Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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
      • 160 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

please help - don't know which way to turn


nickt1976
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4741 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

this is a very long story will provide more if needed, the problem is an accusation of theft [totally untrue], pictures being posted on the police website [ asking anyone to identify them] and the local paper putting the pictures on the front page [for identification], without the police even viewing the tape as the store won't release them [the tape] now 2 months later. this is complicated and getting more day by day any help much appreciated and more info if you can help

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you been arrested?

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

no not been arrested at all or cautioned nothing.I'll try and get as much info in a short space. was allerted by txt and phone that my mum 65yr old and I were in the local paper, front page along with others with the headline WANTED. After work went into Police station Police knew nothing about it. We contacted the store they said the police put it on there website it had nothing to do with them,we contacted police who said an accusation had been made by the store [makes sense]. the police said they would view tape [should they have done this before it went on the website] and get back to us. They got back approx 4 days later with the store said it's partly there fault, teller got distracted, partly ours we left without paying,if we pay the £36 they'd forget everything. We would not have left without paying NEVER we went to the fag/lottery counter after shopping, 4 days later we went shopping in the same store and a few days after that.The alleged incident happened on 23/12/2010 it was in the paper on 30/12/2010. Mum rang police everyday they eventually rang back about 6 days later saying they had viewed the tape and that it looked as though this had happened mum was really upset and I was too, police said let me have another look [you either have or haven't seen something] now today mum rang police, as she has everyday and they have said on the file it says that they haven't viewed the tape as the store has not been forthcoming with the tape. If you can help with advise or make anything of this please do Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically, you've been accused by the store of shoplifting/not paying, in the meantime the store have provided footage to the police who have put your and your mums pictures on their website and the pictures have also appeared in the local papers. Thats outragerous. Is this what you are saying?

Link to post
Share on other sites

you've been accused by the store of shoplifting/not paying- [YES] in the meantime the store have provided footage to the police-[NO JUST THE IMAGES WE HAVE LEARNED TODAY AS THE POLICE HAVE NOT VIEWED THE CCTV FOOTAGE] who have put your and your mums pictures on their website[YES] and the pictures have also appeared in the local papers [YES THEY GOT THEM OFF THE POLICE WEBSITE AND PUT THEM IN THE PAPER] hope this helps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see quite a few issues here, I've not known of any situations where suspected theft/non payment has resulted in the publicity of the people concerned.

You should complain to the police,retailer and newspaper all in writing. Send them Recorded.

 

http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrights/privacy/privacy-and-the-media.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

an update to this story

 

From the last time I posted 28th January a lot has happend.

 

The police had said they'd viewed the tape then hadn't and so on, I sent a SAR off to the Police from their website and the 40 days were up on the 19th March, nothing back only a letter saying we couldn't view the tape as it was still under investigation.

 

With all the pressure my sister lost her baby at 29 weeks after a visit from the Police, but thats another story.

 

The Police came today with the tape which my mother viewed, it showed absolutely nothing, the Police have dropped the case and it's nothing to do with them and it's official, no crime was committed.

 

I am now ready to sue the supermarket and anyone else.

 

Can anyone please give me any advise please

 

thank you

 

nick

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...