Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Unsure what would be classed as appeal I first contacted the applicant then IAS. I am not aware I could appeal again as Bank state I was informed that is news to me. I would have to look through the paper work, I apologise I forget so much due to my caring duties wish I had quality time to get so much done. Will try and look tomorrow, appreciate everyone's time and input.
    • Hi, I've been reading the invaluable advice on this forum and reading about the problems with Evri and lost delivery of items.  From what I gather the initial steps after having exhausted every's own lost item claim process is to draft a Letter of Claim, I think it is called and to register with the government Money Claims.  I have got a login for Money Claims and have made an initial stab at the letter but I'm not certain I have got it right. Am I right to assume that having exhausted Evri customer service's claims process and having received the denial of any compensation because the laptop I was sending is on the non-compensatory list that my next step would be to send the Letter of Claim to them? Let me provide some basic details which I hopefully have addressed in the letter. I purchased a laptop through Amazon.co.uk which a business in Belfast sold refurbished laptops through.  They had a 30 day money back guarantee for a full refund if you have any issues with the laptop.  I have the invoice from Amazon showing the purchase.  On 27 April, 2024 before the end of the 30 day period I used their ParcelShop (inside a Tesco) to send the laptop back and have the tracking reference mentioned in the letter.  As mentioned in the letter there was they advised they could not give me or sell me any insurance because laptops are on the non-compensatory list so I just paid the normal delivery cost.  It was scanned as leaving the ParcelShop on 29 April and the tracking has been like that ever since.  After a 28 working day Evri claim process they gave the expected response that they could not provide any compensation and simply could not proceed with my claim. I was hoping to get some advice on whether I go ahead now and email this to Customer Services straightaway and should I send a hard-copy to the Evri address as well?  Or are there any steps I have missed out on first?  I believe 14 days is the reasonable period of time for them to respond so if I were to send it tomorrow, for example 12 June then I should expect a reply by 26 June, is that correct and fair?  And assuming they don't reply with a full refund then I would then go down the government Money Claims site to proceed with that? Sorry for all the questions, I want to make sure I go about it properly.  I'll continue to read through other cases on here so I can get an even better handle on the process. I attached a LOC, happy for any edits or updates that will make it even better. Thanks so much for anyone's help! Regards, Matt Evri letter of claim.docx
    • The date was 3 June. Get on MCOL now. The legal principle is that, even if you defence is late, if the other party hasn't requested judgement, then your defence takes priority and is accepted. You might be in time. When I say now I mean now.  Recently we had someone who was nine days' late and this was pointed out to them at 5:30pm.  They faffed around till 11pm.  When they went on MCOl they saw that judgement had been entered at 7pm. Every minute is vital. File the below standard defence if you still can - 1.  The Defendant is the recorded keeper of [motor vehicle]. 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.  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.
    • Hi friends,  I’m a bit worried I may have got confused with timings here. I thought I had 33 days from my acknowledgment to submit a defence but the date added above says 3/6/24.   have I missed the date?   if so how can I apply for an exception due to my disability and problems with deadlines and dates etc (ADHD)?   what should I submit as a defence?   I’ve had no reply from BW so far    just been back on MCOL and it says 28 days from service if I completed an acknowledgment of service so does that mean 28 days from that of acknowledgement (I.e. 16/5) which would make deadline for defence 14/6?   Thanks! Panicking here.
    • Normally we don't advise playing your cards early in a snotty letter, but as you have appealed we might as well use what you wrote in the appeal against them. There is no rush, you have until 6 July to get it to them.  See what the other regulars think too. How about something like this? -   Dear Rachael & Sean, cheers for your Letter of Claim.  I rolled around on the floor in laughter at the idea you'd actually thought I'd take such tripe seriously and would cough up! As usual you'll have been too bone idle to do any due diligence.  Had you done so you would have seen that I appealed to your client.  Indeed the driver on the day is a textbook example of having done exactly what you should do when you do not wish to be bound by the T&Cs in a private car park. Of course none of that mattered to the spivs you represent but do you really want to put such a useless case in front of a judge? To be fair, your clients are very useful members of the human race - as comedians.  How I loved the page turner of their antics at The Citrus Building in Bournemouth.  It was chuckle after chuckle reading about them, letter after letter, month after month, insisting they were legally in the right, even through someone who had done just the first day of a GCSE law course could have told them they weren't.  Until the denouement - BOOM - an absolute hammering in court.  In fact - SLAM, BANG - managing to lose twice against the same motorist for the same car park in front of two different judges. Your client can either drop their foolishness now or get yet another tolchocking* in court where I will go for an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g) and spend the dosh on a nice summer holiday, while every day laughing at your clients' expense. I look forward to your deafening silence. COPIED TO COUNTRYWIDE PARKING MANAGEMENT LTD   *  This word is used under licence from Brassnecked
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

ACS:Law copyright file sharing claims, Gallant Macmillan - and probably some others along the way...


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4976 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

  • Replies 4.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

That is the normal/correct way justice works in this country yes. :)

 

Even if anyone did go to court over this, no-one would be on trial - there would be no "guilty" or "not guilty" involved, it would all be very informal & sorted out sitting around a desk with some stuffy officials.

 

Thats all hypothetical anyway - i wouldnt lose sleep in the meantime ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nutcake, I'd ignore for the moment, and if they do send court papers you will have the opportunity to dispute the amount they are claiming. It isn't like the USA with punitive damages, they have to prove their actual losses here. However, I'm not as confident as Mr Ton that they won't take you to court, they may see you as worth trying if they have a written admission.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not said they deffo wont..just implied that its highly unlikely, no matter if Nutcake has admitted it.

It will cost them anyway - so it doesnt make economical sense given that would recieve a tiny sum back per month if anything at all.

