Harrison vs Link Financial Limited- High Court judgment

[pt2537]

the code is commercially sensitive to the Royal mail

 

Only they can decipher it and it would need to go through their legal department, Mr Harrison had tried to get them to assist but they refused, only when they were asked during proceedings did they agree to help

 

ive said more than i should have already

[Basil Fawlty]

the code is commercially sensitive to the Royal mail

 

Only they can decipher it and it would need to go through their legal department, Mr Harrison had tried to get them to assist but they refused, only when they were asked during proceedings did they agree to help

 

ive said more than i should have already

 

Thanks pt.

 

BF

[DonkeyB]

It’s because the Post Office developed and own the code, as part of its automated video encoding system, I believe, and they don’t like to give it away freely. You’re probably talking thousands for a licence. I think the key is to put legal pressure on if there is a genuine legal issue over the date of sending.

 

There may be some third party (unofficial) reader software available. Perhaps try a Google search using ‘how do I read rm4scc code’?

[Basil Fawlty]

It’s because the Post Office developed and own the code, as part of its automated video encoding system, I believe, and they don’t like to give it away freely. You’re probably talking thousands for a licence. I think the key is to put legal pressure on if there is a genuine legal issue over the date of sending.

 

There may be some third party (unofficial) reader software available. Perhaps try a Google search using ‘how do I read rm4scc code’?

 

Thanks DonkeyB

 

BF

[smugorwhat]

Will MBNA still be prepared to sign witness statements claiming UKMail is first class when it has been demonstrated in Court that it is in fact second class? The two day guaranteed delivery they keep quoting is only to the point of handover to Royal Mail.

 

Hundreds if not thousands of consumers will be in this situation and they need something to wave at DJs all over the country.

[Basil Fawlty]

Would it be possible to simply use the Harrison case as proof that UKMail is second class mail?

 

BF

[pt2537]

no

 

because it wasn't UK mail

[pt2537]

To elaborate, MBNA said it was deffo UKMail but we had the envelope so could show the postal method was not ukmail but an inferior postal service

[smugorwhat]

So the UKMail conundrum continues, although the orange barcode would still indicate when and where it entered the Royal mail system. It seems wrong that the borrower is having to prove the delivery date when in theory the obligation lies with the lender.

[ldn_panda]

Hello there, just managed to log on for the first time since posting the query on UK Mail. Thanks vm for the responses...this is all very interesting (!).....& .something to work on. BF - sounds like you are in the same position....do you have a thread ? I'm not sure how to link you to mine - can someone advise ?Perhaps we can join forces ? As Smugorhwat points out plenty of people in the same position....

 

I do remember seeing something on the forum a while back now posted up( was reading posts by supasnopper, robcag, dizziediver,fairbyblue), which was some sort of UK Mail document that seemed to show that UKS meant 2nd.....I haven't been able to track it down.

Would the site team be able to help ? How can you try and get them involved ?

 

I was also thinking about referring to other cases, although Harrison is obviously a dead end.....are there any other cases anyone is aware of ?

 

Another point I'm trying to gain certainty on is charging off......can anyone point me in the right direction ? I'm not having much luck getting interest/responses on my thread.

 

Thanks everyone

[pt2537]

UK mails own terms and conditions set out that they do not guarantee 2 day delivery due to the reliance on the Royal mail

 

Google UKMail and you will find them

 

or look here http://www.ukmail.biz/assets/ukmail_DSA_tcsept09.pdf

[ldn_panda]

wow, this is great. deciphering codes, feel like a young un again.

 

ok, so I deciphered the barcode (courtesy of Wikipedia)....it has my postcode....followed by a delivery point suffix, followed by a checksum. So, I'm guessing it is the 3-3 digit number that follows the barcode that is the key ?!!

