Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • i dont think the reason why the defendant lost the case means anything at all in that case. it was a classic judge lottery example.
    • Hello, I will try to outline everything clearly. I am a British citizen and I live in Luxembourg (I think this may be relevant for potential claims). I hired a car from Heathrow in March for a 3-day visit to family in the UK. I was "upgraded" to an EV (Polestar 2). I had a 250-mile journey to my family's address. Upon attempting to charge the vehicle, there was a red error message on the dashboard, saying "Charging error". I attempted to charge at roughly 10 different locations and got the same error message. Sometimes there was also an error message on the charging station screen. The Hertz 0800 assistance/breakdown number provided on the set of keys did not work with non-UK mobiles. I googled and found a bunch of other numbers, none of which were normal geographical ones, and none of which worked from my Luxembourg mobile. It was getting late and I was very short on charge. Also, there was no USB socket in the car, so my phone ran out of battery, so I was unable to look for further help online. It became clear that I would not reach my destination (rural Devon), so I had no choice but to find a roadside hotel in Exeter and then go to the nearest Hertz branch the following day on my remaining 10 miles of charge. Of course, as soon as the Hertz employee in Exeter plugged it into their own charger, the charging worked immediately. I have driven EVs before, I know how to charge them, and it definitely did not work at about 10 different chargers between London and Exeter. I took photos on each occasion. Luckily they had another vehicle available and transferred me onto it. It was an identical Polestar 2 to the original car. 2 minutes down the road, to test it, I went to a charger and it worked immediately. I also charged with zero issues at 2 other chargers before returning the vehicle. I think this shows that it was a charging fault with the first car and not my inability to do it properly. I wrote to Hertz, sending the hotel, dinner, breakfast and hotel parking receipt and asking for a refund of these expenses caused by the charging failure in the original car. They replied saying they "could not issue a refund" and they issued me with a voucher for 50 US dollars to use within the next year. Obviously I have no real proof that the charging didn't work. My guess is they will say that the photos don't prove that I was charging correctly, just that it shows an error message and a picture of a charger plugged into a car, without being able to see the detail. Could you advise whether I have a case to go further? I am not after a refund or compensation, I just want my £200 back that I had to spend on expenses. I think I have two possibilities (or maybe one - see below). It looks like the UK is still part of the European Consumer Centre scheme:  File a complaint with ECC Luxembourg | ECC-Net digital forms ECCWEBFORMS.EU   Would this be a good point to start from? Alternatively, the gov.uk money claims service. But the big caveat is you need a "postal address in the UK". In practice, do I have to have my primary residence in the UK, or can I use e.g. a family member's address, presumably just as an address for service, where they can forward me any relevant mail? Do they check that the claimant genuinely lives in the UK? "Postal address" is not the same as "Residence" - anyone can get a postal address in the UK without living there. But I don't want to cheat the system or have a claim denied because of it. TIA for any help!  
    • Sars request sent on 16th March and also sent a complaint separately to Studio. Have received no response. Both letters were received and signed for.  I was also told by the financial ombudsman that studio were investigating but I've also had no response to that either.  The only thing Studio have sent me is a default notice.  Any ideas of what I can do from here please 
    • Thanks Bank - I shall tweak my draft and repost. And here's today's ridiculous email from the P2G 'Claims Dept' Good Morning,  Thank you for you email. Unfortunately we would be unable to pay the amount advised in your previous email.  When you placed the order, you were asked for the value of your parcel, you stated that the value was £265.00. At this stage the booking advised that you were covered to £20.00 and to enhance this to £260.00 you could pay an extra £13.99 + VAT to fully cover your item for loss or damage during transit, you declined to fully cover your item.  Towards the end of your booking on the confirmation page, you were then offered to take cover again, to which you declined again.  Unfortunately, we would be unable to offer you an enhanced payment on this occasion.  If I can assist further, please do let me know.  Kindest Regards Claims Team and my response Good Afternoon  Do you not understand the court cases of PENCHEV v P2G (225MC852) and SMIRNOVS v P2G (27MC729)? In both cases it was held by the courts that there was no need for additional ‘cover’ or ‘protection’ (or whatever you wish to call it) on top of the standard delivery charge, and P2G were required to pay up in full for both cases, which by then also included court costs and interest. I shall be including copies of both those judgements in the bundle I submit to the court next Wednesday 1 May, unless you settle my claim (£274.10) in full before then. Tick tock…..    
    • IMG_2820-IMG_2820-merged.pdfmerged.pdf Case management was this morning. Here is the Sheriff’s order. Moved case forward to 24/05.   He said there was no signed agreement and after a bit of “erm, erm, yeah but, erm” when he asked them, he allowed time for sol to contact claimant.  what is the next step now? thank you UCM  
  • 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

Welcome - illegal repo in contravention of section 92 and unfair relationship ** WON **


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4286 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

It's been a while and I was wondering if you have heard anymore about the appeal, will it happen, when is it to be heard? Any update (sorry being nosey is one of my better traits.)

