Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Is the bank still required to file a defence?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5953 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

Obviously, most (if not all) banks are applying for stays straight away, pending the test case. Does the stay application/order dispense with the requirement for the bank to file a defence in the normal timescales?

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

I could be wrong but I think all of the stays I have seen have been applied after the defence has been filed, so I would say no they have to file a defence.

 

I know MCOL Northampton were staying everything on principal but even these cases were being passed to the local County Courts if you sent them a letter so again post defense stage.

 

I'm sure I will be corrected if I'm wrong :).

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pete

I could be wrong but I think all of the stays I have seen have been applied after the defence has been filed, so I would say no they have to file a defence.

 

I know MCOL Northampton were staying everything on principal but even these cases were being passed to the local County Courts if you sent them a letter so again post defense stage.

 

I'm sure I will be corrected if I'm wrong :).

 

pete

 

Thanks for that - my own gut feeling is that they should still have to file a full defence, even if the court agree to a stay, since they have to be able to say why they disagree with the claim.

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Well, my mate & I have decided to try a letter to the court to try and get at least a defence filed.... here's the main body (obviously dates removed):

 

I am in receipt of the N24 dated [date], staying the above case until the OFT test case is heard.

In accordance with CPR15.4(1), the date for filing a Defence (when an Acknowledgement of Service has been made) is 28 days from date of service of the claim - by my calculations, this was [date]. Whilst I will not be applying for the stay to be lifted at this time, I understand that the Defendant has not yet filed a Defence to the claim and, as a Litigant in Person, my opinion is that the Court’s power to stay the case under CPR3.3 does not waive the requirement for a Defence to be filed under CPR15.4.

 

If this is the case, I would respectfully request that an order is made for the Defence to be filed accordingly. In the alternative, I would be grateful for clarification on this point.

 

 

Guess we just see what happens now...

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess we just see what happens now...

 

Not a lot:

Your letter of {date} has been referred to the District Judge.

 

District Judge {name} has stated that it is open to the court to stay the proceedings at any time, a defence does not have to be filed

 

Whoopeee-bleeding-do :rolleyes:

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a nice try :)

 

Thanks :)

I'm putting it down to just another form of process abuse by the banks - at least his HSBC cases have had Defences filed and AQs issued & completed, this one's NatWest (so I guess we could've expected it from Cobbetts!)

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

It is the norm for a bank to respond with a standard defence.

It is also the norm for banks to simply submit a defence and not enclose any supporting document's!!!

"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education." Albert Einstein

 

"No-one can make you feel inferior without your consent" - E. Roosevelt

 

 

Don't lie, thieve, cheat or steal. The Government do not like the competition.

 

 

All advice is offered without prejudice.

We are being sued for Libel. Please help us by donating

 

Please support the pettition to remove Gordon Brown as he was not elected primeinister. He was elected Party Leader something completely different.

 

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/gordan-brown/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

It is the norm for a bank to respond with a standard defence.

It is also the norm for banks to simply submit a defence and not enclose any supporting document's!!!

 

Yes. Supporting documents are presented in court bundles when it gets to that stage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...