Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Appears to me that the school will evidence that there was a contract in place as you paid for several years of schooling.  There is then a period when you were unable to pay the school fees and the argument is about the performance of the contract. Because the school could not provide the education services in the normal way, they will have provided adapted service, with remote teaching being provided using online video and electronically providing course work.          
    • I must say that I don't really understand what is going on with Packlink. They used to be based in the UK – then they folded up here and became based in Spain. This put them out of reach. There are often very difficult to deal with – but recently we've had two or three people who have dealt directly with Packlink and the full claim has been paid up. That looks as if what is meant to be happening here – except as you have pointed out, they've made you promises that they haven't followed up with the filthy lucre. I think it might be an idea to send them another email – with a copy to Hermes – telling them that you have received their promise but you haven't received any money and that if you aren't paid in the next seven days then you will commence the business of suing Hermes as they are in the UK and within reach of a legal action. Let us know what happens. In the meantime – get reading the Hermes stories on this sub- forum.  
    • Shares in Meituan slumped after its boss reportedly shared, then deleted, a Tang dynasty poem. View the full article
    • First of all I've edited your post quite substantially. This is been done to make it more relevant – but also to make it more accessible. It is unhelpful to us and to other people who read this thread to find solid blocks of text that we have to negotiate. At the end of your post you ask if you need to get yourself a lawyer. If you did manage to find a lawyer who is prepared to help you with this, it would properly cost you at least £300 an hour. I'm quite certain that you would present your story to them in an accessible way in order to cut down costs because they would be charging you for every five minutes they spent. Everything here is free – and so as already said, it's not helpful to oblige us to spend extra time restructuring your posts. I understand that you declared the value of £500 but eventually you went on to bring a County Court claim for £1200. I'm afraid that you won't be able to recover £1200. It is clear the contract was for the delivery of an item which you valued at £500 when you arranged the delivery. Unfortunately you have helped yourself because you have incurred County Court costs based on a £1200 claim and the maximum you will be able to recover in terms of costs will be a pro rata figure based on a £500 claim. You said that you expected Hermes to act in good faith. Why? I think it is worth standing your ground and telling Hermes that you are prepared to go all the way to court – but at the same time I think you had better tell the mediator that you are prepared to give up your claim of £1200 and to fall back on the contracted figure of £500. This might give some Face to Hermes as they will think that they have managed to secure some kind of compromise by forcing you to reduce the amount of money you are after. The truth is that you wouldn't be able to get £1200 anyway so you aren't losing anything by agreeing to accept £500. However you should certainly insist that Hermes pays your costs – but be aware that you will only be able to get your costs on a £500 scale and not £1200. You can also tell Hermes that you want interest at 8% from the date they lost the parcel. However this will be 8% on £500 and frankly it is unlikely to be very much. You haven't told us when they actually lost the parcel. Once again, the interest might be something that you would be prepared to give up in order to get your £500 plus costs. I think that will be your best position. I hope you won't mind me saying but that the way that you have conducted this claim so far probably has brought comfort to Hermes because they understand that you are not particularly sure of your ground and this will make them feel more confident. For this reason I think your best interests would be to disengage from this action as quickly as you can – but not for less than £500 plus costs on that scale. Back to the question you asked at the end – if it goes to court then should you get a lawyer? It is most unlikely that you will be able to find a lawyer who is prepared to take this on. It's too trivial and it wouldn't pay them enough. The small claims rules mean that even if you won your case, you would not get your legal costs back and as I've already suggested, you would probably be paying something like about £300 per hour. I can imagine that if you found a lawyer to take it on – and even if that lawyer lost the case for you you would be looking at a bill of £1500 at least. If you won the case, then you would get your £500 and you would still have to pay the lawyers fees. I wish you very good luck. I think you are in a good position if you are prepared to accept £500. However, do be aware that Hermes might quite recently ask you for proof of the value of your loss – and you better be ready with all the bills or other evidence. Please keep us updated.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 33 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

  • Recommended Topics

Scottish Summons But Live In England

Guest dvdriley
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4245 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

I have received a summons from the Sheriifs office in Glasgow for an unpaid bill to a scottish company but i live in england. Is this valid

I think it would depend on where the agreement was regulated. If it was a Scottish company supplying in Scotlend, then that is OK, but if you lived in england at the time, I would think that English law prevails. Not 100% sure though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have received a summons from the Sheriifs office in Glasgow for an unpaid bill to a scottish company but i live in england. Is this valid


It is not valid unless you have been resident in Scotland for at least three months PRIOR to the writ being issued, a Scottish Sheriff court will not have jurisdiction unless this is the case. They have served in the wrong jurisdiction this comes under the Civil Jurisdiction & Judgement Act 1982 which I have pasted in below:-




Jurisdiction over consumer contracts

3. - (1) In matters relating to a contract concluded by a person, the consumer, for a purpose which can be regarded as being outside his trade or profession, subject to rule 5, jurisdiction shall be determined by this rule if -

(a) it is a contract for the sale of goods on instalment credit terms; or

(b) it is a contract for a loan repayable by instalments, or for any other form of credit, made to finance the sale of goods; or

© in all other cases, the contract has been concluded with a person who pursues commercial or professional activities in Scotland or, by any means, directs such activities to Scotland or to several places including Scotland, and the contract falls within the scope of such activities.

