Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi on the notice of disqualification it lists the 2 speed offences and marks offence withdrawn? This is for both offences and then the other 2 is the MS90s which I’m fined for and the additional costs. R
    • Hi,    It has taken a while, but I have received an email from Auxillis -  hello, we are not dealing with this claim all we do is log accident for you isnurance - the claim has been passed to your underwriter markerstudy 0344 873 8183 as they are deal with fault cliams ion behalf of adrian flux. thankyou auxillis   I have made repeated attempts to phone Markerstudy in between working from home, struggling for energy and trying to find a cheap car so that I can keep my job (community support worker). Thankfully I have a supportive team and I am being given phone calls to make but it cant last too long. I had a severe migraine over the weekend and also have quite bad whiplash in my neck and back.    I found this in my insurance policy booklet -    Protection and Recovery If the insured vehicle cannot be driven following an incident leading to a valid claim under this section, we will pay: • the cost of its protection and removal to the nearest approved repairer, competent repairer or nearest place of safety; and • the cost of re-delivery after repairs to your home address; and • the cost of storage of the insured vehicle incurred with our written consent. If the insured vehicle is damaged beyond economical repair we will arrange for it to be stored safely at premises of our choosing. You should remove your personal belongings from the insured vehicle before it is collected from you. In the event of a claim being made under the policy we have the right to remove the insured vehicle to an alternative repairer, place of safety or make our own arrangments for re-delivery at any time in order to keep the cost of the claim to a minimum     I do about 20-25000 miles a year with the work I do, I have been getting quotes and putting that I have now have one accident and no no claims bonus and the cheap quotes from similar companies to markerstudy are more than double what i paid last year at 8-900 and aviva is offering 2600 which is simply out of my price range and more than the car i am looking at.  I am starting to wonder if it is even worth going ahead with the claim as i have no one to claim from. I have had no information from any of the enquiries I have made.  I have a full tank of vpower diesel in the car in the impound, i can strip it for parts and probably make what I will be offered by the insurance payout and get the money quicker.  As I have made contact and started the process can I back out, still keep my NCB and a claim free history? Also what happens with my injuries? I don't think there is any permanent damage but my dr refused to see me and just gave me a boat load of naproxen and codeine. What happens in the future if things don't get better and I cancelled this claim? Can you claim injuries off your own insurance because the other guy ran and you cant find him? I have tried to ask these questions off markerstudy but they keep me waiting for nearly an hour then end the call.     
    • Thanks for the response. Am I able to send you the documents I’ve received or can you message via instant message and I’ll send these? Reece
    • Regretfully it does. Have you actually seen any papers which show what you were charged with (rather than what you were convicted of)? It is unusual not to be “dual charged” but if you were not charged with both, you are where you are. If you had been charged with both offences and providing you were the driver at the time, you could, after performing your SD, have asked the prosecutor to drop the “Fail to Provide” (FtP) charges in exchange for a guilty plea to the speeding charges (you cannot be convicted of speeding unless you plead guilty as they have no evidence you were driving). You will have difficulty defending the FtP charges. In fact, it’s worse than that – you have no chance of successfully defending them at all because the reason you did not respond to the requests is because you did not receive them and that’s entirely your fault. No it’s not correct. Six months from 18/11/23 was 18/5/24 so, unless they were originally charged, the speeding offences are now “timed out.” There is one avenue left open to you. If you perform your SD you must serve it on the court which convicted you. You will then receive a date for a hearing to have the matters heard again. Your only chance of having the matters revert to speeding (and this is only providing you were the driver at the time of those offences) is to plead Not Guilty, attend court. When you get there you can ask the prosecutor (very nicely, explaining what a pillock you know you were for failing to update your  V5C) if (s)he is prepared to raise “out of time” speeding charges, to which you will offer to plead guilty if the FtP charges are dropped.   This is strictly speaking not lawful. Charges have to be raised within six months. Some prosecutors are willing to do it, others are not. But frankly it’s the only avenue open to you. There is a risk with this. I imagine you have been fined £660 (plus surcharge and costs) for each offence. The offence attracts a fine of 1.5 week’s net income and where the court has no information about the defendant’s means a default figure of £440pw is used.  If the prosecutor is not prepared to play ball you can revise your pleas to guilty. A sympathetic court should give you the full discount (one third) for your guilty pleas in these circumstances but they may reduce the discount somewhat. The prosecution may also ask for increased costs (£90 or thereabouts is the figure for a guilty plea). So it may cost you more if you have a decent income (I’ll let you do the sums). But MS90 is an endorsement code which gives insurers a fit of the vapours. One such endorsement will see your premiums double. Two of them will see many insurers refuse to quote you at all meaning you will have to approach "specialist" (aka extortionate) brokers. So you really want to exhaust every possibility of avoiding MS90s if you can. One warning: do not pay solicitors silly money to defend you. Making an SD before a solicitor should attract just a nominal sum (perhaps a tenner). That’s all you should pay for. You have no viable defence against the FtP charges and any solicitor suggesting you have is telling you porkies. The offer to do the deal is easily done by yourself and you can save the solicitor’s fees to put towards a few taxis and increased insurance premiums if you are unsuccessful. In the happy event you find out you were "dual charged", let me know and I'll tell you how to proceed. (Seems a bit odd hoping you were charged with four driving offences rather than two, but it's a funny old world!).    
    • Just the sort of people you despise eh Jugg  You would be much happier among your mates in that room with Rayner begging for votes 
  • 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