Hello, sorry about being so quiet. I've actually ended up quite ill with the stress all of this has caused me, but I'm recovering now and ready to finish this fight with every ounce of strength I have left.

 

The appeal was listed but was then adjourned because the original judge was 'too busy' to approve the transcript. I've now finally received the approved transcript and the hearing is coming up very soon.

I can't really give too much away at this stage as it will be largely determined by what I have to say to the High Court Judge on the day and I'd rather not give the other side any heads up. I will say this though, having now read the transcript I am appalled that it has had to come this far and the glaring errors are shocking.

Following the travesty of the trial I have entirely lost faith in the justice system so I am prepared for this to go against me too, however if I am going down I will be going down fighting.

 

I have no assets and no money so all I have to lose at this stage is my faith that right and wrong is actually relevant in law, as opposed to just who has the most money.

 

A big thank you to all that have followed this thread and offered tremendous support, it has often been because of all of you that I have carried on when I've felt like giving up, so thanks again x

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Good luck hun, hope it all comes out in the end. Glance on here most days to see if any things happened. :-)

Thank you, we can but hope! :madgrin:

 

Just had word from the court today that the judge that is hearing my case has been changed. I feel slightly more reassured by this as the new Judge is very well respected and has previously been described as the UK's best academic lawyer, he also has expertise in the areas of civil evidence, damages, and financial services so hopefully he should know what he's talking about! :-)

 

Fingers crossed x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, we can but hope! :madgrin:

 

Just had word from the court today that the judge that is hearing my case has been changed. I feel slightly more reassured by this as the new Judge is very well respected and has previously been described as the UK's best academic lawyer, he also has expertise in the areas of civil evidence, damages, and financial services so hopefully he should know what he's talking about! :-)

 

Fingers crossed x

 

That's excellent news :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The hearing and judgment was very long and complicated but the gist of it is that they DO need a court order to remove a vehicle from private property although the amount of damages is limited. Permission to appeal was granted on the ground of secret commission and then the subsequent appeal was then granted :-D

Permission to appeal was actually refused on the grounds of Section 92 although it was admitted by the appeal judge and conceded by the other side that the trial judge had erred in law in this respect. The reason being that even if the judge had ruled in my favour he would not have been able to award any further damages as he had already covered this when ruling in my favour for trespass.

 

Quote by the Right Honourable Lord Justice:

"The judgment and associated costs are set aside and you have won" :whoo:

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Superb, so how much have you won and when do you get it?

Not quite that straightforward I'm afraid lol!

It was ruled in the High Court Judgment that they did need a court order, they didn't have one and they shouldn't have done what they did but as there were no physical damages to my property the compensation should be nominal. Which in all honesty I am perfectly happy with, all I needed was to prove that I was right and they were wrong which was successfully proved by a High Court Judge yesterday :-D

 

Now the secret commission element of it is another story, the appeal was granted on this basis therefore it will have to go back in front of a district judge for him to "think again". Although it will have to be a different judge to the trial judge.

 

My claim is for unfair relationship and none of their defences so far have been able to show anything to the contrary so if it does end up back in county court chances are I will win based on the judgment of the High Court. The damages I claimed in this respect are for return of all monies paid and release from all further liability, so we will see how that pans out.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wannabe I'm very happy for you, a great way to end this saga, and I'm glad to see the end of it, as Im sure you are too!Shows there is still some common sense left in the world, even if you have to fight for it to prevail.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not quite that straightforward I'm afraid lol!

It was ruled in the High Court Judgment that they did need a court order, they didn't have one and they shouldn't have done what they did but as there were no physical damages to my property the compensation should be nominal. Which in all honesty I am perfectly happy with, all I needed was to prove that I was right and they were wrong which was successfully proved by a High Court Judge yesterday :-D

 

Now the secret commission element of it is another story, the appeal was granted on this basis therefore it will have to go back in front of a district judge for him to "think again". Although it will have to be a different judge to the trial judge.

 

My claim is for unfair relationship and none of their defences so far have been able to show anything to the contrary so if it does end up back in county court chances are I will win based on the judgment of the High Court. The damages I claimed in this respect are for return of all monies paid and release from all further liability, so we will see how that pans out.....

 

 

I take it, that this now sets a precedent, and is relevant case law?? Particularly with respect to removing the vehicle from private property without a court order??

 

Mike

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is definitely a sad state of affairs when it takes a High Court hearing for them to admit they were wrong.

