Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Below is my proposed letter of claim to Yodel. I would welcome comment.   Dear Yodel, Claimant x: claim for breach of contract loss of package xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx I am making a claim against you claim against for breach of contract relating to your loss of a package valued at £150.00. I refer to two webchats that I have had with your organisation following which I was advised that Yodel were not prepared to recompense me for my loss. This letter is being sent to in accordance with the Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct and Protocols (the Pre-action PD) contained in the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR). In particular, I refer you to paragraphs 13 to 16 of the Pre-action PD concerning the court's powers to impose sanctions for failing to comply with its provisions. Ignoring this letter may lead to our my commencing proceedings against you and may increase your liability for costs. Circumstances leading to my claim against Yodel On 14 June 2024, I made a sale on eBay of a set of 3 Kirkland Signature golf wedges (‘the goods’) at a price of £150.00 plus £6.00 postage. I received payment from the purchaser via eBay and on 15 June I purchased postage from eBay’s Packlink. Packlink arranged the delivery of the package to the purchaser with Yodel. Having packaged the goods in wrapping paper, I delivered them on 15 June to the Shell petrol station on ……..and a tracking number of  xxx was given. Tracking showed that the package made it to your Leeds Depot on 15 June but thereafter the package went missing. The Purchaser had been advised that they were ready for collection at her local depot in Preston but they could not be located in Preston. I personally attended your Leeds depot where your helpful staff confirmed that the package had been scanned into that depot and was also scanned going onto one of your trailers (7DL 1436) bound for Preston but that thereafter the package was not scanned again and could not be located either in Leeds or Preston. Due to non-receipt of the goods, I was required to refund the buyer her £156.00. I have sought compensation via Packlink but they are only prepared to pay ‘basic compensation’ of £25.00. Through your webchat I have sought to make a claim against Yodel but have simply been referred back to Packlink suggesting that I do not have any rights against Yodel. You are referred to the The Contract (Rights of Third Parties Act) 1999 upon which I rely and which give me the right to sue on the contract just as if I was a directly contracting partner. I was a discernible beneficiary of the contract entered into by you with Packlink to deliver the package on my behalf. As the sender of the parcel I was somebody who was intended to benefit under the parcel delivery contract. In breach of contract, you failed to exercise reasonable care and skill to deliver the package to the purchaser but instead have lost the package. Given the scanning history of the package, it is likely to have been misappropriated whilst in your custody – a failure to take reasonable care to avoid such misappropriation.   My Claim against Yodel I wish to claim the sum of £150.00 being the value of the goods lost by Yodel   Relevant documents I enclose copies of the following documents that are relevant to this matter: 1.    A screenshot of the eBay sale of the goods and the tracking notes.   Alternative dispute resolution I am prepared to consider ADR.   I  look forward to receiving confirmation that accept liability for these matters, together with a full settlement of my claim, within [21] days of the date of this letter, namely by [DATE].] [In the absence of a full response by that date, I will issue and serve proceedings without further notice. Yours faithfully,    
    • I didn't know I had to go to the US. Were you there recently, TOR? I'm not sure you've been to London recently either. We know some 'average Americans' and I've asked what they think about things today, as it happens.
    • The scammers were posing as young women online to trick people into sending sexually explicit material.View the full article
    • To even ask that question you clearly haven’t visited anywhere in the USA recently The cesspit that is SanFrancisco Venice beach that no one in their right mind would visit  The open drug taking, crime, zombies everywhere (reminds me of Khans London) The Texan border towns flooded with illegals (The sole responsibility of Harris) And that’s before we get onto world matters  One sniff of Harris in the White House  and China will be into Taiwan Endless tax dollars being thrown at Zelenskyy for what reason? To keep killing Ukrainians? The average American hates it  The barmy Biden/Harris rush to net zero  Perhaps as President Trump can knock that lunacy on the head worldwide 
    • Their fees can go up with different stages of enforcement. They will almost certainly have charged the creditor the first stage (compliance) of £90 including VAT. This will be added to your bill though. Then they are allowed to visit with a view to entering into an agreement with you. They may charge £190 plus VAT for this plus 7.5% of anything over the first £1000. A second visit would trigger an additional fee of £495 plus VAT. Finally, they can visit with a view to removing goods for sale. They can charge £525 plus VAT for this visit plus 7.5% of anything over the first £1000. Not sure if these figures match with anything you have. You would need to ask which fees have been added. You shouldn’t have to pay the VAT. Hopefully, it isn’t a major issue given you won’t be dealing with the bailiffs.
  • 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
      • 162 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

No CCA within 14 days


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5104 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

I have no legal training, any knowledge I have has come from this forum, and my own experiences. Always balance up any advice you get with your own common sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, there is a slight inconsistency. In the page where the letter is it states...

 

Letter used when a company fail to provide a copy of your agreement within the 12+2 working days timescale after your initial request for a copy of your agreement made under s 77/8 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

The trouble is, I have no way of telling exactly when they received it because of the bulk signing thing with recorded delivery. It doesn't show up on track and trace.

 

I guess I'll give them another couple of days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

its not 14 days since posting, its 14 working days since they received it

 

To be clear, it is 12 working days from their receipt.;)

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I'll send it today.

 

Is there a procedure to follow if the "CCA not within timescale" letter and the CCA from the creditor cross in the post, or if they turn up a few days later?

 

Is it just a case of "tough!"?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They'll send it when they like. They don't give a stuff if its late. By that point you'll have disputed the account for nothing. That's what Egg did to me.

Mozzone

_______________

Taking on the bloodsuckers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Q. Can their failure to supply a subjcet access request be used to dispute an account? or does it have to be a cca request?

 

Yes, you should also complain to the information commissioners office,

I have no legal training, any knowledge I have has come from this forum, and my own experiences. Always balance up any advice you get with your own common sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 12 +2 thing is:

 

You send the correspondence.

 

Once it's signed for, the clock starts ticking.

 

From that date, they have 12 working days (not including weekends and public holidays) to draft and send a response to your letter.

 

The +2 days is an extra two working days for their response to reach you in the post (allowing for the time taken by Royal Mail) which makes a total of 14 days from them signing for the letter and you having their response through your letterbox.

 

I hope that clears it up!

 

:)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...