Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Actually there wasn't a massive amount of work to do on the WS.  The "meat" was there because of the great work you'd already done. Here is a version which I think is nigh-on finished. However, with Easter there are a few days for the other regulars to suggest tweaks. Defendant WS.pdf
    • Hi all, We bought a part to fix our washing machine approx 13 months ago direct from the manufacturer of the washing machine via phone. This part then failed 13 months later, as confirmed by their own engineer, who was sent by the manufacturer (who is also the retailer for the part) FoC. The engineer actually installed a replacement part, the machine came back to life, but they then removed the part used for testing (and ours reinstalled) as "we would be charged for it". The retailer are refusing to replace the part, stating that they only warranty parts for 90 days. When I stated that I believed the Consumer Rights Act gives me longer than that, they insinuated that it did not, and this was repeated by many representatives. AIUI for goods bought more than 6 months ago, I need to get an engineers report to confirm the part has failed? Or that it has failed due to manufacturing issues? Or would the companies own engineers report suffice? Also, does anyone have any other decent contact details for Hotpoint (or the Whirlpool group)? Thanks, GH
    • Thank you for that "read me", It's a lot to digest, lots of legal procedure. There was one thing that I was going to mention to you,  but in one of the conversations in that thread it was mentioned that there may be spies on the Forum,  this is something that I've read quite some time ago in a previous thread. What I had in mind was to wait for the thirty days after their reply to my CCA request and then send the unenforceable letter. I was hoping that an absence of signature could be the Silver Bullet but it seems that there are lot of layers to peel on this Onion.  
    • 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.
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3015 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 162
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I don't think this company would get away with it going to court is risky for them as the computer could have been infected. also they may get sued themselves i hope you get this sorted out i think its hard to prove it was you even if it was

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was tempting ;) but on a serious note, is it true that you can't put paragraphs in until reaching x-amount of posts? Or not.

 

if your post comes up without the spaces etc you put

and it was a copy n paste jobbie from what you have typed in another window [whatever the program]

 

then hit the coloured AAA icon top left of any msg box

and re paste it.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think this company would get away with it going to court is risky for them as the computer could have been infected. also they may get sued themselves i hope you get this sorted out i think its hard to prove it was you even if it was

 

 

and anyone with a BT hub has free Wi-Fi from it too!!

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think this company would get away with it going to court is risky for them as the computer could have been infected. also they may get sued themselves i hope you get this sorted out i think its hard to prove it was you even if it was
They're relying on people incriminating themselves. In fact I doubt that they will bother with those who ignore their letter of claim but best to have everything covered and put them on the back foot from the start.

 

What I do find interesting, In the ACS [problem] at least we had the opportunity to report Crossley's activities to the regulatory bodies who got him struck off as a solicitor for 2 years. This latest [problem] is being operated privately so no one to complain to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

rhino666 - I have just sent you a private message - would you please have a look and respond :)

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

They're relying on people incriminating themselves. In fact I doubt that they will bother with those who ignore their letter of claim but best to have everything covered and put them on the back foot from the start.

 

What I do find interesting, In the ACS [problem] at least we had the opportunity to report Crossley's activities to the regulatory bodies who got him struck off as a solicitor for 2 years. This latest [problem] is being operated privately so no one to complain to.

 

Good one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think in these situations, you would wise not to get into correspondence 'ping pong'. Otherwise the risk is that they will pick on you to take to court. If you have evidence that can be used to totally refute their allegations, then that would be a totally different matter. Without such evidence, I cannot see the point in replying.

 

They will pick on a few people at some stage to take to court. I think this is what has happened before, when the accusation was that the letters were just part of a speculative invoice process.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I refuse without prejudice letters ?

 

Why would you want to. They don't count in regard to any court process, so it is as if they never existed. Therefore even better reason to ignore them. You have already written to them to dispute their original allegation. I would leave it at that.

 

As advised earlier, I suspect that they will pick on people who engage in letter ping pong with them.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

ignore them

 

why are you even giving tem the time of day.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem I have here is that supplying this info can only be done if the matter is taken to court because it would involve tell GEIL where I was and which which hospital patients I was attending away from hospital premises.

 

You don't have to tell GEIl anything. If you want to respond, you could just say that as a Healthcare professional, you have a legal duty to maintain patient confidentiality and would be able to supply a Judge in confidence of evidence that showed that you were not at home, at the time of the alleged download of copyrighted materials.

 

In any court hearing, you would be able to show a Judge the information for their satisfaction and the claimant would not get to see it.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have funding arrangements with the other companies yet they're complaining about a film that isn't even there's when a judge has said they can only take people to court for their own films. So how is this even possible to get this far.

 

In July 2012, the High Court ruled that Golden Eye would only be granted access to data in relation to Ben Dover Production films, not the titles by twelve other production companies that Golden Eye were acting on behalf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing how £350 can make it all go away:lol:

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

att unapproved

 

at least page 3 shown all your details & login.

 

.........

 

who said you've got to pay these fleecers?

 

end of letter tennis

 

you've sent one letter

 

that's enough.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally would not respond. The letters look like templates with one or two customised paragraphs. There is not much point playing letter tennis and I think the risk of them actually issuing court proceedings is low.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

no

no views I checked you are safe

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't worry about their letter, it's designed to frighten you into giving away your hard earned - unfortunetly many will and the reason they continue this profitable [problem].

 

I see that they have made reference to YOU doing the uploads. What proof other than some IP logs have they got to identify it was actually YOU - none whatsoever! They have your letter of denial and despite your request they have failed to provide anything in support of their contention that it was YOU. If they're stupid enough to even try it on they will need to produce all the evidence - and I don't think because you're the bill payer so therefore it must be you will cut the mustard with any judge.

 

They know the score so no need to waste anymore time on them. If you still feel the need that you have to respond I'd go with something along the lines of:

 

Dear Sirs

 

I write further to your letter dated ............ I note that you have not provided any further evidence to support your allegations of Copyright Infringement, and have merely reasserted the allegations of your initial Letter of Claim dated ............

 

I refer you to my letter dated ............. in which I denied ANY offence under Sections 16(1)(d) and 20 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Once again, I vehemently deny committing any offence under the aforementioned Act, or authorising any person to commit any such offence.

 

I feel it prudent to advise you that your continuing threat of court action in this matter is tantamount to harassment, and I reserve the right to address this matter through any means available to me. I put you on notice that I have shared my concerns regarding your procedures with all relavent authorities.

 

Please note that should this matter proceed to Court, I will be seeking to fully recover any and all costs to the maximum permitted by the Civil Procedure Rules.

 

The signature of the undersigned confirms the statement provided to be accurate and legally binding under the terms required by pre-action protocol in Civil Law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...