Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • We need to see the actual document from the IAS where it is written - "The Operator's evidence shows no payment for the Appellant's vehicle, or anything similar. It does show two payments for the same registration in quick succession. I would take a reasonable guess, based on the circumstances described, that the person paying has paid for the registration of the person they assisted again." You can't just type it up yourself. At the hearing in July or August or whenever the judge will have two Witness Statements. One from Bank's director says you never made a second appeal. You say you did make a second appeal and the IAS concluded that payment was made. The judge will immediately twig that either you or the director is lying.  But who? Fail to show the documentation form the IAS and instead just produce something you've typed yourself will make it look like you just made up the appeal and you are lying and you will lose the case. Please let us see what the IAS adjudicator sent.
    • I used to have a retail outlet in London selling my husband's photography.  We also had a co-op with staff so they weren't directly employed by me, but I paid for the other overheads etc.  When my husband died, I carried on as usual for a while but then I became ill and moved quite far away so logistically was becoming very difficult.  I came to an arrangement (verbal) with one of the guys I trusted, that I would send him the images to print and sell as normal, and I wouldn't take any money, as a short term solution until I got back on my feet and worked out the best way to do things. He would pay all the  rent, insurance etc... Over a year later, not able to give things away for free anymore,  I drew up a contract as a wholesale agreement, so I would get everything printed and sent to him and I would invoice his for what he ordered. I noticed form the beginning that he wasn't ordering enough or frequently enough to be making any money, and was suspicious he was doing his own orders on the sly and ordering just enough from me to keep my happy.  I checked with my printer, which I've been with for 20 years, and he sad he wasn't getting orders for my images from anyone else. I emailed a few other printers to ask them to keep a look out for some images but I soon realised this would be impossible to police.  The only option really would be to buy a print from him and check the stamp on the back of it.  I finally managed to get hold of on the prints on sale, and sure enough, he did not order it through me.   In the contract he signed in 2022 it explicitly states that he must destroy all files I had previously sent him etc etc so e is in breach of that.  When I drew up the contract, I was careful to make sure it was legally binding, but before I let rip at him, I need to know where I stand.  The contract is here: PARTIES This WHOLESALE AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made effective as of 30th June, 2022, by and between ############################## The Supplier and the Client, collectively referred to as the "Parties," hereby agree to the following terms: TERMS AND CONDITIONS SALES OF GOODS The Supplier agrees to provide the following goods to the Client (“Goods”): Description of Goods ################################# Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b BOTH PARTIES AGREE: The Client purchases the Goods through the Supplier directly, and agrees to delete/destroy any previously held digital images (Goods) owned by the Supplier, and agrees not to use any such files for monetary gain, outside of this agreement, either directly or through a third party from immediate effect of this agreement. The Client purchases the other materials necessary for resale of the Goods independently of this agreement. The Client shall have exclusive rights for resale of Goods at ###########, and also with permission, as a retailer of the Goods elsewhere, provided that there is no conflict of interest between the Supplier and the Client. The Client is free to decide their own retail prices, for the Goods. The Supplier shall use #####  to provide the printed Goods on Fujifilm Crystal Archive paper, with Lustre finish, and will not use any other Printer unless #### cease to trade, without prior approval from the Client. The Supplier shall not impose restrictions on size or frequency of orders made by the Client. The prices provided by the Supplier shall not increase for a minimum of 3 years, unless the prices of the raw materials rise, in which case the client will be informed immediately. Any discounts/promotional prices of raw materials shall be passed on to the Client by the Supplier, and the invoice will show adjustments for this, as well as credit for return postage of any damaged goods. This agreement can be terminated by the Client without notice; the Supplier must give notice of no less than 90 days, unless the terms of the agreement are breached, in which case, the agreement can be terminated with immediate effect. PAYMENT Orders must be paid for upon receipt of invoice, via Bank transfer: ######### Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b DELIVERY AND INSPECTIONS All orders received by 12.00am (midnight) shall be processed by the Supplier the following working day and delivery of order shall arrive in accordance with the Royal Mail schedule, or DPD, should express delivery be requested. The Client shall be liable for the delivery charge which shall be added to the invoice. The Goods will be delivered to the address specified by the Client. The Client shall be provided with order tracking, and should any problems arise with the ordering system or the couriers (Royal Mail, DPD), the Client shall be informed without delay of any such issues. The Client will inspect the Goods and report any defects or damage to the Goods in transit as soon as possible upon receipt of Goods, and will retain damaged Goods for return to Supplier for refund/replacement. GENERAL PROVISIONS CONFIDENTIALITY The prices of the Goods and other information contained in this Agreement is confidential and will not be disclosed by either party unless with prior written consent of the other party. INDEMNIFICATION The Client indemnifies the Supplier from any claims, liabilities, and expenses made by any third party vendors or customers of the Client. GOVERNING LAW This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with UK Law. ACCEPTANCE Both parties understand and accept the wholesale arrangement stipulated under this Agreement. Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the Parties has executed this Wholesale Agreement as of the day and year set forth above.   Signed by us both electronically.   I haven't broached any of this yet, and I am looking for some advice about what action to take.  The main issue I've got is that he has still go those images.  If I terminate the contract, I will need to know that he no longer has those images and I can't think of a bulletproof way to do this. I'm thinking I might tell him I will continue with the contract but ask for a  sum in damages and say that if I find out he's still doing it down the line I will terminate the contract and sue him for damages. The damages side of things I'm not sure how it would work as he is self employed, and I'm positive he doesn't declare all of his earnings to HMRC, in order to find out how much I have lost, would the court demand to go through his tax self assessments?  I'm not sure how to proceed with this, I don't want to lose that place as an outlet as it is in a prime spot in London, which is why I let him have those images in the first place as I would have had to pull out altogether at that point.  I am regretting it somewhat now though.  Please help.
    • I cannot locate anything in my paper work that states 2 payments were made? Perhaps you could point this out? In reply from IAS it states "The ticketing data has been attached" nothing was sent to me. I made a response to the IAS all this was done online
    • Thanks again for your responses. The concern I have here, is that freeholder of the land (a company, who presumably would have been the ones to have initially instructed PPM to manage the parking here), will have proof of exactly how long the vehicle was on site for, as the driver was meeting operatives from that company on a separate matter. On this basis, if the matter was to get to court, I feel all the other technicalities about signage, size of signage/font, lack of start/finish times, will not be enough to have any case dropped? This PCN was brought up to the freeholder but they have advised that PPM will not waive this charge. 
  • 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