Elsinore v Citi Cards***WON & PAID***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6152 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

Best of luck mate!!:D

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 160
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Best of luck,

 

Waiting with baited breath !

 

 

Hondamad

__________________

EGG CC Default Removal: Have reported Egg to Trading Standards, Summery Claim - 2nd Hearing Date 09/10/07. Click here to read posts

Monument CC: received statements, now need to send letters. . . !

BoS Current Account: Settled

Citi Cards: Hhmm seems like I have sued the wrong “entity”. Aaaaahhhhh . . .. oh well back to court I go, and they have settled in full!!!

 

:-D:p:D

This is just advice from me. If you are not sure please seek legal advice. However if what I have said has been helpful, than please add to my reputation by clicking on the scales :D

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm back.

 

Els

 

 

Well . . . . . . .:confused: :confused: :confused:

 

What happened ??????????

 

Hondamad

__________________

EGG CC Default Removal: Have reported Egg to Trading Standards, Summery Claim - 2nd Hearing Date 09/10/07. Click here to read posts

Monument CC: received statements, now need to send letters. . . !

BoS Current Account: Settled

Citi Cards: Hhmm seems like I have sued the wrong “entity”. Aaaaahhhhh . . .. oh well back to court I go, and they have settled in full!!!

 

:-D:p:D

This is just advice from me. If you are not sure please seek legal advice. However if what I have said has been helpful, than please add to my reputation by clicking on the scales :D

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick summary.

 

David Travis representing Citi

Part-time stand-in judge.

Court file missing!

Judge no experience of such claims.

Long discussion.

Got order for directions!:D

10 minute hearing lasted 50 minutes

Got parking ticket!:(

 

More on this story later.

 

Els

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the points I put forward help?

Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, I appreciate you're all keen to know but, even at my great age, I still have to work for a living!

 

I promise you a blow-by-blow account later today, together with the wording of the Order.

 

Els

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool. Will wait till later.

Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Met David Travis from Citi, prior to entering the courtroom. Took an instant dislike to him because he is both young and handsome!

 

I drew his attention to the discrepancy between my claimed amount of charges and the amount in Citi’s defence. He wondered if I had failed to take into account any refunded charges, but I assured him there were none. I had to show him a copy of a letter I had received from Brian Smith which confirmed my figures. He didn’t have a copy of the letter in his papers. He was a little disconcerted and therefore slightly on the back foot when we were called.

 

District Judge Bury had clearly been drafted in to assist. He admitted that he was not familiar with this type of claim, being a part-timer. He sought introductions from us both and had a stab at summarising why we were there. He asked me for my copy of the claim form, which I thought was odd. The reason for his uncertainty became all too clear when the court usher poked her head round the door and reported that they were still unable to locate the file!

“Not to worry” said Bury J, “We’re managing quite well without it!”

 

As, indeed, we were, with both DT and myself handing the Judge documents from our respective files as the discussion progressed. Both of us were allowed to make our various points, which were received fairly. Much of the discussion was taken up with the Judge sorting out in his own mind where 1st Credit fitted in and why I appeared to be claiming back charges which I had never paid. In the end, he was satisfied that I was looking to have the account balance reduced to zero and only seeking reimbursement of the excess. He came to the conclusion that if I agreed to amend my PoC and if DT confirmed that Citi would defend it, he would make an order to proceed.

