Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Tecso Insurance Questions - Laptop Claim


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5629 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

Hi there,

 

I have sent a laptop off to tesco insurance, and they have proclaimed it beyond econimical repair. It was a Sony NR21Z, and They have based the calim on a current model of the FW21L

 

I have been offered £700 worth of vouchers to spend at currys/pc world, even though I bought it at the sony centre. If i dont want the vouchers it would be £500 cheque.

 

They have also said that they will keep the old laptop, and if I want the hard drive back I have to pay for it.

 

The only problem with the laptop was the screen. The rest of the laptop works fine(I checked by hooking it upto an external monitor).

 

Questions:

 

1. Can they really offer me vouchers for the full amount, but less in a cheque? I really dont want to buy a laptop from either of those places.

 

2. Can they really keep the old laptop?

 

3. Can they really charge me £30 to return the old hard drive?

 

Any other advice would be appriciated.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

If an insurance company pays out on an item, it effectively buys the item from you.

For instance if you wrote a car off then in settling the insurance claim the insurance company buys the car from you.

However you should be given opportunity to recover personal items from the wreck, which in your case would be the personal data on the hard drive.

The legality of the cheque/voucher scheme may be covered in that they would probably claim that the value of the laptop is actually £500 (I do not make that valuation - I do not know) and that they are giving you an extra payment in consideration of taking vouchers rather than cash.

Personally I would pay the £30 for the drive (you could possibly ask for them to return the laptop to you while you consider your options and then send return it to them once you have decided, but that would probably cost you more than £30 in postage and it would massively complicate matters)

I would also accept the vouchers and go and buy another laptop from currys or PC world.

 

this is probably not what you want to hear, but these are my thoughts.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm.. this is an interesting one. Maybe someone with more claims experience will be able to offer there opinion on this specific point:

 

 

Although the hard disk drive, as a physical object, has a value (the insurance company will call this salvage), and thus within a 'total loss' claim they are entitled to ask you for money on this, I do not believe that the same can be said for the data stored on the hard disk drive.

 

I believe this data would have a very different "value" - for example it might have the only copy of your wedding photos it might have, or it could be full of mp3s that you bought from iTunes, or whatever.

 

I'm thinking that you couldn't really give a crap about the hard disk drive if you got a new laptop, but what you do care about is the data stored on it. However you cannot get at your data unless you pay the £30 to get the HDD back.

 

Now the point of insurance is to return you to a condition you were at before the claim was made. This would certainly (in my mind) indicate that the new laptop should have the data on it. Because of this I think that the insurance company should replace the data, and that they should pay for the costs of this.

 

 

Anybody else have some thoughts on this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Until you have accepted their offer of payment then the computer and the information contained on it still belongs to you. Ask them to send it back while you decide what you would like to do. Retreive all the information from the hard drive and then send it back. It won't cost anywhere near £30 to post a laptop.

Then you will have all the infomation and £700 worth of vouchers. You can get a fantastic laptop for £700.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The truth is - and admittedly with the benefit of 20:20 hindsight - is that the laptop should never have left your possession in the first place without all your personal data being copied.

 

If the hard drive had simply failed, you would have lost the lot. Regular back-ups are a must; most people don't realise that until it is too late. Never have only one copy of anything digital.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair - And believe me I Know the point about backing up - but not everyone would be able to back up data from a machine that didnt have a working screen...

 

(some people wouldnt know how to back up data from a computer WITH a working screen)

 

your point about backing up is very well made though and as you say - there should have been regular backups while the computer was working.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...