Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bartok

  1. Your help is really appreciated. Do you know a template or have a suggested comment to put on an N244?
  2. Ok ok, You seem more informed than me, an N244 it is then, what would be your way forward? Can you suggest me the text of the revised particulars or a template from somewhere.
  3. Hmm, thanks for that. I think changing the particulars on an N244 to one of estoppel would be the way to go, yes? Am I right in thinking the Judge advocates for litigants in person in a small claims, and would say there is a case of estoppel?
  4. Yes, since June 2007, several times now, had no reply heard nothing. They seems to be defending the new claim as if its a separate claim and ignoring they agreed to settle on a previous claim. It might be down to their policy of defending multiple claims en-masse using a standard set of facts.
  5. Estopple, interesting.... I ddint get a judgement, the claim was discontinued because the parties reached agreement.
  6. Im not sure how a costs order would work because this is in the small claims track. When I asked for one, the Judge said something civil procedure rules. The order granting the stay (which has since been lifted) says: "These proceeddings remain stayed until 21 days after judgement is handed down in a test case." From what you say, it looks like an N244 is the way to go. yes?
  7. I think you could well be right, its my line of thought. So I think I should just attend the new hearing and say to the Judge this is now a claim for breach of contract and present the original N24 (document above). The fees of a solicitor could negate the financial return I would get from Barclays. Atrtending as litigant in person - that is, I go in without legal representation, the Judge should advocate. Anyone disagree?
  8. I made a claim against Barclays for unfair bank charges which concluded amicably back in 2007 where Barclays agreed to pay £2000 without judgment on the day. (Below). After making the agreement, Barclays has reneged on it and I filed a fresh new claim. That had been stayed until recently, but I think the grounds are now void due to a House of Lords ruling. How does this leave me? Bearing in mind Barclays agreed to settle before the House of Lords ruling. Do I change my particulars? or just file copies of my letters on the claim at court and have the Judge make up his own mind? Suggestions how I should proceed?
  9. You have a good point and I was aware of this, but I took photos using a mobile and asked them to point out the CCTV camera covering the customer service desk. They did ask to keep the goods because they wanted to send it back to the manufacturer. If comet lies and then says they have lost the footage then they have a bigger problem. I cant see comet exposing themselves to fraud.
  10. Unfortunately yes. A malfunctioning printer is not much use to me, and when I realised I am going to be left without a working printer I knew I had to buy another from elsewhere. I know Comet electricals could lie and switch the faulty printer for a working one then say nothings wrong with it, but I have a feeling if I need to take the matter to litigation, a court will take a dim view of any retailer trying to exclude himself of liablity under consumer legislation. A judge presiding over a small claims hearing will ask what do I have to gain by returning a printer only to immediately buy another near indential printer from another retailer, Currys, less than a hundred yards away on the same retail park. Comet electricals could have just exchanged it whan I asked and they would have retained a sale and a happy customer. It beats me why they have chosen to be awkward.
  11. One dodgy cartridge would be bad luck £9.99. Having five or six dodgy cartridges would suggest something else is wrong.
  12. Thats quite a brutal approach and really made me chuckle, but I've already sent the letter now. I didnt want to come accross as dictating the law to them, an employee at Comet Electrical's head office reading it would probably toss it in the bin uttering the word g'won then, sue me ay-holl! I need to arrange the letter so it can be presented before a judge if I need to file a claim, and I must to appear to be the party that is being most reasonable. The court would advocate me under the CPR anyways because I would be attending as a Litigant in Person, so I dont really need to quote legislation. I'm sure Comet Electricals own legals are aware of consumer law, and know full well how a small claim would go. My concern now, is Comet Electricals could try and say there is no fault with the machine. They have possesion of the machine and I dont have its serial number. They could lie and would probably get away with it because I cannot prove its the same machine.
