Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It's the only way to proceed, he has to prove irrevocably that he gave me that information, and agreed to it, which he cannot do because it doesn't exist. Not only that, he sent me a trade sales invoice, other than that you're pretty spot on.
    • Sorry - need to put my glasses on!   I think you and the other posters have been at cross-purposes because they haven't followed what you are trying to argue.  You aren't arguing a fault etc with the car, you simply want to cancel it as a distance sale, and because the vendor did not provide the necessary cancellation information pre-contract in a durable medium, you are saying that you therefore have 12 months plus 14 days to cancel AND that the vendor has to pay the collection/recovery costs.   Although I understand that argument, I don't know if that's the best way to proceed or not.   I suspect not many people have tried to argue it with second-hand cars.  And that might be, for some reason I don't know, that it's a non-starter or it's too risky.
    • No, not all all.  It's up to them to prove you were the driver.  Well done in not telling them!   Remember in all this you are legally in the right.  Their parking fee was paid.  You're not trying to "get out" of something you owe.  They are in the wrong as far as the law goes.   So how about sending them something like -   Dear BW Legal,   cheers for your Letter Before Claim.   I don't earn owe your clients a bean, indeed your clients owe the driver of the vehicle who paid the parking fee - twice.  It is your clients' responsibility if the machines they buy second hand on eBay don't work properly because they're too tight to pay a technician to maintain them.   Your clients also gave me to no right of appeal or of paying a discount in contravention of their own industry's Code of Conduct.   You can either drop this foolishness now or your clients can get a good hiding in court, both are fine by me.  I fancy a winter holiday and I fancy financing it by an unreasonable costs order under CPR27.14(2)(g).   COPIED TO NCP   The reason i say to send to NCP too is because unscrupulous solicitors are well into their clients starting claims which are bound to lose, after all they get the £££ in any case.
    • appeal one has ref number showing other pix to screen removed please use PDF only     dx
    • Well that's an interesting question if I outted myself or not. I did send an appeal to NCP in reply to the original letter although I was late with that and after their shut off date or what ever they called it. I'd just had a hand operation. However I did not say I was the driver but perhaps by even replying to NCP I make myself the driver by default. Is that right?   after the time or not I did fire off and appeal and have the receipt for that. See attached. Some time late I got a letter from Trace then it seems I was bounced over to BW.   I never herd back from NPC regarding my appeal. Total radio silence. Then came the Trace letters and then BW   I did send a bit of snot over to NCP. As I was using this car park on a daily basis for some months I did capture on day the pic with the masking tape on it just by chance.   Apart from that I was using the NCP payment app which did or did not work depending on the day. Talk about bugware!   I do have some 4 months of payment history within the app.   so my point is that these machines do go wrong from time to time. I did not put the tape on there but someone did! bank card only.pdf
  • Our picks

    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 4 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .
    • In desperate need of help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/425244-in-desperate-need-of-help/&do=findComment&comment=5067040
      • 29 replies

Why the belief that the ORIGINAL Agreement Needed in Court?


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3670 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

Apologies that this is going over ground that was covered a couple of years ago and is the subject of a sticky - mods please feel free to move/delete if you feel appropriate but.........

 

I've noticed that in almost every thread I read, regarding copies of agreements etc, that people continuously state that the claimant (OC / DCA etc) would HAVE to produce the ORIGINAL agreement in court if there were to obtain Judgment.

 

I may well be missing something, but my understanding is that this is not strictly true. This topic is the subject of a sticky in this forum, but I fear that many members have not read that thread and so continue to, totally unintentionally, give somewhat misleading advice to other members.

 

My understanding is that S8 Civil Evidence Act 1995 allows that copies of documents can be produced in proceedings and can be accepted as proof, so long as the court is satisfied as to their authenticity.

 

Civil Evidence Act 1995

8.— Proof of statements contained in documents.

