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

Supreme court rules


Consumer dude
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5249 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 for that excellent digest and contribution Mark.

 

I would add, though I am uncertain as yet, as to whether, as other posters have stated, Dunlop continues to apply.

 

Dunlop of course relates to 'penalties'. Insofar as I know this argument was dismissed early on in the High Court and this was affirmed in the CoA. Has the SC judgment done anything to insist that such charges are penalties and that Dunlop still applies. I'd hate to see anyone float this boat and get short shrift.

 

Anyone?

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 360
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Thanks for that excellent digest and contribution Mark.

 

I would add, though I am uncertain as yet, as to whether, as other posters have stated, Dunlop continues to apply.

 

Dunlop of course relates to 'penalties'. Insofar as I know this argument was dismissed early on in the High Court and this was affirmed in the CoA. Has the SC judgment done anything to insist that such charges are penalties and that Dunlop still applies. I'd hate to see anyone float this boat and get short shrift.

 

Anyone?

 

Penalties still applies to the older contracts where the banks did actually use the term 'penalty fee', or 'additional administration charges/fees'. Ruling yesterday included reference, as did Smith's Appeal ruling. Smith ruled out the later use of common law, except where the UTCCRs don't protect the consumer. It's all down to the wording of the contract... hence why most banks reissued their T&Cs when the balloon went up.

I'm often a sarcastic SOB and speak my mind (and I don't do PC at all), but I have a laugh as I go. I won't be intimidated, and I don't take prisoners... so live with it, or go get yourself a humour implant :p

 

Copy of Law book from Amazon…£19.95, Refund Request stamp...32p, LBA stamp...also 32p, Court fees...£750.00,

The look on the bank's barrister's face, when they lost the '£25k Mother-of-all unfair charges' cases...(plus his £8k+ of costs)... Priceless!

 

The legal bit: These are my opinions and own view of legislation and process. I accept no liability whatsoever for any outcome as a result of anyone invoking any or all of the advice given - clarify your own personal stuation with an insured legal professional.

Saying that, I've used these methods against many of these corporate crooks:evil: and won hands down!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by SurlyBonds

 

Penalties still applies to the older contracts where the banks did actually use the term 'penalty fee', or 'additional administration charges/fees'. Ruling yesterday included reference, as did Smith's Appeal ruling. Smith ruled out the later use of common law, except where the UTCCRs don't protect the consumer. It's all down to the wording of the contract... hence why most banks reissued their T&Cs when the balloon went up.

 

Thanks, understand this point. However to be absolutely clear: If I were to cite Dunlop, as I have done before the 'test' case, would I still have a leg to stand on, on the notion of a penalty charge. My reading was no. Others are saying Dunlop still applies. Clarification please from anyone?

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Mark, Thats been by far the easiest post to understand with all the relevant information. =)

 

BTW folks, what Mark posted above is taken from Stephen Hones website, he was the chap who first fought and won his charges back... he is a lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by sequenci

 

This is the last time I'll ask, please keep this thread on topic. If I see any more trolling I'll be placing people on moderation.

 

?:confused:

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, understand this point. However to be absolutely clear: If I were to cite Dunlop, as I have done before the 'test' case, would I still have a leg to stand on, on the notion of a penalty charge. My reading was no. Others are saying Dunlop still applies. Clarification please from anyone?

 

I'd suggest that we wait and see. There are numerous QC barristers, that specialise in banking, looking over the verdict in defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW folks, what Mark posted above is taken from Stephen Hones website, he was the chap who first fought and won his charges back... he is a lawyer.

 

Sorry it wasn`t my intention to take credit for that piece. The kudos is all Stephen Hones. I was emailed the piece and with everybody running around with heads up bums ( so to speak) I thought it would help put things in perspective.

 

I then had to edit it because I had left my email address in the message.:razz: I will now go back and re- edit and give Stephen his right and proper recognition. He is much, much cleverer than me. A Wizard by any other name.;)

 

Cheers, MARK:cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The courts would be foolish to do so, that may happen, BUT if they do once a valid arguement has been put to them demonstrating that the OFT case doesnt have a real impact on our claims, I would hope their decision will be overturned, nothing I have read in the judgement says that clims should be stopped, in fact it actually guides slightly as to the next move.

:madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I am reading, it is right that we need to basically sit tight a wait for all the info.

 

My case has been stayed in the county court since July 2007, I am worried that County Court will start throwing cases out before we have a chance to do anything. Is this likely to happen?

