Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I will revert back if i get paid the £321.00 
    • so from august 2019 till june 2020, when harvey's went bang, you did nothing to chase this up? then you wrote your first letter to creation, the finance company?   sorry i must say this story is getting mighty confusing..for want of a different word.    so how did this ultimately end in benson's getting involved?
    • I called the hermes help desk to see if they had done anymore to locate my rather large parcel, this was after submitting the online claim form. He told me they there was no chance of it being found.   I asked  if i am covered, he spoke to the claims department and came back and confirmed it was covered including the shipping cost of £21.00 so £321 would be paid back.    Nothing formal from the claim team in writing so far.        
    • It was The repair team that do work for Harvey’s. They had to come out three times in the space of four months. After the last visit in august 2019 Harvey’s contacted us to say they would replace the sofas
    • If you can spend some time reading around the threads here as I've already suggested, you will understand what we have to say about the so-called insurance cover and how it is unfair and unenforceable. Please familiarise yourself with this. Have they actually agreed to pay out on the insured value? Not only should you have the value of your lost items that you should also have the cost of the delivery as well as the insurance back. They don't care about losing a lot of business. They've got a huge amount of business and although they are the most complained about courier company in the country, I expect that 98% of their deliveries are successful. Of course when you talk about the remaining 2% of millions – it still ends up with a lot of loss parcels. The really disgusting thing is how Hermes then deny liability and try to force people to accept their losses. Most people give up but people who come here normally get their money back – but in your case afraid it does depend on the correct declared value
  • Our picks

Help please letter from Cobbetts


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 5188 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

Hi All

I have recently responded to Cobbetts and the courts with Allocation Questionnaire and letter against there defence. Have recived today I quote

 

'We note your comments on our request for Further information. It is our clients contention that your particulars of claim did not particularise your claim. For example, our client cannot properly defend a claim where you have not given the details of each charge you claimis disproportiante and unreasonable.

 

The court is bound by an overriding objective to deal with cases justly and ensure thast parties an equal footing. It was clearly the case that our client could not respond to your claim where you did not provide sufficent particulars. Our client therefore objects to your allegation that the Request is intimidating'

 

What exactly does this mean, I believe I have followed the protocol as per this site and now concerned it may fall apart at thie last hurdle.

 

:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi

 

i used this ( taken from posts on the forum)

 

hope it helps

 

 

 

 

Name xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Address xxxxxxxxx

Address xxx

County xxx

Post code

Cobbetts LLP

Ship canal House date xxxxxxxx2006

King Street

Manchester

M2 4WB

Your Ref: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Particulars of claim

 

 

 

Dear Sir or Madam: IN THE NORTHHAMTON COURT

Claim No: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Account Name: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Account number: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Sort Code: xxxxxxxxxx

I acknowledge the receipt of the defence posted on behalf of National Westminster Bank plc.

 

1. The Claimant has an account ("the Account") with the Defendant which was opened on or around xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

2. During the period in which the Account has been operating the Defendant debited numerous charges to the Account in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant and also charged interest on the charges once applied. The Claimant understands that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant.

 

3. A list of the charges applied is attached to these particulars of claim.

 

4. The Claimant contends that:

 

a) The charges debited to the Account are punitive in nature; are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant; exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and are not intended to represent or related to any alleged actual loss, but instead unduly enrich the Defendant which exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges with a view to profit.

 

b) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999), the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the common law.

 

5. Accordingly the Claimant claims:

 

a) the return of the amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £xxxxxx and £ xxxxxx interest.

 

c) Court costs £xxxxxxx

 

d) Interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act as set out on the attached list of charges or at such rate and for such periods as the court deems just.

I am not prepared at this stage to answer the CPR Part 18 Request. I anticipate that the claim will be allocated to the small claims track and would not then expect to have to deal with a Part 18 request since these are specifically excluded under Part 27 unless the court specifically orders me to do so of its own initiative

 

I believe that the contents of these particulars of claim are true

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...