Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The move marks the first time the country's central bank has raised interest rates for 17 years.View the full article
    • The move marks the first time the country's central bank has raised interest rates for 17 years.View the full article
    • The firm has benefited from the AI boom, making it the third-most valuable company in the US.View the full article
    • Former billionaire Hui Ka Yan has been fined and banned from the financial market for life.View the full article
    • In terms of "why didn't I make a claim" - well, that has to be understood in the context of the long-standing legal battle and all its permuations with the shark. In essence there was a repo and probable fire sale of the leasehold property - which would have led to me initiating the complaint/ claim v SPF in summer 19. But there was no quick sale. And battle commenced and it ain't done yet 5y later. A potential sale morphed into trying to do a debt deal and then into a full blown battle heading to trial - based on the shark deliberately racking up costs just so the ceo can keep the property for himself.  Along the way they have launched claims in 4 different counties -v- me - trying to get a backdoor B. (Haven't yet succeeded) Simultaneously I got dragged into a contentious forfeiture claim and then into a lease extension debacle - both of which lasted 3y. (I have an association with the freeholders and handled all that legal stuff too) I had some (friend paid for) legal support to begin with.  But mostly I have handled every thing alone.  The sheer weight of all the different cases has been pretty overwhelming. And tedious.  I'm battling an aggressive financial shark that has investors giving them 00s of millions. They've employed teams of expensive lawyers and barristers. And also got juniors doing the boring menial tasks. And, of course, in text book style they've delayed issues on purpose and then sent 000's of docs to read at the 11th hour. Which I not only boringly did read,  but also simultaneously filed for ease of reference later - which has come in very handy in speeding up collating legal bundles and being able to find evidence quickly.  It's also how I found out the damning stuff I could use -v- them.  Bottom line - I haven't really had a moment to breath for 5y. I've had to write a statement recently. And asked a clinic for advice. One of the volunteers asked how I got into this situation.  Which prompted me to say it all started when I got bad advice from a broker. Which kick-started me in to thinking I really should look into making some kind of formal complaint -v- the broker.  Which is where I am now.  Extenuating circumstances as to why I'm complaining so late.  But hopefully still in time ??  
  • 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

Conservatives want to scrap the Human Rights Act


rebel11
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3454 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

Dominic Grieve does not agree with the change that Cameron and some Tories want to see. Grieve was seen as a very good attorney general who was respected as being very knowledgeable about human rights law.

 

Even if the Tories were elected with a majority they would not be able to make the change, as quite a lot of Tory backbenchers won't support it and opposition parties will vote against.

 

It is purely a party political device to pander to the right wing media who keep going on about it.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

didnt the cons say that they were going to repeal/amend the HRA last time, and the time before? didnt happen. cause it cant be done without something else in its place that satisfies the hr requirement for eu membership (unless leave the EU :)). maybe the proposed bill will satisfy. the ECHR has been part of our law for ages prior to the HRA anyway. the HRA just 'codified' it as per eu membership requirements.

one poss option, is for the EctHR to increase its so called margin of appreciation. more of a political matter though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are talking about it being replaced by a UK Bill of Rights. They are using some high profile cases to promote their cause. It sounds like they want to transfer more powers to the UK Supreme Court .

 

didnt the cons say that they were going to repeal/amend the HRA last time, and the time before? didnt happen. cause it cant be done without something else in its place that satisfies the requirement for eu membership (unless leave the EU :)). maybe the proposed bill will satisfy. the ECHR has been part of our law for ages prior to the HRA anyway. the HRA just 'codified' it as per eu membership requirements.

one poss option, is for the EctHR to increase its so called margin of appreciation. more of a political matter though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are talking about it being replaced by a UK Bill of Rights. They are using some high profile cases to promote their cause. It sounds like they want to transfer more powers to the UK Supreme Court .

 

i know. as i posted 'maybe the proposed bill will satisfy' eu requirements.

there are also lots of cases (partic criminal eg re fair trial) where the EctHR has not interfered due to its margin of a.

if we are to remain in the eu, then we would still need to satisfy the clear statement of human rights requirement of such membership (currently the HRA). prior to the hra the echr was already 'incorporated', but such incorporation was not seen as clear enough (was mostly contained in case law).

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are talking about it being replaced by a UK Bill of Rights. They are using some high profile cases to promote their cause. It sounds like they want to transfer more powers to the UK Supreme Court .

 

Yes they want to transfer it to the court where the judges are basically "appointed" by the government and a court which together with its government spout on about how democtratic the UK is, but in reality do not respect human rights and bang on how the normal public must respect the rule of law and decisions of the courts and judiciary, but then they blatantly ignore rulings and judgements when they don't like them. Maybe we should all start doing the same when we don't like any eu laws such as emissions, noise, etc. sorry but think Cameron and his home office ministers deserve places in history with Marx, Mugabe, polpott, putin, Hussein, etc. at least we have a mutated form of free speech, you can say or type what you want as long as it doesn't go against many laws against discrimination, electronic communication, Anything the uk or usa governments don't like, etc but even then this post will most probably get gchq on my posterior.

Link to post
Share on other sites

where the judges are basically "appointed" by the government

No they are not and if you look back you will see that the government have lost a lot of cases in the supreme court.

 

 

 

 

This means we have unelected judges running this country and not the government.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No they are not and if you look back you will see that the government have lost a lot of cases in the supreme court.

 

 

 

 

This means we have unelected judges running this country and not the government.

 

 

I think you may be looking back at before the supreme court. The supreme court justices are appointed by the queen on the recommendation of the prime minister after recommendations by a committee, all the governments cronies in other words, so please don't tell me they are independent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

even before. eg re appointment of QC's, ie potential recorders/judges. things are better, but still depends on the selection panel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...