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 
        • 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

where do i stand on this


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4439 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

Hi everyone ,just after some advice really concerning my landlord ,guinness trust . we have lived quite happily in our association house for 20 yrs without any problems untill recently . my 19 year old son is a mechanic and like most boys likes to tinker with his car and occasionally does repairs on ours ,nothing major just changing brake pads ect , now twice in as many months a woman from our local office (5 miles away) has apparently just happened to drive past and seen him repairing his /our car ,1st time she told us would let it go as we are not allowed to do repairs on our driveway and if caught again then matter would go further , but we desperately needed our break pads changing last friday so son on his day off changed them and this lady again was just driving past and caught him doing this ,had a right go at my son and said final warning was being sent by letter over wkend .Now im not sure of my rights here ,are we allowed to do minor repairs to our cars on our driveway that is next to our house or is she right that we cant , we have always had a car and always done any repairs needed without any problem at all ,now this woman has been at this office for about 9-12 months and is very pally with our neighbour who is a bit nosy and caused no end of problems on our street in the 4 yrs she has lived here,got a feeling as soon as toolbox comes out she rings her up and thats why she catches us but cant be certain that is the case , any input would gladly be appreciated on this as ive no idea whos right .

Link to post
Share on other sites

My comments only apply if the premises are entirely within England.

 

Only a Court can decide what the legal effect of your tenancy agreement is.

 

 

Will you please provide the essential information requested in the "sticky" thread Questions for new posters.

 

 

If you have a Housing Association tenancy granted in the 1990's, chances are it is an Assured tenancy, granted under the 1988 Housing Act. Such a tenancy can only be terminated if you break one of the terms and conditions set out in the tenancy contract.

 

You will need legal advice in order to understand the meaning of the contract document, so take it to the Citizens Advice Bureau or to a Solicitor.

 

The landlord can't just evict you. It must first obtain a Court order, so it will have to prove to the satisfaction of a judge that you are actually in breach of the contract. For example, if the contract simply bans you from running a business at the property, this would NOT be broken if you are simply repairing your own car.

 

If the contract bans you from causing a nuisance or annoyance to your neighbours, you will need to see a Solicitor to discuss in detail what the legal phrase 'nuisance or annoyance' means. It can be almost anything, if it has an impact on the visual amenity of the street. In a run-down neighbourhood, it will take something quite bad to become an annoyance; but in a smart, posh neighbourhood even something quite trivial might amount to an annoyance.

 

The court will not evict you lightly; so you might get away with it if the judge looks on the breach as purely trivial, unless you repeat the breach on a number of occasions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...