Direct Line - How do you get them to fight for you


bluecat0208
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6489 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

What do you do when you know that you are in the right over a car crash yet your insurance company refuses to fight.

 

Just recently my husband had his car crashed into by a middle age lady on a rounabout. She was lost and was driving round the outside of a three lane roundabout looking for the right exit and drove her car into the back wheel on the passinger's side of our car.

 

At the time she admitted that she was at fault and it would be very clear from anyone looking at the roundabout there is no way she was in the right lane or driving correctly.

 

However when Direct Line contacted her insurance company they were informed that she now claims that it was my husband's fault and as there were no witnesses they want to go 50/50

 

We are very angry about this, not least because we have £650 excess on the policy but also because of the effect it will have on our insurance history (we currently have 5 years no claims). It appears that they are prepared to accpet the word of the other person rather than ours and unwilling to do any further invesigation.

 

 

any ideas gratefully received

Link to post
Share on other sites

We are in exactly the same boat with Tesco Insurance (owned indirectly by Direct Line, haha); our accident was in September and it's taken Tesco and their bunch of monkey-shaped weasels they call solicitors all this time to decide to roll over, play dead and accept 50/50 liability. Thus destroying the OH's no-claims that he was building up quite happily. Same story - a woman pulled out in front of him suddenly and he went into the side of her car. She admitted fault at the scene, but then chav-gorilla husband turned up and started running the show. She's lied and changed her statement a number of times. We've provided photographs, road diagrams, Highway Code directions, speed to weight ratios, the kitchen sink...and all the above weasels can say (when they're not 'in a meeting' or 'on holiday') is that there were no witnesses.