(1) Where a statement contained in a document is admissible as evidence in civil proceedings, it may be proved—

(a) by the production of that document, or

(b) whether or not that document is still in existence, by the production of a copy of that document or of the material part of it,

authenticated in such manner as the court may approve.

(2) It is immaterial for this purpose how many removes there are between a copy and the original.

 

This topic is dealt with in far more detail in the sticky linked to below:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?162535-Documents-in-Court-Civil-Evidence-Act-1995

 

Now I can understand a claim that a COPY OF THE ORIGINAL must be produced in court - simply because it makes sense to my (somewhat simplistic!) mind that unless it is a copy of the original, the claimant is unable to prove what the alleged debtor actually signed and agreed to. But the actual, physical, original agreement? I feel not.

 

Unless I'm drastically mistaken and something has drastically changed, I feel that instead of advising people that originals are needed in court which, I feel is incorrect, we would be better placed by advising that copied may suffice and then going about devising a "plan B" in line with each individual situation, whereby the authenticity of copied could be challenged if the worst case scenario prevails and an alleged debtor ends up in court on the basis of copy documents.

 

Any thoughts would be readily welcomed.

 

All the best.

Cheers.

UF

I am rarely around these parts any more. I only stop by when something has come to my attention that has sufficiently annoyed me so as to persuade me to awake from my nap and put in my two pence.

 

I am a final year law student; I am NOT an expert in law. All of my posts are just my opinion. I cannot be held responsible for any outcome whatsoever resulting from any person following the opinions or information contained within my posts. Always seek professional legal advice from a qualified lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jason King

I think the last post of the thread you included answers your question.

 

Also, I believe something along the lines of if an agreement has been varied then the lender must produce the original in court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unitedfront,

 

Judge Waksman answers most of these questions, in Carey v HSBC (2009), in a nutshell, it's 'Subtance over form'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jason, thanks for the reply. Unfortunately that post does not answer the question, or the issue. The post to which you refer, is talking about reconstructed agreements, as per the Manchester Test Cases.... whereas I am talking about a direct copy of the agreement, such as a photocopy etc.

 

In the instance where the original document is no longer in existence, but the claimant (OC / DCA etc) wishes to pursue through the courts are are in possession of a direct copy and can satisfy a DJ as to the authenticity of that copy, then in my view (and, it appears, in the view of the OP of the thread to which I linked) that could be ruled as admissible evidence...

 

Cheers

UF

I am rarely around these parts any more. I only stop by when something has come to my attention that has sufficiently annoyed me so as to persuade me to awake from my nap and put in my two pence.

 

I am a final year law student; I am NOT an expert in law. All of my posts are just my opinion. I cannot be held responsible for any outcome whatsoever resulting from any person following the opinions or information contained within my posts. Always seek professional legal advice from a qualified lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

rebel... that's my point in its entirety, really:

 

Given that it is substance over form, then why are we saying, so frequently, that only the original will do?? Surely, if it is substance over form that is important then a photocopy of the original will suffice? This appears clear to me, keeping in mind the Civil Evidence Act, as quoted?

 

Cheers

UF

I am rarely around these parts any more. I only stop by when something has come to my attention that has sufficiently annoyed me so as to persuade me to awake from my nap and put in my two pence.

 

I am a final year law student; I am NOT an expert in law. All of my posts are just my opinion. I cannot be held responsible for any outcome whatsoever resulting from any person following the opinions or information contained within my posts. Always seek professional legal advice from a qualified lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, we do need to distinguish at least a little bit between the Manchester Test Cases and this discussion... simply because I am not talking about reconstructed agreements, I am talking about direct copies....

I am rarely around these parts any more. I only stop by when something has come to my attention that has sufficiently annoyed me so as to persuade me to awake from my nap and put in my two pence.

 

I am a final year law student; I am NOT an expert in law. All of my posts are just my opinion. I cannot be held responsible for any outcome whatsoever resulting from any person following the opinions or information contained within my posts. Always seek professional legal advice from a qualified lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...