(2) This rule shall not apply to a contract of transport other than a contract which, for an inclusive price, provides for a combination of travel and accommodation.

(3) A consumer may bring proceedings against the other party to a contract only in -

(a) the courts for the place in which that party is domiciled;

(b) the courts for the place in which he is himself domiciled; or

© any court having jurisdiction by virtue of rule 2(f) or (i).

(4) Proceedings may be brought against a consumer by the other party to the contract only in the courts for the place where the consumer is domiciled or any court having jurisdiction under rule 2(i).

(5) The provisions of this rule shall not affect the right to bring a counterclaim in the court in which, in accordance with this rule, the original claim is pending.

(6) The provisions of this rule may be departed from only by an agreement -

(a) which is entered into after the dispute has arisen; or

(b) which allows the consumer to bring proceedings in courts other than those indicated in this rule; or

© which is entered into by the consumer and the other party to the contract, both of whom are at the time of conclusion of the contract domiciled or habitually resident in the same Regulation State, and which confers jurisdiction on the courts of that Regulation State, provided that such an agreement is not contrary to the law of that Regulation State.


Exclusive jurisdiction

5. - (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any of rules 1 to 4 above or 6 to 9 below but subject to paragraph (3) below, the following courts shall have exclusive jurisdiction: -

(a) in proceedings which have as their object rights in rem in, or tenancies of, immovable property, the courts for the place where the property is situated;

(b) in proceedings which have as their object the validity of the constitution, the nullity or the dissolution of companies or other legal persons or associations of natural or legal persons, the courts for the place where the company, legal person or association has its seat;

© in proceedings which have as their object the validity of entries in public registers, the courts for the place where the register is kept;

(d) in proceedings concerned with the enforcement of judgments, the courts for the place where the judgment has been or is to be enforced.

(2) No court shall exercise jurisdiction in a case where immovable property, the seat of a body mentioned in paragraph (1)(b) above, a public register or the place where a judgment has been or is to be enforced is situated outside Scotland and where paragraph (1) would apply if the property, seat, register or, as the case may be, place of enforcement were situated in Scotland.

(3) In proceedings which have as their object tenancies of immovable property concluded for temporary private use for a maximum period of six consecutive months, the courts for the place in which the defender is domiciled shall also have jurisdiction, provided that the tenant is a natural person and that the landlord and tenant are domiciled in Scotland.


Prorogation of jurisdiction

6. - (1) If the parties have agreed that a court is to have jurisdiction to settle any disputes which have arisen or which may arise in connection with a particular legal relationship, that court shall have jurisdiction.

(2) Such an agreement conferring jurisdiction shall be either -

(a) in writing or evidenced in writing; or

(b) in a form which accords with practices which the parties have established between themselves; or

© in international trade or commerce, in a form which accords with a usage of which the parties are or ought to have been aware and which in such trade or commerce is widely known to, and regularly observed by, parties to contracts of the type involved in the particular trade or commerce concerned.

(3) Any communication by electronic means which provides a durable record of the agreement shall be equivalent to "writing".

(4) The court on which a trust instrument has conferred jurisdiction shall have exclusive jurisdiction in any proceedings brought against a settlor, trustee or beneficiary, if relations between these persons or their rights or obligations under the trust are involved.

(5) Where an agreement or a trust instrument confers jurisdiction on the courts of the United Kingdom or of Scotland, proceedings to which paragraph (1) or, as the case may be, (4) above applies may be brought in any court in Scotland.

(6) Agreements or provisions of a trust instrument conferring jurisdiction shall have no legal force if the courts whose jurisdiction they purport to exclude have exclusive jurisdiction by virtue of rule 5 or where rule 5(2) applies.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest dvdriley

sorry what i didnt say was the debt is for my uk ltd company for scottish debt from socttish solicxitor. i live in uk and so is the company,


still the same answer monty?

Link to post
Share on other sites
sorry what i didnt say was the debt is for my uk ltd company for scottish debt from socttish solicxitor. i live in uk and so is the company,


still the same answer monty?


I thought it was a personal credit card debt. Not sure if its a company, you should check with your local court or Citizens Advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...