The particulars of claim on my claim form clearly lists the relevant laws and regulations, But I am also enclosing these again for your further reference

 

I am more than willing to provide further information if the court deems it necessary.

also enclosing the following after reading another thread by pac1208. Hopefully it will quicken up the process!!!

 

The claimant holds bank account number####### with the defendant that is conductedon their standard terms and conditions. Theclaimant is seeking the return of money taken by the defendant during the past 6 years in

relation to Unauthorised Overdraft,Referral,Chq/DD/SO Unpaid and Default Notice Charges. These charges are a disproportionate penaltyand therefore unenforceable as they arecontrary to common law. Further, as a

disproportionate penalty they are invalidunder the Unfair (Contracts) Terms Act 1977 s.4 and under the Unfair Terms in Consumer

Contracts Regulations 1999. Para.8 and sch.2(1)(e). In the event that the charges are not a penalty then they are unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 s.15. The claimant has

repeatedly asked the defendant to return the money but they have not done so or attempted to justify their charges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds good, I'd like to think that the intimidation bit really annoys them! :-)

 

Good luck.

24/04/06 - Capital One - £170.00 - Court Claim Acknowledged - Defendant intends to defend claim

18/05/06 - Full settlement received (£170.00) + another £20 for charges added after claim issued.

 

16/05/06 - RBS - Court Claim Submitted - Total £4900 (inc. Interest + Court Fee + Allocation Fee)

22/05/06 - Acknowledged by RBS

16/06/06 - RBS Defence Received

29/06/06 - Settlement offer from Cobbetts LPP £2,500

22/07/06 - Hearing date given as 27th October, York County Court

25/07/09 - Cheque received from Cobbets for £4800!! only £100 to go!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

maybe give cobbetts a ring verity? they settled with me the day after I gou court date for November.

 

Keep us informed hunxx

NatWest - Settled in full 22/05/06

 

RBS- Prelim sent 9/05/06 £1,147

£500 offer 27/05/06, rejected 30/05/06

LBA sent 25/05/06 :razz:

MCOL 15/06/06

Defence received 20/07/06

Settled in full 01/09/06 wahey!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe give Cobbetts a ring Verity, I received full payment the day after getting my court date, or if you don't want to ring perhaps an email.

 

Keep us informed hun xx

NatWest - Settled in full 22/05/06

 

RBS- Prelim sent 9/05/06 £1,147

£500 offer 27/05/06, rejected 30/05/06

LBA sent 25/05/06 :razz:

MCOL 15/06/06

Defence received 20/07/06

Settled in full 01/09/06 wahey!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...