Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Tory MPs: Public will lose (them) if we can’t earn tens of thousands from second jobs YEEHAWW - bring it one   Labour's plan to ban MPs' side hustles will not help as second jobs help prevent   'plotting and scheming' - argues one senior Conservative - too busy self and paying pal serving to plot for anyone else   Tory MPs: Public will lose if we can't earn tens of thousands from second jobs INEWS.CO.UK Labour's plan to ban MPs' side hustles will not help as second jobs help prevent 'plotting and scheming', argues one senior Conservative  
    • send their client our sb letter nail them in their box dx  
    • Just ignore it, have you moved home since taking out the debt?
    • Fart: “Boorish cartoon misogynist.” “Cheeto-dusted cartoon villain.”      Michael Cohen says he used to be ‘knee deep in cult’ of Trump as he stands firm in fiery cross-examination ‘Knee-deep in the cult’: Michael Cohen holds his ground against Trump’s attorneys WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Trump’s attorneys want to undermine the former ‘fixer’ after damning testimony connected him to a criminal hush money scheme   Doesn't nodfathers lawyers/fans realise that anything they say about cohen being a crim reflects mostly on the guy he was crimming for? aka Trump LOL
    • Notice how Kev goes about his scam.  In Kahunaburger's case they left the car park well before the time shown on the ticket they had purchased.  But because Kev added on the time taken to look for a parking spot and queue to pay/try to get an internet signal he still sent them an invoice. So If you had left before the Justpark message, say at 3:55, Kev would still have managed to turn that into a stay of 4:06 and thus an overstay and an invoice. Unfortunately for Kev, judges have ruled against his reasoning.  Have a read of this famous case  http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2014/03/waiting-for-space-is-not-parking.html  
  • 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

davg v clydesdale


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6283 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

  • 4 weeks later...

Well, received a settlement offer for amount claimed (including interest) + costs today for part 1 of my claim so thats great but I'm worried that I've to sign an agreement that that's a full and final settlement of my claim against the bank. Does this mean I will be struck out if I do part 2 of my claim if I accept this offer ? The way I see it is that this offer is for the amount detailed in this claim only and should not stop me from going for the rest as detailed in my LBA.

Can anyone advise me on this as I'm a bit confused whether to accept or not ?

 

Thanks davg

Link to post
Share on other sites

The letter from Clydesdale is trying to get you to agree that it's in full and final settlement of your entire bank charges claim against the bank, which it isn't. Don't sign ANYTHING they send you. If the offer's acceptable to you, just write back to them saying that you accept it in full and final settlement of that particular claim - include the claim number. Then YOU write a short note to the court telling them that the claim has been settled to your satidfaction.

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Robert, the offer was for the full amount I was claiming in that particular claim but I'll just make it clear that it's for this claim only and see what happens. Thery are trying anything to wriggle out of paying up the full amount but if they say this is unconditional then I will refuse the offer hands down as they know the amount I'm claiming as provided in LBA. Once again cheers and I'll keep you posted.

 

davg

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Really chuffed :D , received cheque today for full amount + costs for my small claim. Been a long time coming so I would like to say thanks very much to everyone who has helped and given advice to me on this site. I hope everyone else hangs in there and sees it out, it's worth the wait. So am off out for a few pints now, chin chin !

 

davg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done davg. Are you finished with Clydesdale now, as there are now problems with some second and subsequent claims in Scotland.

 

For now though, I think congratulations are in order and I hope you enjoy your evening.:D

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers Caro, unfortunately that was only part 1 of my claim, the other being for roughly the same amount, I've just read the thread about doing subsequent claims and am cheesed off but I'm not giving up just yet. Look forward to hearing everyone's take on this though. Right, I'm off for few beers now to celebrate.

 

davg

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fight is far from over. You don't really think CAG gives in that easily do you.;)

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well in mate.

 

congratulations

Yorkshire Bank Plc £3553.77 Prelim letter sent 14/9/06 LBA sent 22/9/06, MCOL Sent 10/10/06 MCOL Notice of Issue Rcvd 12/10/06, MCOL Acknowledged 17/10/06, £929.00 Offer Rcvd, 03/11/06 - Rejected, 09/11/06 YB Defended, 10/11/06 Transferred to Local Court, AQ Returned;) 30/11/06 Copy of Banks AQ Received, 1 month extra asked for by Clydesdale, 09/01/07 £2140.00 Offer Rcvd, 09/01/07 - Rejected, 11/11/07 Allocation To Small Claims Track, Court Date Set - 05/03/07, 15/01/07 £2590.00 Offer Rcvd, 15/11/07 - Rejected, 07/02/07 £3773.77 Offer Rcvd (FULL), 12/02/07 - Accepted, 21/02/07 - Chq Received for FULL AMOUNT. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...