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

Contract law and verbal agreement problem?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5584 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

I recently got involved in discussions to settle a claim with a finance company. The company made a Part 36 offer. It came after lots of discussions and correspondence but finally I decided to accept it.

 

The offer was made in writing a few weeks before I accepted and I telephoned their solicitors and spoke with the solicitor fellow who was involved from the start and I told him I accepted the offer within the time frame allowed.

 

He then told me he would get the paperwork out to me to finalise it, so I waited. I emailed him in the next 2 weeks twice asking what was happening and should I let the court or anyone know and they said no, they were awaiting instructions from the finance company on the figures. Three weeks later I received the conditions in a Tomlin Order which were contrary to the Offer they made and I objected. Now they are saying I never accepted the offer because I didn't put it in writing.

 

I am aware that a Part 36 Offer, under the CPR rules has to be accepted in writing, but I was waiting for a response from the solicitors and what I want to know here is what the weight of a Verbal contract is being made in an offer and acceptence situation like I described.

 

Verbal Contracts are legally binding, I have now got to present to the court my reasons for believing their Part 36 was accepted and whilst I have documentary proof from the solicitors supporting my position that I was waiting for them, I also need further back up to support the verbal acceptance and I'd like those who understand Contract law to point me to cases where a verbal contract has been bound in law if you can.

 

Anyone?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi smarterchick, have you done a search on the BAILII site (British and Irish Legal Information Institute - Access to Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information), it does include caselaw

 

 

BAILII - Search results

 

I've just done a search using the term 'verbal contracts' and got 172 returns. Bit of a slog, but may be worthwhile.

  • Haha 1

A couple of hundred years ago Meyer Amshel, (1743-1812), founder of the Rothschild dynasty is reported to have told his five sons, “Let me control a nation’s money and I care not who writes its laws”.

 

PLEASE NOTE - I am not a legal expert, what I have written is my own opinion garnered from reading this forum and consumer legislation, and my own experience of the judicial process.

 

If I have been helpful, please feel free to tickle my scales!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're welcome. It might also be worth sending a pm to pt2537, who has access to a case law database. He may take some time to respond as he is usually extremely busy.

A couple of hundred years ago Meyer Amshel, (1743-1812), founder of the Rothschild dynasty is reported to have told his five sons, “Let me control a nation’s money and I care not who writes its laws”.

 

PLEASE NOTE - I am not a legal expert, what I have written is my own opinion garnered from reading this forum and consumer legislation, and my own experience of the judicial process.

 

If I have been helpful, please feel free to tickle my scales!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, that's a good start 'estoppel':

 

Estoppel is a legal doctrine of common law that has many individual rules but that generally means that any person arguing a legal position to the court should not have behaved unfairly in the matter. Estoppel complements the requirement of consideration in contract law.[citation needed] In general estoppel protects a party who would suffer detriment if each following test is met:

  • A second party has done or said something to induce an expectation.
  • The first party relied (reasonably) on the expectation ...
  • ... and would suffer detriment if that expectation were not met.

Okay, this immediately fits the bill, but....this is a Part 36 offer - does that make any difference in law or legal practice?

 

I don't understand estoppel, heard of it but it's one of those words that appears meaningless as I've never ever used it before...

 

Would I be whistling up the wrong path to use this, I'm going over the lsit and if this is anything to go by I should find what I need... thank you so much..

Link to post
Share on other sites

..........

Edited by DocH

A couple of hundred years ago Meyer Amshel, (1743-1812), founder of the Rothschild dynasty is reported to have told his five sons, “Let me control a nation’s money and I care not who writes its laws”.

 

PLEASE NOTE - I am not a legal expert, what I have written is my own opinion garnered from reading this forum and consumer legislation, and my own experience of the judicial process.

 

If I have been helpful, please feel free to tickle my scales!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Can anyone point me to legal backup for a case I have. I did a deal where a part 36 offer was offered by the Claimant in full and final on a deal and I accepted on the telephone, time dragged before their consent and Tomlin came over and the tomlin conditions compromised the Part 36 ( I don't need ANY guidance on that part) I just need to back up with some case law where a verbal contract is affective as legally binding ..nothing else

 

Ta - asap pls if you can..

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is simply common law I believe.

 

A contract is a contract. There is no legal distinction between a written and a verbal contract. The only issue is with provability.

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi SC

Googled this

 

Briefing Note - Legal Binding Agreements and Verbal Contracts

In order to form a contract, the parties must agree on what either party will do under the terms of the contract; they must have the intention to form contractual relations; and there must be consideration. It is immaterial whether the contract is verbal, in writing, or partially verbal and partially written, although common sense says that recording the agreement in writing creates a document that may be referred to for its terms in the event of a dispute between the parties. Obviously, this is particularly important when disputes arise in respect of the agreement, whether the dispute arises in respect to the work to be performed or sums to be paid under the agreement. Both verbal contracts and written contracts are equally legally binding contracts, subject to the existence of the usual requirements for formation of a contract.

Certainty and Completeness of Agreement

Agreement is reached between contracting parties when an offer is made by one party which is clearly and unequivocally accepted by the other party. The offer must be sufficiently certain so as the parties know what is to be performed, and the agreement must be complete. An agreement is incomplete when an essential term has not been agreed or there are further matters to be agreed. Agreements in principle are usually considered not to be complete, as are contracts expressly stated to be ‘subject to contract’. In deciding whether a contract is complete, a court will consider a contract to be formed when, from the viewpoint of an officious bystander, the parties have agreed in the same terms on the same subject matter.

Verbal Contracts

There is no legal impediment to the parties entering into a contract based on their conduct and verbal statements or representations. When parties agree the terms of the contract by verbal statements, the binding terms of the contract are more difficult to ascertain. Usually a court will look to the history of the statements made by the parties and the performance of the parties to obtain assistance in determining what was actually agreed by the parties. Where one person however has not performed their part of the bargain, and court is left to more uncertain means in reaching a decision. Draft contract documents, emails, letters and order forms may lend assistance to deciding the terms of a verbal agreement, and courts have used similar agreements with third parties to apply a standard of reasonableness in determining the terms of the contract in the absence of writing.

In the event that a party refuses to sign a contract, it is essential to write to the person and confirm the terms of the contract as they are understood, to provide a evidence at a later date as to the terms of the agreement reached. In the absence of any other evidence these communications are may be key in assisting the resolution of disputes relating to the terms of the contract. It may be useful to know that where an verbal agreement has been reached, which is later confirmed in writing but the written document does not properly record the terms, that it may be rectified using the doctrine of rectification.

Exceptions

There are exceptions to the general rule that contracts may be verbal, for instance in respect to employment contracts, tenacy agreements and contracts for consumer credit. In some instances where writing is required, a note or memorandum will be required. In the absence of such evidence of the contract, the agreement may be void, unenforceable, or unenforceable by only one party, or on the order of a court.

Back to Top

MORE INFORMATION

For legal advice on contract disputes and contract terms contact our solicitors online or call us on 020 7353 2732.

Gillhams Technology Solicitors, Second Floor, 47 Fleet Street, London EC4Y 1BJ, UK. T: +44 20 7353 2732; F: +44 20 7353 2733. UK Solicitors regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

 

Plenty more on google.

 

x AL

-------------------------

CAPITAL ONE * SETTLED*31st Oct 06

HBOS *SETTLED* 8th Oct 06

WOOLWICH *SETTLED*12thJan2007

Monument (Barclays) *SETTLED*10thMar2007

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...