Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What advice would you give about Amex. Should i set up a payment plan directly with them or wait until they contact me. I have not had any letters from amex for 1 year and NCO have only contacted me in the last few weeks. Many thanks for your help. Just to mention my only income is the state pension.
    • Okay. Thanks. Nice piece of research. You should come and volunteer for us a bit if you get fed up with your day job stop The recipient is clearly in a position of trust. I wonder if he is self-employed or an employee. Let's assume that all of the consumables/perishables which were included in the parcel are no longer available. That leaves you with the WMF cutlery set which is presumably what you really want. I'm wondering whether you should start to correspond with him directly by letter to his home and also copies to his work address. I think if you made it plain that you know all about him and where he is and that you are prepared to escalate this matter even to the point that his employers might discover what has happened, you could find that there would be an agreement whereby he would return what is left of your parcel to DHL. You could then take up the question of the value of the missing items – the loss of which can clearly be compensated by a pecuniary award – with DHL. You wouldn't be able to guarantee success – but you could have some fun – and we would help you. If it failed then you could still proceed against DHL as I've already described. An advantage is that this approach really wouldn't cost you very much other than some damage to your Karma – but I dare say you could find some interesting outlet for that. It seems fairly clear that this person has acted with intent to deprive you of these items. Does that give you enough of the – grudge factor – to pursue this?  
    • If it's with debt recovery, you can ignore them. As we've said, you only respond to a Letter Before Claim/Action.   HB
    • Sorry I didn't mean to come across like that. My bad.  I definitely appreciate the time.  I will go through it again, but I have no documentation, no yellow slips, no letters, nothing.. all binned... Because as far as I am aware, these people write their own laws, so I write my own too, just tell them to f off.  I will read over them all but not sure how trying to clear up some ntk slips now will do anything, it's all been passed to debt recovery, I think anyway, because I never answer unknown calls.  Anyway sorry I have gone on... Maybe we should close this here. 
    • Conversion is a tort – and references to it are contained in the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act. Generally speaking if you sue in contract or negligence then you wouldn't be getting your goods back. You would simply be getting financial compensation. That's the way the courts work. The basic premise is that everything can be compensated by a payment of money. When we deal with special values such as sentimental/expectation losses then you have to reassess. However, if you are simply concerned with the replacement value then we would simply be talking about money. The idea of suing in any kind of tort whether it is the tort of conversion or the tort of negligence is to put you back into the position that you would have been if the tort had never occurred. Returning you to your pre-incident position is generally considered to be putting you into that position in terms of monetary value. So if you run into someone's car and cause £500 with the damage – then you are entitled to recover £500 and that puts you into the position you would have been if the accident never occurred. If you suffer the loss of something that has a particular value to you which may not be of value to anyone else – then things get much more complicated – especially if you're suing  in contract or in negligence because generally speaking remedies are assessed on a replacement market value.  A sentimental item may be worth very little on the market and couldn't be replaced simply by finding out the going rate on eBay or in the shops, for instance. If you are  suing in conversion then the natural remedy to be awarded by the courts is an order for the return of the items. Of course you face additional complications if the items have been sold on or damaged. I have to say it seems to me that you are better off not having your German chocolates. There are much better ones around – but that  is a matter for you. Of course, everything I said in my much earlier post about the disadvantages of suing the actual recipient still stand and in fact if you did sue that person, it would be in the tort of conversion. Basically you would be saying that that person has usurped the rights of owner. They have converted your property into their's. (We talking about ownership/title here). I hope you understand how messy it would be to have to sue the alleged tortfeasor in Liverpool and if you are simply prepared to go with replacement values – even if we can enhance the value because of the special value to you, by suing DHL – how much easier it would be. It's good news that DHL apparently carry items up to €500 – and also good news that the value wasn't declared. This means that they would not be able later on to try and argue that because the original contract with the sender was based on a £200 declared value – or a £200 German statutory maximum, that you wouldn't be entitled to claim anything more. We would have been able to overcome that – and of course at the end of the day if they put their hands up to £200 then they would be really stupid to start putting their heels in for an extra £ton. Of course I'm sure that you would like to go for the recipient. It would be very satisfying – but there would be considerable risk factors in terms of the economic risk  I have explained in my earlier post. It's up to you. We will help you do either – but if you want a quick resolution to this then as I have already said, DHL is your target. Of course you could then hope that DHL will challenge the recipient and attack them – but that will never happen. DHL want a quiet life and just get on with business and making money – which isn't altogether unreasonable. If you sued the recipient, then if you are able to establish dishonesty on their part then they could be a question of punitive damages – but I would have to look that up. I think we would then have to think about suing that person in trespass which carries with it the sense of not only having usurped rights of owner but also having delivered an insult to the true owner by deliberately interfering with their goods. You would have to establish the dishonesty of the recipient which would be another complicating factor – although the fact that you have attempted to contact them and they haven't responded and they have blocked your messages will be extremely helpful. Also if it came to court and they had to admit that they had eaten your dog treats and fed your German chocolates to the dog, it wouldn't go down well and the judge would be disposed to award you some punitive damages – but it probably wouldn't be more than 300 or 400 quid, I would have thought – and of course at the end of the day you still have all the problems of enforcement. I'm afraid people often know lots about their rights and about how to assert their rights – but they never think about enforcing their rights. You will find this to be the case where the you go to Resolver, or citizens advice – or most other agencies.  
  • Our picks

scimi..driver

scimi..driver / charge certificate received

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3697 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi, I Have unfortunately been issued with a 'Charge Certificate' due to excess time parked (first 1.5 hours free) at Lidl in Dundee from Athena ANPR based in Uxbridge.

 

Usual stuff from what I have read, £90.00 fine. £45.00 if paid within 14 days, photographs of me driving the car in and out at alleged times

 

As this has happened in Scotland, is the 'the ignore and get on with your life' still advised as there are different legal systems in place North of the Border

 

regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, scimi..driver.

 

I've started a new thread for you.

 

Regards.

 

Scott.


 
 

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, the fine is still unenforceable and you should ignore everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The photographs they took do not clearly identify the driver so I geuss if push came to shove and they did take it to court, they would have to identify the driver (which I believe I am not required to disclose to them)

 

So should I just ignore all correspondance even registered post?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems reasonable.

 

The only thing you shouldn't ignore are court papers. That said there's a miniscule chance of them taking you to court. Some companies like to issue "draft" court papers in an attempt to intimidate. A quick call to HM Court Service will tell you if they're real or not. However let me stress this is extremely unlikely.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Court papers - to be valid they will need a have a claim number and a court seal.

 

Some PPC's have sent out 'fake' court papers to scare you into paying. If this happens then report it to the court concerned

 

The best course of action is that already noted and that is to ignore everything except properly served court papers. The pieces of paper will get scarier with ever increasing amounts and purport to come from Debt Collectors and Solicitors but these are in reality the PPC in disguise

 

The chances of court are slim indeed as they do not have a case

 

Ignore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...