[pt2537]

you will need to speak to Royal mail legal department

 

i cannot say anymore sorry,

[ldn_panda]

i shall examine with a fine tooth comb. thanks for the link

[ldn_panda]

totally understand. I'll see what I can do with what I have so far. The link will, I'm sure, be helpful. Thanks vm

[ldn_panda]

pt2537 - while you are on....i will probably post up my defence tomorrow for advice. but there is a point i am struggling with and wonder if you will be able to give me some advice or point me to someone who could help....the claimant issued an invalid DN and then brought enforcement action, claimed the full amount etc. i was originally going to argue that they have no right to bring said action and by own actions and by doing so have unlawfully repudiated contract and I accept that repudiation. this was the thinking on the site a while ago, before pumpkinhead's experience, which seems to suggest the invalid DN means it was never terminated and by accepting repudiation you become liable under common law ??? (there is a lot of conflicting views ) . however, in my case they appear to have actually terminated the contract before issuing DN. Therefore I am thinking along the lines of saying they issued an invalid DN, brought enforcement they are not entitled to and having already terminated the contract, can't now reissue a DN as they can't do this unilaterally on a terminated contract. Where I am getting a bit tangled up is that there are clauses in the contract stating that they can term at any time. So how do I avoid getting into situation where the DN is disregarded and end up being liable for the full amount on that basis ? Is this clause valid/unfair given the provisions of CCA and requirement to issue DN ? Plus they didn't write to say it was terminated. I'm thinking that I could argue that this claim is invalid, but does that leave them still with the right to another claim on basis of the term prior to DN ???

[Basil Fawlty]

Hello there, just managed to log on for the first time since posting the query on UK Mail. Thanks vm for the responses...this is all very interesting (!).....& .something to work on. BF - sounds like you are in the same position....do you have a thread ? I'm not sure how to link you to mine - can someone advise ?Perhaps we can join forces ? As Smugorhwat points out plenty of people in the same position....

 

I do remember seeing something on the forum a while back now posted up( was reading posts by supasnopper, robcag, dizziediver,fairbyblue), which was some sort of UK Mail document that seemed to show that UKS meant 2nd.....I haven't been able to track it down.

Would the site team be able to help ? How can you try and get them involved ?

 

I was also thinking about referring to other cases, although Harrison is obviously a dead end.....are there any other cases anyone is aware of ?

 

Another point I'm trying to gain certainty on is charging off......can anyone point me in the right direction ? I'm not having much luck getting interest/responses on my thread.

 

Thanks everyone

 

Hi kin_panda. My thread is here:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?279652-MBNA-admit-to-having-no-CCA

 

BF

[Ricardino]

Hi kin panda et al

sorry to jump in but i have exactly the same scenario (although no termination notice issued) with full balance due on DN. They sent another one claiming my copy was from the SAR

but have proof to disprove this. Wasn''t pleaded in defence as only interested in getting back the PPI.

My thread located here,

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...BNA-v-Me/page2

 

many apologies in advance for the hijack

[smugorwhat]

Mbna are still insisting that UKmail guarantee 2 day delivery in my case. They say the terms and conds on ukmail website don't apply to them and the judge is receptive to that argument. I have managed after some argument to get a court order instructing Royal Mail to read the barcode before the trial resumes.

 

Does anyone know who the correct contact is at Royal Mail to get it deciphered?

 

Also MBNA are claiming that even if the default notice was late, it is de mimimus and furthermore they claim that they can terminate the agreement and claim their money without a default notice at all.

 

Could really use some help, it's been a long day.

Edited September 7, 2011 by smugorwhat
typos

[AndyOrch]

- MBNA county court Summons " Help Please-- Post number 1439 page 72

 

Regards

 

Andy

[smugorwhat]

The correct address for Royal Mail is:

 

Legal Services

First Floor

35-50 Rathbone Place

LONDON

W1T 1HQ

020 7441 4241

 

They will confirm that UK Mail do not deliver mail to private addresses but deliver it to Royal Mail a day or two after picking it up from MBNA etc. Royal Mail do not guarantee how long it takes to deliver it to the recipient once received from UK Mail. They can provide date of receipt by them and delivery address from the orange barcode on the envelope.

So MBNA claiming that UK Mail guarantee a two day delivery is completely false, and they know it.

[jackreacher]

Although the failures of themselves constituted redeemable breaches , the need to refer over to the T&C's whether provided or not, in order to assertain the relevant interest rates, put MBNA and thus the defendant in irredeemable breach?

 

Can you explain. Lots of people have their conditions on the rear..

 

Regards To you and a great win.

 

Jack.