 

Hi WHITEHART80:)

 

From what I have read on the HoL discussion thread it would be an idea to check your paperwork from the court as some Caggers have said that their paperwork states that they must inform the court of their intentions of how they want their claim managed within 28 days of the final determination of the OFT test case.

 

Additionally one member stated that their paperwork states that within 28 days of the final decision the bank will file at court and serve on the claimant -

 

'(a) a case summary of not more than 500 words setting out the effect of that decision

 

(b) their proposed directions in this claim'

 

and that the documents will then be referred to the District Judge to consider further directions.

 

Either way it would be a good idea to check your paperwork from the court to see what, if anything, it says you need to do - otherwise if there's something you should be doing and you don't, the banks will achieve what they want.....particularly as some banks (LTSB for example) are already stating their intentions to apply to the courts to have all cases dismissed.

 

Other than that you are correct in saying that we sit tight and await further instructions from the site team!

 

Hope this helps!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Landy.

 

When you say the paperwork from the court do you mean the original notification of the stay or do you think it is likely that I will receive something from the court.

 

It seems a real grey area at the moment for those of us with claims already lodge with the county court.

 

As I said my biggest fear is them getting my case thrown out before I can do anything about it.

 

I dont see how they would have the grounds to have cases thrown out anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all, can anyone look at this from the disabled angle?

 

For those of us who are ill or disabled can we use disabled law in our cases? Its hard for us to access bank websites to find information we need on for example right of appropriation. For many of us its hard if not impossible to even go into a bank to discuss our situations. To even do a SAR request and chase it up in my case can take months. We receive no help from the banks, just harrassment and of course what they are taking is our benefits.

 

Would a seperate class action from disabled customers be appropriate?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Landy.

 

When you say the paperwork from the court do you mean the original notification of the stay or do you think it is likely that I will receive something from the court.

 

It seems a real grey area at the moment for those of us with claims already lodge with the county court.

 

As I said my biggest fear is them getting my case thrown out before I can do anything about it.

 

I dont see how they would have the grounds to have cases thrown out anyway.

 

Hi WHITEHART:)

 

From what I read on the HoL discussion thread, the reference was to paperwork already received - which I took to be the notification of the stay - so I should have a check through your existing paperwork first.

 

I'm in the position where I only filed at court last month and paid my (£200) AQ fee the day before the judgment was handed down, so hadn't even got as far as the staying of my claim, therefore I don't have that actual paperwork myself.

 

I fully agree that the banks don't have the grounds to have cases thrown out, but it seems like they're going to have a damned good try:(

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Landy_Alert

 

I fully agree that the banks don't have the grounds to have cases thrown out, but it seems like they're going to have a damned good try

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

 

They certainly are...

 

 

BBC News - Lloyds to ask local courts to dismiss overdraft cases

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely. But you can bet your last that is exactly what they will do. They should be made outcasts and not be able to rely on any law for their abuses of the legal process.

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Thanks for the link EIE;)

 

God I hate LTSB -

 

First they refer to my OH's suicide attempt that was caused by previous financial problems (partially brought on by their own actions, I hasten to add) as trying to 'top himself' in the notes in my SAR, then they turn down our Financial Hardship charges claim, despite our priority debt arrears and full knowledge of what our financial problems led to before.....and now this little gem:evil:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Landy

 

I have to tell you that I stuck one on these barstewards during the stay and there is so much more coming their way. I hate them with a passion and what you've said confirms I was right to do so. 'Top himself.? How dare they?.

 

I've caught them red handed bare faced lying on a massive issue which could see them fined bigstyle by the EU. Seriously. Watch this space.

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Landy

 

I have to tell you that I stuck one on these barstewards during the stay and there is so much more coming their way. I hate them with a passion and what you've said confirms I was right to do so. 'Top himself.? How dare they?.

 

I've caught them red handed bare faced lying on a massive issue which could see them fined bigstyle by the EU. Seriously. Watch this space.

 

Glad to hear I'm not the only one EIE.........and I certainly will be watching;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

read all threads. .amazing with the exception of vegnomeat who is a moron....what pees me off is they keep talking about overdraft charges. on current accounts....but what about people with basic accounts..no one can go overdrawn because they are not allowed an overdraft. so a direct debit is presented...bank says no..then charges 35.00 for it!!! basic acc. customers have not borrowed any unauthorised money from banks, but are still charged the 35.00... would these people have a case??? would sooooooo go on a march....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...