We're giving up and accepting it now. We're just fed up with having to do everything ourselves. You know we didn't even get to meet our assigned weasel face to face? It just feels like we've been doing all the running, only to find out 11 months later that what we thought was a nice straight path is actually a little ouroboros hamster wheel. Lined with spikes.

 

*rant over*

-----

Click the scales if I've been useful! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should state categorically that you are not prepared to accept a 50/50 settlement. You should also ask them about the company complaints procedure and inform them that if they are not prepared to deal with your claim properly that you will invoke it, taking it all the way to insurance ombudsman if necesary.

 

Direct Line tried a similar thing on with my OH in 2004. She got hit up the rear by a car that had also been hit up the rear by another vehicle (whose occupants did a runner). She got the details off the driver who hit her car. Nice easy claim so we thought, but Direct Line had other ideas. They tried to tell her that they would not claim off the other driver as it was not his fault he had been hit and shunted into my OH. So they expected her to lose her no claims and excess. We wrote to DL and told them it was not accetable and we were not prepared to accept this. Eventually they agreed to reinstate her no claims and also refund her excess, but it took a bit of a battle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

direct line are well known for this, you get what you pay for. In the first case the damage is to the nsr quarter on a roundabout so it could back up her false claims that you turned across her, with no witnesses and her word against yours there isnt much else they can do really.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was a small roundabout maybe she could argue, but this is a large three lane rounabout with traffic lights and very clear marked lanes - if you are not in the inside line to go round you're in the wrong lane. More like a junction than a roundabout. There can be no question he drove in front of her, he was just going wnere his lane indicated he should go. straight ahead and up a dual carridge way.

 

However since my last email, we have reported her to the police and they have agreed that she was in the wrong.

 

We have also paid for legal assistiance with Direct Line, it would be a interesting case using them to sue direct line for incompetence

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm sorry guys but I don't agree with your comments about Direct Line. As an ex-claims handler myself it can be incredibly difficult to fight a policyholders case when a) they have not bothered to get details of independent witnesses b) think that the other persons at fault are going to be genuine and therefore don't take all of the necessary information or check the information given is correct, or c) don't involve the Police.

 

bluecat0208 - how on earth do you expect Direct Line to fight your case when it's your word against the other driver. You have no evidence to back up your case irrespective of the circumstances of how the accident occured. Direct Line have to fight your case but within the Law. Although Direct Line would not dispute your integrity regarding how the accident occured, they need to be able to rely on evidence to prove that the accident was the sole responsibility of the other driver and back this up with independent evidence. Because you don't have any independent evidence to back up your claim there's nothing Direct Line can do other than try and reach agreement with the other insurer - hence the 50/50 liability split which is quite common in cases such as this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

a tip for all of you !

 

if you are involved in an accident try to ensure that you get the details of as many independent witnesses as possible.

 

phone the Police immediately if injury occurs or drivers get irate/abusive

 

carry a small disposable camera in your boot to take photographs of the scene of the accident - also get a picture of the other vehicle/s and also the driver/s!

 

You will be surprised at the amount of cases I have dealt with where the driver/s of offending vehicles have denied liability completely for being at the scene of an accident. If you have photographic evidence - this helps!

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what do you do when there are no other witnessess or no one else stops - jump in front of people's cars on a fast road and say "you saw that, be a witness"

 

Plus you don't need to keep a camera in the car, just use your mobile phone - which my husband did - took pictures of the car, the person and her tax disc.

 

It is not a case of his word against her but a case of Direct Line not looking at the site where the accident took place.

