Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder

shamrocker

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    1,421
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

shamrocker last won the day on December 12 2019

shamrocker had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

618 Excellent

About shamrocker

  • Rank
    Classic Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

513 profile views
  1. Ah, ok. The attachment you posted is called 'Claimants WS', so I thought you'd had theirs. I only glanced at it briefly. Any detail that you feel is needed to support your defence and then the brief arguments presented at the hearing should be included within your WS. This is 'the' time for detail.
  2. You can provide your interpretation of the law in support of your defence, but that's just your interpretation, unless you qualify it with pointing to the legislation that applies, or other suitable sources referring to it. Therefore, quoting relevant legislation and case law is how you'll demonstrate that you have a winning argument. The claimant has done just that in their WS. Say as much as you need to in order to make the best possible impact with your arguments.
  3. You can offer them any figure you like, but they don't have to accept it. The figure needs to be sensible and should represent value to the Claimant. My own approach is that by offering a lower amount than what's being claimed, the Claimant gets to save on the costs they'd have incurred by going all the way to trial - therefore, the sooner the offer is made, the better really. You can then add in a bit for the fact you may contest things such as penalty fees that the judge may be inclined to knock off. Then you can reduce it a bit based on the fact they will be nervous about losing, so may be more open to negotiation. It's not an exact science, but you need to appear realistic and sensible. Fully understand why you're making the offer and why the offered amount may be appealing to the claimant. Too low and you risk antagonising them - too high and you're giving away money. View it as a commercially based negotiation. If they think their claim is rock solid, they'll be unlikely to budge - but why would they offer a Tomlin if they were completely confident? They will also be aware that even if they win the case, you may never pay up and may duck and dive forever more - it's time and money wasted by them. Just keep it in mind. My suggestion of £1,500 was definitely on the cheeky side, so even that could be taken the wrong way by them. If you want to ensure you're taken seriously, then perhaps knock a third off, or £500 maybe. As Andy says, a one-off payment will give you more leverage, but whatever you offer, if you need to do it by way of a payment plan, make sure it's completely affordable or you may regret it later.
  4. You should view this as a bit of a game of poker, and choose to play it according to the hand you hold, how the possible outcomes will affect you, and how the opposition appear to be playing their hand. If you're clutching at straws a bit and also don't have the experience to use what you've got to best effect, then you should certainly be considering all options open to you. The fact the agreement is post 2007 gives them some wriggle room, so you can't depend on it really.A Tomlin in this instance might be a safe bet for you, but please remember that you do not have to settle for amount they're claiming. Taking this to a hearing will cost them a few quid, and they will be aware there's no guarantee they'll win either.They might even be aware of certain weaknesses that you've not identified and could be nervous.The fact they've offered a Tomlin at all shows they would rather take something than risk getting nothing, or that it would present a commercially viable option for them. If you could afford £25 per month, tell them that you believe you have a good chance of being successful at the hearing, but offer them £1,500 over 60 months under the Tomlin Order.Request that the Claimant pay the £100 fee. You can still pay the settlement amount in one hit if you can afford it, then the matter goes away. They may not accept it though, so you have to return with an increased offer or tell them you'll proceed to the hearing and see how they respond.
  5. Well done! They would have known they were in for a good hiding by the judge. All you had to do was expose their blatant weaknesses, which you did.
  6. Mods will probably move your thread over the the General Legal forum - just in case it happens and you get confused. I'm not even mildly clued up on a dispute of this nature, but you'd need to compare benefits they were contractually required to deliver against what you actually did receive. Without seeing the T&Cs and course schedule, as well as their complaints policy, it's difficult to say at a glance what scope you'd have to sue them. Others on here will hopefully be able to advise better. You should wait out the number of days they've been afforded in your pre-action letter.
  7. Do you think a judge will see it the same way? Sorry for not being particularly helpful at this stage.
  8. Is a refund the only possible resolution to your grievance?
  9. I wouldn't use the fee payment as an indication of their confidence - they probably haven't got a clue about the circumstances of the claim the payment relates to.
  10. They appear to be out of time to issue the NTK and it's also a classic case of 'double dipping'. Take a screenshot of your movements from that day and keep it safe somewhere, as it may prove useful later. More comments will follow from other forum members.
  11. You really only send the letter in response to a Letter of Claim. Until then, ignore them. That letter can then be used in your WS later to demonstrate that you did engage with the claimant and gave then fair warning that they have no grounds to claim against you and that their failure will just cost them. It also shows them that you will not be taken for a fool. Being nice, polite, respectful, etc equals easy target in their eyes.
  12. Yes, just call them up and ask. I've previously found email to be a good option, should you not wish to mess about in queues etc. It might take a couple of days to receive a reply sometimes though.
  13. This is the area - where the little yellow car is parked: https://www.google.com/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x486ef5c79b2dd813:0xf5e4daf54281ff74!3m1!7e115!4s/maps/place/metropole%2Bchambers%2Bswansea/@51.6188614,-3.9404894,3a,75y,57.71h,90t/data%3D*213m4*211e1*213m2*211sFHo_1DFwM-9av4gErJ4_0Q*212e0*214m2*213m1*211s0x486ef5c79b2dd813:0xf5e4daf54281ff74?sa%3DX!5smetropole+chambers+swansea+-+Google+Search&imagekey=!1e2!2sFHo_1DFwM-9av4gErJ4_0Q&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjHlMGwyeXmAhUztHEKHTnFAUAQpx8wE3oECA4QBg These operators are predators - lazy ones at that. They make a habit out of placing a few inconspicuous signs around little parcels of land that tend to be popular parking spots. There will be plenty of scope to defeat them though. I recently assisted someone who got ticketed by them just round the corner at the Cross Keys. I'm convinced they merged with Alliance because the courts in the area were sick of the sight of them and likely gave them zero credibility.
×
×
  • Create New...