Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • no that is not a defence. because you don't have a photo
    • I purchased the vehicle using finance through motonovo under a HP 60 months agreement. I have now amended the document ensuring all is in black. Unfortunately, this email has now been sent. However, I have not sent a letter to big motoring world. Also, I have taken the section of the firealarm issue. I am struggling to convert to PDF. I am not tech savy at all. My mistake was that the the salesman was very fussy on a sale. We went down a quiet road for a little test drive and not for a lengthy road test. The water issue was not present at this moment of time. However, it only became prevalent after driving away, after all docs signed. I did stated to Audi I wanted a diagnostic report. However, they carried out an Audicam which is footage of the issue. Audi have diagnosed the issue as a common issue where coupes/cabriolets accumulate water in the seals. However, I did state beforehand for no issue to be rectified due to me wanting to reject the vehicle. I am awaiting a report from Audi through email from the branch manager in relation to the issue. The issue so far is the water still being present in the sills. Audi tried to fix the issue however the problem is still prevalent. Regards 
    • First begging letter received from Overdales   ;Blah blah blah, our client's are going to win this blah blah blah we supplied all your documents under CPR   PS you can stop all this by paying £1200 less in a lump sum
    • Right,  so the court hasn't send out the Directions Questionnaires/N180s yet. PE's one is a false one, meant to intimidate you into thinking your defence was rubbish and they are confident with their claim. This is par for the course.  The PPCs do this regularly. However, PE have gone further and written that "a copy has also been filed with the court" which is a lie as the court haven't even sent out the papers yet. Keep a screenshot of MCOL, later on in your WS you can draw attention to their lying and abuse of court procedure. If you've got time on your hands, then complain to the BPA about one of their members lying.    
  • 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
      • 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

Barclays claim Won!!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6457 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 All,

I just wanted to let you guys know I won my case against Barclays and once I receive my bucks I'll be sending over my % to keep this place going and to thank everyone for the help you've shown.

HOWEVER!!!!!!!

I received the following letter today from Barclays and need a little help on it:

 

I am writing to you in connection with the default judgment which came to the attention of the bank's litigation team today.

I believe that you have issued a claim in the *** court and in the absence of the defence, obtained a default judgment on 02nd October 2006 for £***

 

Notwithstanding the fact that we had not filled a defence within the prescribed time, we are still entitled to make an application to the court for the default judgment to be set aside. However, I am conscious of the time involved for all concerned, i.e. for you to attend a court hearing and the cost of pursuing the matter further. I, therefore, propose to offer to settle your claim in full. However, I would be obliged if you will agree to :-

1. The Sum of £*** is paid by us in full and final settlement of your claim entitled *****

2. There be a stay of execution pending payment;

3. That upon receiving payment you write to the court stating that you have withdrawn your claim pursuant to a settlement between the parties;

4. That you consent to the default judgment being set aside

 

The sum of £*** will be credited direct to your Barclays account; I trust that you understand that we have reached this agreement to avoid the time involved in making a application to the court to have the judgment set aside. It, therefore, does not imply any acceptance of liability on the banks part.

 

I enclose a draft consent order setting aside the default judgment. Please sign and return this to me and I will arrange for it to be filled at court after your account has been credited. You will see that it makes reference to us filling a defance to your claim within 14 days. This will not be necessary as we intend to pay you in full, but nevertheless needs to be mentioned in the order

 

Regards

Now, the order states:

1. The default judgment entered on 2nd October 2006 be set aside forthwith;

2. The defendant to serve a defence within 14 days as from the date of this order;

3. There be no order as to costs.

My question is should I sign this order?

Cheers in advance for your help on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is mention of this move in another thread. You should sign it because you are getting all monies that you are seeking. It is said that if they apply to get the ruling set aside, they will succeed. What happens then is that after the set-aside, you will have to wait for more time so that the court sets yet another date for a hearing.

 

But I just read it again. In the tail-end of your posting they mention in 3.There be no order as to costs. In the settlement figure, are all your court costs covered?

 

Enjoy and Congratulations.

To follow my case progress, click here to see where I'm at right now.

 

Welshman

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...