Advertising

[jferdi]

Hi all,

 

I have taken something to court and they wish to defend i just wonder what my chances are heres my claim:

 

Advertising that was Mis-sold to Mr F, Mr F is being charged quarterly for an advertisement that he believed to be a one of payment. He has also been overcharged on the first payment as he was advised the amount he would be paying would be a one off payment of £188.00 which would be reduced to £128.00 if he was to take out the advertising over the phone which was done. He has given the company in question no permission to set up a switch board payment system on his card to deduct further payments which they have done quarterly causing charges on the account which are now also being claimed for. Formal request for reimbursement was made on 10/10/2008.

They intend to defend the case I just wonder if this is a reasonable case?

[Trilby274]

Need to be careful with these people. Who are they? Did they send you a copy of the contract you 'signed' over the phone? I believe they are supposed to do so within 7 days so that you can still cancel within the 14 day cooling off period. I had one a couple of years ago and the t&c's were printed in very small print in very light grey on the back. You really had to work hard to read them - I didn't bother and just cancelled the contract immediately on the basis that their t&c's were unclear.

 

Not saying these are, but some of the people offering advertising are just [problem] merchants.

 

Anyway, to your question. If the contract is clear and your submission is correct and in accordance with the contract, then I would say take them on. How do you know they are going to defend the case? It's easy enough to say - quite another matter to actually do it.

 

This is my first real 'advisory' post, so please treat with caution

[Bookworm]

I would imagine OP knows they intend to defend because he says he has taken them to court, not that he is going to, which would mean the defendant had 14 days to acknowledge the claim and say that he either accepted he owed the money, accepted he owed part of it, or say he wants to defend in full and this means he has said the latter. The defendant now has another 14 days to lodge his defence.

 

Until we know what the defence is, we can't really say what are your chances one way or another, so post it here when you receive it and we can take it from there.

[Trilby274]

Thanks Bookie - missed that little implication. So the OPs case really does rest on the interpretation of the t&c's? As you say, need to see what their defence is first.

[Bookworm]

Well, I don't want to really say until we know what the defence is going to be, but I would have thought that the case will rely on the distance selling regulations, actually, namely that if OP was not given a copy of the contract and sold sight unseen so to speak, and that their T&Cs do say it's not a one-off but a renewable charge, then it would be down to the judge and who he believes on balance of probabilities.

 

There's not enough info to give an opinion here one way or another, which is why I am being cautious.

[jferdi]

My particulars of claim were incorrect, and I had signed terms and conditions which were on the back of a proof document, I accepted a settlement of £130, instead of £500 =( ill be more on the ball next time.

[Trilby274]

Ermm - does this mean the case is over? Did it actually get to court?

[jferdi]

yes the case is closed there was an advance in dispute resolution before it went to court.

[Trilby274]

OK - well done. Sorry you missed out on the larger amount