Announcements
-
-
Tweets
-
Posts
-
By BankFodder · Posted
If I haven't referred to it before then please check out this thread another case where the claimant contracted directly with Packlink for a courier delivery service carried out by Evri. Please read this thread very carefully and eventually you will get to a point where the claimant – our OP – discovered some interesting terms and conditions and has referred to them in his case. He incorporated these into his witness statement and was given judgement – not on the basis of rights of third parties but on the basis of direct responsibility. I would suggest that use the witness statement as a model although we will want to see it before you file it off. When you find the particular post with the witness statement, please can you post a link to it here as well as a copy of the witness statement because I don't have the time to look for it at the moment and the thread is rather long. However it is very important to you and you should go through it very carefully indeed. We have applied for a transcript of the judgement and hopefully it will be along in six weeks or so. As soon as we receive it we will make it available on this sub- forum. -
By Man in the middle · Posted
Yes they are criminal charges. The law requires you to stop/report if "...owing to the presence of a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place an accident occurs by which— [injury or damage to a third party or their property is caused]. "I would be disinclined at this stage to offer anything more than you do not believe any such accident took place. You could provide a brief description of the altercation in an attempt to explain why another party might be making these allegations. I know it's a silly question, but are you sure that you did not collide with anything? Could you have mistaken hitting something for the other party thumping your car? Could it be that you passing closely caused him to damage something somehow? -
By BankFodder · Posted
Thank you. They insisted that they claim they have an "allocated settlement" figure per day. Make a note of this and make sure it gets into your witness statement and onto the judge. This is a scandal and even more evidence of the abuse of the system. It has nothing to do with justice. It is purely economic's for them. Once again, insist on seeing their contract with Packlink. You shouldn't take their word for anything without evidence. Also standby as I will post a link to a similar case where a very interesting discovery has been made about Packlink's terms and conditions and how Evri are responsible to you in any event. We are applying for judgement on that. It will take about six weeks. I'm sure it will be available by the time you go to trial. Also, it is outrageous that they wasted your time and the mediator's time agreeing to compromise when they already had a fixed sum in mind. This is not about compromise, this is about setting a condition from which they will not move. This is an abuse of the court process. It is an abuse of the mediation process. Make sure it all goes into the witness statement. The judge needs to know -
Update: they actually showed up to mediation this time. The mediator seemed pretty understanding that I had a previous claim with Evri last year where they didn't show up to mediation and ended up settling in full before court. And how evri are infamous for following this "dragging out protocol" even when they will lose. Evri spoke the usual speil of my contract is with packlink not them, to which i briefly explain to the mediator the Rights of Third Parties Act 1999 etc. Best they could offer was a "goodwill guesture" of £20 plus covering the court fees so £55 total. Said they have an "allocated settlement amount per day". the mediator could already tell it wasn't going nowhere so we had no deal. -
The payer is not responsible for registering and making sure that VAT is charged correctly.
-
-
Our picks
-
If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,
If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.-
- 1 reply
-
-
Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld
ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,
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
-
-
A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report
WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,
Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299-
- 161 replies
-
-
Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available
BankFodder posted a post in a topic,
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
-
-
PPI on Swift Advances mortgage.......***WON***
style="text-align: center;">
Thread Locked
because no one has posted on it for the last 4946 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
-
Recently Browsing 0 Caggers
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Have we helped you ...?
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS
Recommended Posts