  13. My thoughts are likewise, anyway this is my opening shot before I start reading the proverbial Riot Act citing consumer legislation and threatening trading standards etc. Comet Electricals might be willing to reach an amicable resolve and I needed to know the legal position before I write the letter.
  14. No they didnt test it, its an intermittent printing fault. Sometimes a page prints OK, other times it takes two or three attempts to get a good print. Printing multiplage docs on the first attempt is not possible. I have this horrible feeling they might comeback saying theres nothing wrong with it. Ive been reading other posts, and that appears to be Comet's MO.
  15. Thanks Martin, I think point 1 you raised fits the remit. I'll write to Comet Electricals Head Office and ask for a refund.
  16. I have just left work on Maternity pay with a new baby born November 2009 and I tried to claim Family Tax Credit. HMRC want to assess my income I earned last year, 29K a year, but as I am raising little'un, I am only earning £117 a week. Its seems unfair for my tax credits to be based on my last years earnings when I’m only earning £117 a week. Can HMRC really do this?
  17. I bought an HP Photo Smart combined printer scanner machine from Comet store on 27 October 2009 for £149.99. It performed well during the first week but developed an intermittent fault where the printer produced horizontal banding (occasional blank lines in a document). The fault progressively got worse and I followed the manufacturer’s instructions which said to run the print head "cleaning cycle" over and over again until the fault goes away. It often took repeated attempts to print a document to get a perfect finish and printing photographs was not possible without white horizontal lines across them. This consumed ink cartridges which needed replacing at £9.99 each which the printer takes four at a time. The cleaning cycle did not resolve the problem and the cost of ink cartridge replacement was now over £100. I returned the printer to the store on 21 January 2010 and asked for an exchange. My request was denied by the store assistant. I then asked for a refund and my request was again denied and the store assistant commented it was "company Policy" they do not give refunds or exchanges for faulty goods because they have to be returned to the manufacturer. I left the store without the goods or a refund and bought another printer of the same make and similar functionality elsewhere and it has worked perfectly ever since. Can I ask for a refund from Comet.
  18. Not many of those, most tranfer-ups end up nulla-bona gone-aways and the creditor out of pocket.
  19. Further info. If this holds in UK law, it would enable consumers to reclaim parking fines from private pay & display car parks to reclaim their money within six years of paying it. Section 2 of the Limitation Act 1980. Anyone agree?
  20. Requested post by Happy Contrails. From conversation with a passenger, a German lawyer on FRA - DXB at the weekend. The lawyer on the flight casually talked about a case in Germany where a motorist was penalised for over staying a pre-paid Pay & Display ticket. He successfully overturned the penalty because the car park operator charged disproportionately high sum in compensation. The motorist argued the contract formed between the motorist and car park was unfair. The car park admitted accepting overpayments from consumers without compensating them for unused time. His complaint was upheld. The court ruled where compensation is disproportionately high and no equal compensation is given in return, the clause in the contract awarding penalty for the land owner can be disregarded. This (possibly by accident) meant penalties for underpayment can lawfully be disregarded, and allows consumers to freely use car parks operating a pay & display without paying anything. Car parks operators are now having to revert to pay-on-exit. This only charges on actual land usage, and does not require motorists to overpay for parking they may not need to protect themselves from the risk of penalty for underpayment. Could this happen in the UK? In the UK, pay & display parking arrangements on public land and highways are common place but these fall under the jurisdiction of local councils and regulated by the Traffic Management Act 2004. But, this legislation does not apply to private companies and trading in paid parking on private land or parking structures for commercial gain - e.g. NCP. When a consumer parks a vehicle on land or in a structure operating pay & display, a contract between the parties is formed at common law. If a private car park has a policy where it accepts overpayment from a consumer, but enforces a higher charge for under payment at a rate that is higher than the rate otherwise charged when the consumer does not over-stay his advance-paid time. Does this fall under the remit of the UK's legal definition of an unfair contract clause? The legislation referred to is Schedule 2(e) of Regulation 5(5) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Comments?
  • Create New...