Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Debs v Natwest ***WON***


Guest DP37
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6103 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

Thanks so much Hedgey - I've had a read through that thread and posted my latest question there ... I'll pop it below as well and any tips received with much gratitude!! x Debs

 

Hi - it seems Bedford (reallocated from Northampton) have also dispensed with the AQ as I had a letter a few weeks ago. No mention of fee so will call court today to check.

 

However I have had a "Notice of Allocation or Listed Hearing" saying:

 

District Judge etc has considered the statements of case submitted in this claim and has decided that a hearing is necessary before a final decision about allocation can be made.

Reasons for hearing are as follows:

The Court needs to identify whether this particular case is suitable for hearing as a Fast Track.

District Judge etc orders you to attend at etc with directions.

 

There is an HMCS letter attached saying:

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

The Court has identified a number of cases which all raise the same issue and defence. In an effort to manage them appropriately the Court has listed the cases for consideration of allocation to track or in some cases reallocation. The Court has endeavoured to list cases involving the same lending institution at the same time in the hope that only one representative need attend.

Yours faithfully etc from the Listing Officer

 

Any thoughts, tips, and what am I supposed to take along aside from my notes, claim and copy of all correspondence of course?

 

Thanks in advance for any help - am in on 2nd July!! :shock:

 

x Debs :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi again Debs, this thread should help you http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/guidance-notes/64911-got-court-date-guide.html as it explains what type of hearing this is and how you need to prepare for it. Sounds as though the judge basically wants to decide what track to allocate your claim to - but the thread above explains this in more details. ;)

Can't find what you're looking for? Please have a look at Michael Browne's

A-Z Guide

*** PLEASE NOTE ***

I do not answer queries via PM. If you send me a PM, please include a link to your thread - any advice I am able to offer will be on your thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Am in the very happy position of just being offered settlement, inc court costs, to the amount I was claiming. fantastic!

 

I did ask for payment by CHAPS transfer, not a cheque (they are a bank after all!) but of course that's not protocol! So it will be the whole 'cheque is in the post' waiting game now!

 

I have asked that the signed offer letter is emailed to me before I halt proceedings at the Court - which was agreed. It was originally going to just be an email, however I did say I needed a signature to feel more secure which she said she understood.

 

I've noted about confidentiality demands often discussed on this site and have said I won't sign that which they've agreed.

 

Whilst on the phone to them I asked that any credit defaults that may have been done against my name by Natwest be removed - she said she put in a default request on the system as we spoke (it still takes up to 28 days) and I asked that note of that be included in my offer letter which was agreed.

 

The woman from Cobbetts who did the call (the only call I have had) was very pleasant, very efficient, sympathetic without being pushover of course, and to be honest really nice to deal with - I was very surprised. It was a good way to tie up the issue!

 

Of course the signed letter has yet to arrive - it is being scanned and emailed due to the postal strike as my court date is Monday so they want to get it to me in time for me to stop proceedings.

 

You guys have given me a lot of confidence and strength to go through with this and it means we pay off another chunk of debt. THANK YOU.

 

Look to your donations pile, as soon as the money clears I will be sending something over - and thank you again. :) x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and PS also said that this is only this claim we are dealing with and that I certainly won't agree to never take Natwest down this route again in the future if I deem it necessary! She said that's fine, totally agreed and the letter makes it clear it is only this case that is being dealt with.

 

We await the letter! x

Link to post
Share on other sites

CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!

That's brilliant news Debs - well done to you for not caving in to any conditions.......... and getting everything that you asked for. Brilliant job!!!!!

Enjoy the cash, and very best wishes to you!

Hedgey xxx :D

Can't find what you're looking for? Please have a look at Michael Browne's

A-Z Guide

*** PLEASE NOTE ***

I do not answer queries via PM. If you send me a PM, please include a link to your thread - any advice I am able to offer will be on your thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gorgeous gorgeousness - I went down to Bedford County Court today to hand in my form ceasing hostilities ;) apparently the cheque is coming 'special delivery' and will be with me on Monday ... hmmm, I will fall over in amazement if that happens!! Happy weekending you delicious folks xx

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a lovely start to the weekend for you!!! That's great news............ get your wish list written - and make sure you ave a nice drink on nat west ! xx ;)

Can't find what you're looking for? Please have a look at Michael Browne's

A-Z Guide

*** PLEASE NOTE ***

I do not answer queries via PM. If you send me a PM, please include a link to your thread - any advice I am able to offer will be on your thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well, now we've emerged from the sea of bubbly celebrations ;)

 

I got my cheque via special delivery on Wednesday. They had promised monday, but post strike etc and the postman did try to delivery on Tuesday but I was out. SO am quite impressed to be honest - well, mildly as these are the first promises fulfilled!! Cheque should clear by Monday I reckon and then will get my donation over - you guys have been SO brilliant.

 

I have a question - my Father died suddenly in May which has knocked us all over. It transpires he was about to start the process as has been badly charged on a number of accounts. I have read somewhere that it is possible to reclaim charges for someone who has died - we would dearly like to get as much as possible back to help Mum.

 

Can anyone advise on best procedure? All help as always much appreciated.

 

xx thank you xx Debs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Debs,

 

I've asked for some advice on this one, and the answer I've received is as follows:

 

Yes, although the Data Protection Act only applies to "living data subjects" they should be able to obtain statements if they (relative acting on their behalf) are handling the estate.

 

If they are applying for probate, then this will be sufficient for them to act for their late Father - failing that, they will need a copy of the death certificate, a letter of authority from an executor of his will, if he had one.

 

So, in a nutshell, the answer's yes! With many thanks to Hagenuk for giving such a speedy response.

 

Go for it Debs - it'd be nice to get something back for your mum. xx :)

Can't find what you're looking for? Please have a look at Michael Browne's

A-Z Guide

*** PLEASE NOTE ***

I do not answer queries via PM. If you send me a PM, please include a link to your thread - any advice I am able to offer will be on your thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Hedgey and Hagenuk - brilliant news, and I'm on the case. I'll let y'all know how it goes and hopefully have other info to share for other folks in a similar position. You're brilliant x Debs

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi CAG fab folks - have made small donation - essentially what was left over once I paid off the overdraft at Natwest, closed the account and walked away triumphant. Hopeful of more in the future. Sorry it's not loads.

 

thanks again - you have been amazing. x Debs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Help!!

 

I have received the defence from NatWest this morning and similarly to some others, stated " This request is served pursuant to CPR Part 18 alternatively with regard to CPR Rule 27.2 (3). What does this mean? Should I send the letter that has been shown previously in this thread? I sent the court copies of the charges by post even though I registered my claim online, do you think this means that the charges weren't filed with my claim, or are Natwest stalling? I have been through the process to the letter using the templates, so Natwest have previously received 2 copies of my charges.

 

What's my next best step, I have until 22nd August to respond.

 

PS. I'm suprised that they have entered a defence since the latest ongoings with bank charges, is this a good sign or not?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there - I'm sorry that I have not a clue :confused: However I did get some great advice earlier when the whole CPR thing was going on and it was to go to this thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/35672-cobbetts-cpr-18-request.html which even if it doesn't answer your question directly is very busy so do post your question there too. Hope that helps ! x Debs

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...