There were many times when I wanted to give up the fight but I'm glad I persevered, justice has been done and that is all I ever wanted x

 

Thank you to everybody that lent their support, it has been invaluable and I'm so glad I'm able to finally share good news with you all :thumb:

Link to post
Share on other sites

what can i say

 

you stuck at it even though it was depressing at times

 

a true inspiration to all

 

as stated, as this is the court of appeal then

 

IT HAS RELEVANT CASE LAW ATTACHED TO IT:smile:

 

when you have landed out of cloud nine , please post up the judgement as this is a nuclear bomb now in our arsenal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Done! It's good getting a positive judgement, isn't it?

 

As you have now had a favourable judgement, hopefully, a sensible offer to settle will be forthcoming too, and there will be no need to go to trial? You can then get on with your life! And the longest thread on the CAG can be brought to a satisfactory conclusion.

 

Well done!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Done! It's good getting a positive judgement, isn't it?

 

As you have now had a favourable judgement, hopefully, a sensible offer to settle will be forthcoming too, and there will be no need to go to trial? You can then get on with your life! And the longest thread on the CAG can be brought to a satisfactory conclusion.

 

Well done!!!

Thank you! It certainly does feel good :-)

 

I do somehow doubt that there will be anything sensible forthcoming from the other side! The Judge was desperately trying to discreetly encourage them to settle once it was over but they were too busy having a strop to listen. At present they are trying to pressure me into a CMC but they seem to forget that this is MY case and I get to make the choices, not them.

The problem they are now having is that their defence to the secret commission issue is not applicable to my pleadings or even their own defence lol! Their defence said "no commission was paid and the allegations are tantamount to allegations of fraud", but then at trial they admitted paying a commission but said it was only a small amount and so it didn't matter! They tried really hard to make an argument based on fiduciary duty but unfortunately got torn to shreds by the judge about it as that wasn't what was pleaded by me or defended by them and so didn't apply, (even if it did they couldn't reasonably show it in any case!).

The High Court Judge summed it up beautifully - "so Mr XXXXX, say you were hit by a bus on the way here today, then who would've been here to tell me all this????"

 

I believe they want a CMC so they can try to get the judge to agree to amendments to the pleadings but I have told them I am not willing to amend anything and I am happy for the case to be remitted as is. Unfortunately they are not listening and are making up some rubbish about how witness statements will need to be filed and the length and venue of the hearing decided! I am sure the court are perfectly capable of making those minor directions all by themselves.

The real problem here is that their 'professionals' got beat in front of a High Court Judge by a lowly LiP :oops:

 

I have quite plainly told them that the issues are not substantially different from those at the original trial or the appeal hearing and so nothing further needs discussing, but for some reason they aren't very happy with that.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

So where does the law stand now? What has changed? If someone enters your property and takes your car, you may claim for breach of statutory duty or common law of trespass and receive nominal damages. This is a long way from what people were saying much earlier in this thread. SO WHAT HAS CHANGED??? HELP.

It has turned into a very complicated issue, unfortunately there has never been previous case law on this issue itself so this was always going to be a test case.

 

The law is that they are not allowed to enter your property and remove your vehicle without a court order, if they do you can make a claim for breach of statutory duty. In Goode Consumer Credit Law and Practice it is stated that the damages awarded will be akin to trespass, so the award will be based on how much of a trespass occurred. In my case all they did was step on my drive so for this I was awarded nominal damages, that is not to say another case would not be different with respect to the damage caused.

 

Now this is where it gets a little more interesting....my claim was for Unfair Relationship under Section 140 of the CCA 1974. I claimed that their breach of statutory duty, along with the payment of secret commission, gave rise to an unfair relationship. For this the powers of the court are wide ranging, I have claimed release from all further liability and return of all monies paid, effectually restoring us to the position we would've been in had the agreement never been entered into. This amount will be decided as a result of the remit of the case back to County Court and I will update as soon as I hear the news.

 

The appeal judge found that original judgment was wrong and so set the whole thing aside, it now has to be remitted to the County Court for them to give the right judgment.

 

As an aside, there are other parts of Goode that make reference to the criminal consequences of their actions, but that's another story!

 

If I could give any advice based on my experiences it would be this:

 

  • Don't start anything like this unless you have balls of steel!
  • It isn't a quick way to make some cash, it's about fairness and standing strong for what is right.
  • It should be a lot easier to make a claim of this sort now that findings have been made by a High Court Judge
  • Even if you are awarded nominal damages, you will still have won in principle
  • Don't put all your eggs in one basket and keep things simple. If there are other issues you have with the lender then raise them, all the issues I raised have accumulated to make very good overall picture of their deceit and how they have treated me.
  • Be prepared for a fight to the death, the other side will not ever want to admit defeat!

That's pretty much all I can say really, it has been an immense struggle to get to this stage and one I very nearly didn't complete. Nonetheless, it's over now and I can look my beautiful girls in the eye and tell them that mummy didn't give in to the bullies......priceless :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...