They are just relying on threatening people into paying up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Received my reply from ACS:LAW after sending them a LOD. Here is their reply:-

 

We refer to previous correspondence regarding infringement of our clients copyright.

 

We note the response you have given matches a template response that is available on the Internet. With this in mind we are disinclined to accept at face value what you have said, as it is simply one of a number of identical replies we have received.

 

Accordingly, unless we receive your written undertaking and payment within the next fourteen days of receipt of this letter or you are able to provide a satisfactory explanation as to why you are not liable for the acts alleged against you, we shall seek our client's instructions to commence proceedings against you.

 

In the meantime, we expressly reserve all our client's rights.

 

Yours Faithfully

 

ACS:LAW

 

END OF THEIR RESPONSE

 

Well to be honest when I first received my original letter demanding over £500 it made me physically ill, coupled with the fact I suffer greatly with medical depression. Now, after a few weeks have passed and they have replied with the above quoted letter I honestly feel that I don't give a monkeys for these people. They will get one last reply from me, this time my own words which are not going to be pleasant or nice. I will tell them to stop threatening me, take the damn thing to Court ASAP. I know I didn't download the crap they say I did, I can't say for definite whether somebody else in my household or friends used my connection, so I will base any defence I may have to give in Court on the basis of who is responsible for the legal use of my connection. I know for a fact than a Roman Court has already thrown similar cases out of Court because they say you can't hold somebody responsible just because they pay the Internet bill. A friend of mine borrowed my car a couple of days ago, am I responsible if he were to drive like a lunatic and kill somebody??? I don't think so. ACS:LAW, go and get stuffed, take your legal crap with you and I for one will see you in Court anytime....:mad: Oh and after living expenses I have about £2.36 a month left over so good luck ACS with suing me for thousands because I will be about 200 years old before the fine is paid. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

We note the response you have given matches a template response that is available on the Internet.

 

 

 

Something along the lines of...

 

I note your reference to template letters, need I remind you that the letter you initially sent me appears to match a template letter you yourselves sent to possibly thousands of people, therefore I consider this some sort of fishing excercise on your clients behalf.

 

Until you provide me with some sort of proof of this alleged offence I cannot comment further than to deny all your allegations at this time.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I note your reference to template letters, need I remind you that the letter you initially sent me appears to match a template letter you yourselves sent to possibly thousands of people, therefore I consider this some sort of fishing excercise on your clients behalf.

 

Until you provide me with some sort of proof of this alleged offence I cannot comment further than to deny all your allegations at this time.

 

Love it! :D

 

And don't forget to tell them that their rejection letter of your LOD is also a proforma so you will be disregarding that as well, so your LOD stands in your view :D

 

Yorky.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Something along the lines of...

 

 

 

S.

 

 

True. They have used the exact same template letters thousands of times, as did their predecessors, in fact they are the same letters as their predecessors used, remind me how that went again, oh I know, their predecessors packed all this nonsense up and passed it to these bunch of robbing cowboys, cya in Court ACS.:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez..ACS are muppets, do their staff now spend their days looking at this and other sites making notes about 'template' letters.

 

Wether a letter is a 'template' or not, people are quite entitled to use them , and as others have pointed out, what makes ACS letters NOT templates !

 

Lets hope we see the downfall of this horrible grotty company soon.

 

Incidentaly, whats happened to the SRA investigation of Davenport Lyons, it was started a long time ago.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heaven knows why they are whinging on about template letters, the legal profession use them all the time, it doesn't matter a jot where or who created them.

 

The realisation is probably dawning on them that there is now a collective involved in this & they are no longer dealing with an individual who has no or little knowledge and who's only recourse was to either pay their demands or line the pockets of some other legal wallah in order to exonerate themselves.

 

Firms like this have complained in the past to judges about their 'victims' using the aid & resources of forums & were given short shrift & if these muppets try the same line they'll undoubtedly get the same.

Edited by cerberusalert
Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd think that they would cotton on to the fact that they are getting so many template responses that they should stop sending out template demands for money, as they are clearly on a slippy slope here.

 

The fact they are replying to template letters with template letters speaks volumes, IMHO.

 

This just adds to the "reply with a LOD letter and ignore them until they take you to Court" strategy that seems to be showing itself to be effective.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should also add parts of the Harrassment template in to the LOD letter - that way, if they continue corresponding, you can slam them for Harassment and get the Police involved.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They talk about template letters like that's an excuse that we are guilty as hell already. I also take note that so far none of their letters actually go as far as making it clear that "You have no obligation to pay them". So far the letters I have received have been nothing short of a "DEMAND". You MUST pay and you MUST pay now. Well stuff them. When a Judge tells me to pay, I will then pay (But only about £2.00 per month because of my financial circumstances lol). Of course these nasty bullies don't point out that they use thousands of templates to worry people sick. I say we should make up a twenty page template letter, send them at least twice a week. After a few thousand of these they will have no time to take anybody to court because they will be reading twenty pages of garbage like the massive letters they first threatened us with. I for one have really lost my patience with these ****. :-x My reply to them won't be another template it will be my very own original, pointing out to them in no uncertain terms how I feel about this and that any more letters from them will be used as toilet paper, bit rough but I'll get over it. I'll also be informing them to prove that it was me, sitting at my PC downloading the filthy crap they say I did....Grrr I'm at boiling point......;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I think the general conclusion is we know more about what they can and can't do than they do. Either that, or we are able to learn faster than they can, so have the upper hand now.

 

;)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So the general conclusion of this whole sorry saga...is that its been a waste of time on their part?

 

I suspect a percentage of people paid them - probably before it was all over the net what their game was.

 

On that basis they would have made money out of it.

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4976 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...