Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice is change. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been reading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. On mediation form you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee that you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.  
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
    • too true HB, but those two I referred for starters - appear to be self admitted - One to excuse other lockdown law breaking, by claiming his estate away from his consistency and London abode was his main home the other if he claims to have 'not told the truth' in his own words via that quote - to have mislead his investors rather than broken lobbying rules   - seem to be slam dunks - pick which was your law breaking - it seems to be both and much more besides in Jenricks case Starmer was director of public prosecutions yet the tories are using seemingly baseless allegations for propaganda and starmer is missing pressing apparent blatant criminality in politics
    • I am sure the resident experts will give you a comprehensive guide to your rights.  The responsibility lies with the retailer. I have dealt with Cotswold before for similar. And found them refreshingly helpful.   Even when I lost the receipt for one item I had bought in Inverness. The manager in Newcastle called the store. Found the transaction and gave me a full refund. 
  • 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

H.O.L Test case appeal. Judgement Declared. ***See Announcements***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4997 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

If in doubt, contact a qualified insured legal professional (or my wife... she knows EVERYTHING)

 

Or send a cheque or postal order payable to Reclaim the Right Ltd.

to

923 Finchley Road London NW11 7PE

 

 

Click here if you fancy an email address that shows you mean business! (only £6 and that will really help CAG)

 

If you can't donate, please use the Internet Search boxes on the CAG pages - these will generate a small but regular income for the site

 

Please also consider using the

C.A.G. Toolbar

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

They cant tax it surely as it was in most instances money earned before the bank took it and was there by already subject to income tax ?

 

PF

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They cant tax it surely as it was in most instances money earned before the bank took it and was there by already subject to income tax ?

 

PF

 

 

That's a 'no' but I bet they wish they could!! :rolleyes:

Michael

When I was young I thought that money was the most important thing in life; now that I am old I know that it is. (Oscar Wilde)

--I like to be helpful wherever possible however I'm not qualified in this field. I do consider carefully anything important (normally from personal experience) however please understand that any actions taken are at your own risk--

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hummm,

 

Bank charges and Profits, do they belong in the same sentence ?? :confused:

Please help us to help you. Download the CAG tool bar for free

HERE and use the search option for all your searches. CAG earns a few pennies every time !!!

 

Please don't rush, take time to read these:-

 

 

&

 

 

This is always worth referring to

 

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by me are personal, are not endorsed by the Consumer Action Group or the Bank Action Group. Should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:-xWhy oh why is this not front page news? Banks have been getting away with literally stealing people's money for decades, they are nothing more than common criminals like our expenses grabbing MP's. It's all very well pontificating about 'never exceeding your overdraft' if you manage your money well or have enough to not worry about it, but being charged £35 for being 10p in the red is criminal and should have been outlawed years ago (yes, it does happen, and usually only the poorest pay). Although it is frustrating being charged if there has been a genuine mistake or if you are on a low income, penalties should be proportionate to the amount and the 'admin' costs and they charge clearly do not reflect this. I cannot understand why so little publicity is being given to the bank charges debate.....oh, hang on a minute, doesn't money talk to politicians and the media...silly me!

Link to post
Share on other sites

:-xWhy oh why is this not front page news? Banks have been getting away with literally stealing people's money for decades, they are nothing more than common criminals like our expenses grabbing MP's. It's all very well pontificating about 'never exceeding your overdraft' if you manage your money well or have enough to not worry about it, but being charged £35 for being 10p in the red is criminal and should have been outlawed years ago (yes, it does happen, and usually only the poorest pay). Although it is frustrating being charged if there has been a genuine mistake or if you are on a low income, penalties should be proportionate to the amount and the 'admin' costs and they charge clearly do not reflect this. I cannot understand why so little publicity is being given to the bank charges debate.....oh, hang on a minute, doesn't money talk to politicians and the media...silly me!

 

As Car said, this was in the media a lot when people were able to claim thousands from the banks. Now that it is in court and cases are on hold there is nothing new for the media to report until the outcome. MPs' expenses will die down soon as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

mmmm.

 

refunds might not be subject to tax...

 

interest might well be though. ;)

 

The IR view is that charges refunds are not 'new' income as they've been taken from 'DISPOSABLE' income you have had AFTER tax was paid. It's like money being taken from the wage you receive after NI and tax.

 

The interest you receive IS income and as such has to be declared. Depending which department of the IR require this info, received interest below £300 does not need to be declared.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL I knew I should never have mentioned tax in the 1st place!

A serious note though is that the banks will be able to claim back tax as this to them will be expenditure, a very unusual venture for them. With good financial advice [sic] they'll find ways to minimalise outgoings.

 

This is a time when I think back to C&E going on strike and leaving honesty boxes for Excise duty. People were exceptionally honest and at one location they collected - 1p!!

 

As for the media I have to say they never seemed to report much when the case even started. I would have expected mass reflection and comment by everyone.

 

Michael

When I was young I thought that money was the most important thing in life; now that I am old I know that it is. (Oscar Wilde)

--I like to be helpful wherever possible however I'm not qualified in this field. I do consider carefully anything important (normally from personal experience) however please understand that any actions taken are at your own risk--

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed tax is not my thing all i know is i got paid and the employer took care of my tax obligations.

 

But on a more serious note perhaps we should have more coverage of the tax subject on this forum if anything it will show the many financial companies etc out there that this site does strive to act within the laws of this country and is not here to help folk avoid debt.

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your claim is in the legal system and you've claimed compound interest then the whole monetary award regardless of interest and capital is NOT subject to taxation.

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your claim is in the legal system and you've claimed compound interest then the whole monetary award regardless of interest and capital is NOT subject to taxation.

 

That would be correct ... for non-business accounts. This would also be so for people who have their claims with the financial institution only. Any financial institution paying 'interest' might deduct any basic rate tax at source - the only potentially 'grey' area.

Michael

When I was young I thought that money was the most important thing in life; now that I am old I know that it is. (Oscar Wilde)

--I like to be helpful wherever possible however I'm not qualified in this field. I do consider carefully anything important (normally from personal experience) however please understand that any actions taken are at your own risk--

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your claim is in the legal system and you've claimed compound interest then the whole monetary award regardless of interest and capital is NOT subject to taxation.

 

What if the settlement was made without going to court or the bank accepting/acknowledging a claim and was purely a 'business decision'?

Link to post
Share on other sites

that depends if there is interest added.

 

Basically the charges (when refunded) will not have a tax levied against it, but any interest that the bank adds to it as a way of "saying sorry" will be taxed. However you would need to declare it and chances are it won't be much at all so I wouldn'y bother anyway!

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

And to answer the question (sorry)....then no, if they made a "refund" as a business decision then nothing gets taxed.

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

chances are it won't be much at all so I wouldn'y bother anyway!

 

People with 2 or 3 claims settled claims in any tax year may easily receive a few thousand pounds in interest, depending what rate they're paid at (and many banks do pay the contractual rate), so this kind of amount DOES need to be declared and cannot be ignored.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A trifle harsh, your bank. :(

 

Lets hope danielr recognises your sparkling wit/attempt at jolly banter and sticks around.

 

Welcome to the thread danielr :)

Oh well, have used the line before but for the unfortunate poster you can click on "thread Tools" and it should have a dropdown box and in that it will say "subscribe to this thread" and hey presto, job done.

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...