 

I then realised that, without the court file in front of him the Judge had had no opportunity to see my letter and request for an Order for Directions. I drew this to his attention and he agreed to read my file copies. He clearly liked the Draft Order, fell upon it with gusto and proceeded to amend it to take into account the points previously agreed.

He scored out the title ‘Draft Order for Directions’, replaced it with the word ‘ORDER’ and signed and dated it.

 

I have no doubt that our side won the day. DT didn’t have a lot to say and seemed content to let things take their course. He is actually a very pleasant, affable man.

 

The Judge was so concerned about processing delays at the Court, that he gave us the Order to take to the Court office for photocopying! I’ll transcribe it and post it later.

 

The whole episode could be described as a dignified Fred Karno’s.

 

The only downside was that I was 7 minutes over my hour’s parking and got a ticket! Thanks for the link, Tide!

 

Els

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great job Els - you played a blinder by the seems of it!:D Good work.

 

Did their sol not object to the disclosure order? I.e "commercially sensitive...... blah, blah, blah...."

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ORDER

 

 

Elsinore - Claimant

 

 

and

 

 

CitiFinancial Europe plc - Defendant

 

 

 

1. The Claimant shall by 4 pm on 26th April 2007 send to the Defendant and the Court:

1.1 A schedule setting out each charge, repayment of which is sought, showing the date, amount and reason given (if any) for that charge being made;

1.2 Copies of any statements or other documents relied upon as showing that each and every charge has been made;

1.3 A statement of evidence of all matters relied upon as tending to show that the charges are irrecoverable as penalties or otherwise;

1.4 Copies of decided cases and other legal materials to be relied upon;

1.5 An amended Particulars of Claim seeking a declaration that he is not liable to the Defendant’s assignees, if it be the case that, whilst he has not paid (all of) the default charges, they are nevertheless being sought from him.

 

If the claimant fails to comply with this order, the claim will be struck out without further order.

 

 

2. The Defendant shall by 4 pm. on 10th May 2007 file and serve a response to the Claimant's schedule, stating in respect of each item claimed:

2.1 Pursuant to what contractual provision such charge was made, producing a copy of the contractual document relied upon;

2.2 Whether such charge is accepted to be a penalty and, if not, why not;

2.3 If such charge is alleged to be a pre-estimate of the Defendant’s loss incurred by the Claimant’s actions (whether or not such action is treated as a breach of contract between the parties), all facts and matters intended to be relied upon as showing that such was a proper estimate of such loss and all evidence to be adduced at the trial as to what the true cost of dealing with the matter was;

2.4 If such charge is not alleged to be a pre-estimate of the Defendant’s loss incurred by the Claimant’s actions, then facts and matters intended to be relied upon showing the basis upon which the charge was calculated and all evidence to be adduced at trial as to show that the charge was fair and reasonable;

2.5 Any witness statements;

2.6 Copies of decided cases and other legal materials to be relied upon;

2.7 Whether they accept the Claimant’s entitlement to the declaration referred to at 1.5 (if amended Particulars have been served) and if not, why not

 

If the Defendant fails to comply with this order, the defence will be struck out without further order.

 

3. List for hearing first available date after 1st June 2007.

Signed Bury J 12th April 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Did their sol not object to the disclosure order? I.e "commercially sensitive...... blah, blah, blah...."

 

No, he didn't, Gary! I think he was not very well prepared. The only time he requested anything was to ask for longer than two weeks to respond to the order. The judge concurred and gave him 4 weeks. I assumed, wrongly, that that would apply to me as well, hence the discrepancy in the dates. Do you think this might give them an advantage?

 

Els

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent! 2 weeks for the claimant and 4 weeks for the defendant is the usual timescale for these orders - to be honest even if they had 8 weeks I can't see it making any difference!

 

Which court is it by the way?

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They didn't comply in my case to the draft order, so it's pretty much a certainty that they won't in yours.

 

You'll have to start putting your bundle together, if you need any help let me know and I can give you my standard dislosure list which will give you an idea of what to include.

  • Haha 1

Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...