 

Three lane roundabout - a car in any of these three lanes can go straight ahead up a duel carridgeway very clearly marked and only ONLY in the inside lane can you go round the roundabout as well as straight ahead. Plus there are four sets of lights at this roundabout. My husband had stopped at the lights and then pulled away to go up the dual carriage way - as was his right and this lady in the far outside lane decided to go around the roundabout on the outside - wrong lane and creashed into the side of this car. There can be no issue about guilt.

 

This is just Direct Line being lazy

Link to post
Share on other sites

"It is not a case of his word against her but a case of Direct Line not looking at the site where the accident took place"

 

this is irrelevant as the other party can deny that they were in the wrong lane - you need proof that this wasn't the case.

 

I understand that you have been shafted here but with all due respect in the absence of witnesses you will not get any further than 50/50.

 

I would suggest you take photo's yourself and send these to Direct Line explaining again why you are not in the wrong. Direct Line then should write to the other party to see what response comes back.

 

Good Luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand exactly what you are saying and also aware that it is very hard to create a picture without images.

 

But if this woman was in the right lane, it would have been impossible for the accident to occur. With the direction my husband was going, he could not be in the wrong lane as all lanes on the toundabout indicated that he could go that way.

 

Why I am annoyed is that Direct Line appear to want to roll over and take the easy route. In the past when you had an accident you had to fill in forms, provide diagrams and pictures to the insurance company, now it appears they have a conversation with you and a conversation with the other person's insurance company amd make a decision. Why should I have to fight to make them do their job correctly, if they put the slightest effort into looking into our claim - speak to the local police about the roundabout, request CCV TV footage - it would be clear very quickly that the other person's story does not make sense.

Why don't they do the job they are paid to do?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but I still agree with bluecat; we were always treated as an annoyance, never as paying customers. Our appointed solicitors made constant mistakes, with facts and on forms (we had to send one court form back TWICE because it was so riddled with errors) - it does ultimately feel like the insurance bosses have got together for a few whiskies in their local golf club and a titter at the expense of the great unwashed.

-----

Click the scales if I've been useful! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The other driver may well be on a forum saying "and anyway this car was about to turn left then pulled back into my lane" who knows, nobody reading this thread and not the insurers. What do want columbo doing door to door in the area?

The insurance company has insured you against loss under the terms of a contract and you decided to make it a cheap contract by applying a £650 excess.

 

If you had paid to insure your car properly you wouldnt be so upset now.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry but I really don't understand your comment about columbo - it doesn't make sense to me.

 

The rest just appears to be having go and being rude - but for your information our car was a £60,000 car and the insurance we pay is not cheap, the excess was chosen as we knew that we would not be claiming on our fully comp insurance for any repairs which cost less than that.

 

If you have some helpful comments I would be happy to hear them. I pay for an insurance company to do a job, if they don't do it, I have every right to make an issue about it and I thought by posting here that someone may be able to help and I am grateful to everyone who has posted supportive comments

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which part of your contract with direct line do you think obliges them to investigate an accident and recover the excess you specifically excluded from cover?

 

An insurance company will only investigate to recover their own losses, in this case the cost of repairs to your car. These were probably much more than £650, but they knew full well that proof of fault would be impossible to gain so they didn’t investigate; they are not going spend money trying to recover, for you, something you choose not to insure.

 

You bought car insurance, you had an accident, and your car has been fixed.

 

If you want advice, make an official complaint, in writing to direct line they wont do any thing but then threaten the ombudsman. A complaint to the ombudsman whether justified or not costs the company involved, you may get your NCD back just to avoid a complaint.

 

Sorry if I sound rude, but it’s probably intentional

 

 

SS

Link to post
Share on other sites

What are you talking about - have you even read the rest of the thread. I am not talking about the excess - if we go 50/50 means we only pay £325 anyway plus going 50/50 does not mean that the insurance company will recover it's costs as the car repair is going to cost thousands.

