Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Better version attached with the late appeal explained more clearly for the judge. This will sound silly, but I think it would be a good idea to e-mail it to the court and UKPC on Sunday.  It's probably me being daft, but Sunday is still March, and as it's late, sending it in March rather than April will make it sound like it was less late than it really is.  if you get my drift. You can still pop in a paper version on Tuesday if you want. E-mail address for the court: [email protected] And for UKPC: [email protected]   [email protected] Defendant WS.pdf
    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
  • 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

Paid a cheque in 6 weeks ago, still has not cleared and no sign of money advice need?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4197 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

I am not sure if I'm posting this in right section if I'm not I apologise. My self and my husband have a joint account with think banking ( they have now changed there name to think money). The account is split in to 2, salary account and card account. The salary account part is held with RBS. Paying in book we have says RBS. My husband is French, just over 6 weeks ago his mum in France sent him a euro cheque for his birthday. The cheque was for 200 euro. We went to RBS like we normally do when paying in cheques and paid in euro cheque. A few days later I logged in to our online backing and it showed cheque had been paid in. On 23 August it showed cheque number and stated paid with Recour and showed the amount £147.10. The money was showing in salary account. The next day I logged in to online banking agin for another reason and noticed that it now said for August 24th. Cheq neg and the £147.10 had been taken out of account. I phoned think banking and asked what was going on. But they were not very helpful. They told me to Wait longer as it can take up to 6 weeks for a euro cheque to clear. We have waited and waited but still no money has appeared. It has been 6 weeks now. My husband has phoned his mum and she confirmed that the money has gone from her account it left her account over 5 weeks ago. We thought perhaps the cheque had bounced but how, his mum has plenty of money in her account, the money has been taken from her account. The money must be some where. What does paid with recour and cheq neg mean. Do you think cheque has bounced and if so why. How can my husbands mum or us get the money back as it has to be some where. It's not a small amount £147.10 is a lot of money to us . I have phoned think banking today and they keep just saying wait longer or talk to RBS. RBS say they can't help and that I need to talk to think banking. I'm going around in circles. What should I do. Any advice would be much appreciated

 

Thanks in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

You might have to pop into your branch. We've had a few reports of RBS having issues with cheques.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, foreign cheques really can take months, even from not so far away. The best solution is simply not to use this for international transfers - you'd have been better off with €200 in cash, or sent electronically.

 

If the situation is not resolved after say 8 weeks, write a stern letter headed 'Official Complaint' to Think, demanding that the money which is rightfully yours, be immediately credited to the account. Don't be afraid to threaten legal action if they don't comply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a side note, only threaten legal action if you intend to go through with it. banks get issued legal threats all the time, and unless they actually get a court summons, they simply ignore it.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

His mum sent the cheque to my husband, there is no way she could send cash in the post. She is also getting old now, she does not know how to use a computer and does not use online banking so a electronic transfer would not really be possible either. That's why she sent a cheque. My husband told her not to send a cheque but she would not listen. And sent a cheque any way so we paid it in. My husband used to have a account with Barclays and we never had this problem with them. When my husband used to pay euro cheques in to his old Barclays account they used to clear really quickly with no problems. I can't understand why it takes so long with this bank.

 

Thanks for you advice

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noticed from holidays there that Barclays has quite a big branch network in France, but RBS doesn't.

 

You don't need a computer to make an electronic transfer - you can do it at the branch (probably for a fee). But apparently the French still love cheques so I suppose it's just a question of familiarity.

 

Anyway, an official complaint will hopefully resolve the problem. Renegadeimp is quite right to say you should only threaten legal action if you mean it, and you probably wouldn't do that in the first letter anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...