Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes that looks fine. It is to the point. I think somewhere in the that the you might want to point out that your parcel had been delivered but clearly had been opened and resealed and the contents had been stolen
    • Hi All, I just got in from work and received a letter dated 24 April 2024. "We've sent you a Single Justice Procedure notice because you have been charged with an offence, on the Transport for London Network." "You need to tell us whether you are guilty or not guilty. This is called making your plea."
    • Okay please go through the disclosure very carefully. I suggest that you use the technique broadly in line with the advice we give on preparing your court bundle. You want to know what is there – but also very importantly you want to know what is not there. For instance, the email that they said they sent you before responding to the SAR – did you see that? Is there any trace of of the phone call that you made to the woman who didn't know anything about SAR's? On what basis was the £50 sent to you? Was it unilateral or did they offer it and you accepted it on some condition? When did they send you this £50 cheque? Have you banked it? Also, I think that we need to start understanding what you have lost here. Have you lost any money – and if so how much? Send the SAR to your bank as advised above
    • In anticipation of lodging my court claim next Weds 1 May (14 days after advising P2G that was my deadline for them to settle my claim) I have completed my first draft POC as below: Claim Claim number: xxxxx Reference: P2G MAY 2024   Claimant xxxxx   Defendant Parcel2Go 1A Parklands Lostock Bolton BL6 4SD  Particulars of Claim The defendant has failed to arrange for the safe delivery of the claimant's parcel containing a 8 secondhand golf clubs (valued at £265) that was sent to a UK address using their delivery service (P2G Reference xxxxx). The defendant contracted Evri to deliver the parcel (Evri Reference xxxxx) and refuses to reimburse the claimant on the grounds that the claimant did not purchase their secondary insurance contract. The defendant seeks to exclude their liability in breach of section 57 Consumer Rights Act. The secondary insurance contract is in breach of section 72. The claimant seeks reimbursement of £265, plus P2G fees of £9.10, plus postage costs for two first class letters to P2G of £2.70, plus court fees, plus interest. The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from xxxxx to xxxxxx on £276.80 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxxx   Details of claim Amount claimed £276.80 I look forward to your thoughts and comments guys! As ever, many thanks - G59    
    • Hmm, that's strange how they got my email then.  I assume the below is ok to send to DCBL, Nicky?  Hello, I am writing regarding our ongoing dispute and the upcoming court claim reference xxxxxxxx. To ensure fairness and transparency in our communications leading up to the court hearing, I request that you use postal mail exclusively for all further correspondence related to this claim. Please refrain from sending any communication or documents via email. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation. If you have any questions or need clarification, please feel free to contact me via postal mail at the address provided above. Yours sincerely, xxxx
  • 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

Brandon Case


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3971 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

  • Replies 266
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Nooooo.....I think it sounds promising myself! This is an appeal. There is obviously some flaws in the last judgement if it has to be thought about in depth this time. If Brandon had no chance of winning the appeal then I feel the judge would have made his judgement yesterday IMO.

SB

 

Thats not always the case, trials may be complex or the sheer number of submissions by both sides render the time alloted not enough for the judge to make the decision, both arguments have been put forward but he/she may still need to read the relevant documents or look at the quoted case law in depth and so they will usually reserve the judgement for a number of months before letting both side know the outcome. Some you win, some you lose

 

Fingers crossed for Mr B

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this case about unenforceability, or default notices, or something else?

 

BF

 

for reference, this was the brandon case that was the subject of the appeal hearing on 12/7.

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]28909[/ATTACH]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I note that in clause 48 the judge is presumably directly refering to the Durkin case and states his treatment was "Clearly outrageous". Hopefully this will be reflected when it is presented to the Supreme court shortly

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

COURT 8

Before LORD JUSTICE PILL

LORD JUSTICE GROSS and

SIR RICHARD BUXTON

Tuesday, 25 October, 2011

Not Before half-past 11

FOR JUDGMENT

APPEAL

From County Courts

FINAL DECISIONS

B2/2010/1463 Ian Karl Robert Brandon -v- American Express Services Europe Ltd. Appeal of Defendant from the order of His Honour Judge Roderick Denyer QC, dated 25th May 2010, filed 15th June 2010.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes good luck i am sure he will need it , the judges may look at it and think this one is trying to rock our comfortable boat , but lets hope not and the judges have a sense of justice and decide it is time the ****** banks had a good kik up the backside once and for all

patrickq1

Link to post
Share on other sites

he seems a young judge so that is a good sign

 

 

 

His Hon Judge Denyer, QC's Biography

 

Forename(s) Roderick Lawrence Sex Male Decorations QC (1990) Date of Birth 1/3/1948

Surname DENYER Style His Hon Judge Denyer, QC Recreations cricket, 1960s pop music

 

His Hon Judge Denyer, QC's Professional Career

 

Career called to the Bar Inner Temple 1970 (bencher 1996); lectr in law Univ of Bristol 1971-73, practising barr 1973-2002, former head of chambers, recorder of the Crown Court 1990-2002, circuit judge (Wales & Chester Circuit) 2002- His Hon Judge Denyer, QC's Publicationsand Publications

 

Personal Injury Litigation and Children (1993, 2 edn 2002), various pubns in legal jls

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I do so hope we'll be smiling tomorrow!May the Gods be with you Mr Brandon.

Notwithstanding the fact that I sometimes ramble and I'm such a worrier, all postings are made with the best intent and entirely without prejudice.

You are welcome to use any information you may find here entirely at your own risk. Please do not hold it against me! :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

I must confess, after reading the judgement, I have no idea of the implications, other than that errors in service of a default notice are not minor and cannot be overlooked. I am guessing that after failing to serve a DN correctly, the lender cannot then go on to terminate the account.

 

It doesn't seem to have been argued that a contractual right to terminate undermines the CCA and is incompatible with the protection to the consumer it seeks to give.

 

It can be seen though., that AMEXs attitude was that errors in DNs don't matter because we can terminate any way we like.

 

It would seem that Mr Brandon is still liable for the debt as their illegal termination doesn't seem to ended their right to collect it.

 

I am puzzled though as to Amex counsel claiming that the agreement continued and it was only the card itself that was terminated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...