 

I feel that they should do something more than have two conversations and then decide fault. If you disagree with this point of view that's fine, as we clearly both have different ideas over what the role of an insurance company is but why you feel the need to be unpleasant is beyond me. There is no need for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if I sound rude, but it’s probably intentional

 

SS

 

And what grounds do you have for being this rude? This forum is for helping people in unfortunate, distressing circumstances by giving out constructive advice, not for sniping at other people because you don't agree with them. I would appreciate it if you could bear this in mind.

-----

Click the scales if I've been useful! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pictures of the crash

Pictures of the roundabout showing the clear lane markings

Police advice - they would be happy to charge the other driver if we wished to go down this route

and if they cared to ask for it - CCTV footage.

 

If she was in the right lane for the direction she was going in, it would have been impossible for this crash to occur and with the direction my husband was going in it was impossible for him to be in the wrong lane.

 

He has seven years no claim bonus and drives over 90 miles a day to work and back and has a clean driving licence. When the crash occurred he was out driving his pride and joy sports car and was not going to be doing anything stupid like being in the wrong lane on a roundabout 2 miles from home which he drives everyday. Unlike the woman who crashed into him, who was in a strange place and had just missed her exit off the roundabout.

 

Just to rephrase again, the reason why I am annoyed is that there is no checking just assume after one conversation and we all know the saying about assuming things. If they invesigated and then found us at fault, then that would be different but taking this sloppy easy route is wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pictures of the crash

Pictures of the roundabout showing the clear lane markings

Police advice - they would be happy to charge the other driver if we wished to go down this route

and if they cared to ask for it - CCTV footage.

 

If she was in the right lane for the direction she was going in, it would have been impossible for this crash to occur and with the direction my husband was going in it was impossible for him to be in the wrong lane.

 

He has seven years no claim bonus and drives over 90 miles a day to work and back and has a clean driving licence. When the crash occurred he was out driving his pride and joy sports car and was not going to be doing anything stupid like being in the wrong lane on a roundabout 2 miles from home which he drives everyday. Unlike the woman who crashed into him, who was in a strange place and had just missed her exit off the roundabout.

 

Just to rephrase again, the reason why I am annoyed is that there is no checking just assume after one conversation and we all know the saying about assuming things. If they invesigated and then found us at fault, then that would be different but taking this sloppy easy route is wrong.

 

ok, have her charged, Harsh but fair. It will help your case.

 

Ask to see a copy of her diagram and statement, if DL havent got it, then tell them to get it.

 

Obtain a copy of the cctv, if it costs you get a receipt.

 

Do a good diagram yourself, note where both cars were coming from and going to.

 

Who is the other person insured with?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest strangewayofsavin

Hi Direct line are incompitant F@@&*$s, I had a gentleman drive into the back of my van, I had a witness, the gentleman, told his insurance company that I had reversed into him (On the A38 ) after not hearing anything for about 6 or 7 weeks, I was told that my witness did not count, as they were in my vehicle! and had agreed a 50/50 settlement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If shes charged then found guilty in court they have effectively settled it for you that she was at fault then Directline will have the ammo they need to hit her insurance company.

 

Similar thing happened to us the guy on the motorbike that hit us turned left from the right hand lane and took the front of our car off, we did have 2 witnesses but the police charged him with dangerous driving and driving with a defective tyre he was found guilty on both charges and the insurance company used that to good effect

Link to post
Share on other sites

i had an uninsured driver sideswipe me a few years back. He gave his real name and address and false insurance, he hadnt been insured for 8 years. Anyway i was with churchill and they said that they couldnt do anything as they had no company to claim back from so i had to take the loss of NCB on the chin...............................................................OOOOOHHHHHHH NNNNOOOOO............i said. did i not pay you an extra little premium for legal cover? Yes sir was the reply but its for uninsured losses they said. What then is this claim for? i said. ERRRRRR!!!! they said. They traced him and took him to court, i won and got my NCB plus excess. But only coz i didnt just accept what Churchill said................................FIGHT ON MY FRIEND.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...