Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • that was a good saving on an £8k debt dx
    • Find out how the UK general elections works, how to register to vote, and what to do on voting day.View the full article
    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
    • Seeking further advice now. The 33 days in which the defendant has to submit a defence expires at 16:00 tomorrow. The defendant has submitted an acknowledgement of service but looking to get the claim awarded by default in failure to submit the defence. This is MoneyClaim Online and can see an option to request a default judgement but believe that is for failure to acknowledge the claim within 14 days??  So being MoneyClaim Online, how do I request the claim be awarded in my favour?
    • Have to agree with the above Health and safety legislation is specific in that the service provider in so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees and those not in the employ of the business. You claim is like saying you slipped in the swimming pool area while taking a dip. As rightly stated by by the leisure centre, a sports hall has dedicated equipment and you yourself personally have a legal obligation in mitigating danger or injury to yourself by taking account of your immediate surroundings. Where your claim will fail is if it is reasonable and proportionate to impose liability of the Leisure Centre? The answer has to be no.
  • 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
      • 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

Car Written Off - Hasting Offer - Looking For Advice


elldickson
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4226 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 Recently I was involved in a non-fault accident.

 

The damage was minimal with the car (x Reg year 2000). The bumper was slightly damanged and the head light was damaged. Hasting sent out a surveyor who reccommended the car was written off valuing the car at £700 and estimating the repair work was £900+ therefore it would not be an economical repair. As such Hastings has offered me £700 for the car. I think the car is worth £1000. I also believe the surveyor did not survey the car correctly as he had a quick look at the bumbper and light but not the rest of the car.

 

The car is a sound car and has been for many years and I dont think I will get as reliable a car again for the £700 However I have been to my local garage and they have had a look and in total they say the repair costs would be £550. So it would save Hastings / the other insurance £150 from what they are offering me.

 

However when I contacted Hastings saying I would settle for £550 for repairs Hastings replied that they would need to see a quote. The local garage I deal with (run by an old guy who is 100% trust worthy and never done us wrong) dont do quotes like Hastings require with letter headed paper etc. So here is me trying to save my car and save Hastings a bit of money and they are not interested. Bearing in mind the other insurance has already accepted liability.

 

So as the innocent party I will be out of packet trying to get a replacement car and in terms of the time I have spent on dealing with this.

 

It has left me with a few options:

 

1 - Try and get another garage to do a quote on headed paper - This is more time and effort on by behalf which I have already wasted to try and get the car to another garage that I trust

 

2 - Try and push for the £1000 I want for the car to be written off

 

3 - Accept the £700 offered by Hastings

 

4 - try and get hastings to pay £550 for the repairs without a quote

 

I would prefer options 2 or 4.

 

My question to the forum is what are your views on this, am I right to push for options 2 and 4?

 

When the accident first happened I got a call from the other insurance company (Tesco Insurance) saying they would pay for the car to get fixed etc if I let them handle it, but I rejected this on the advice from Hastings however I am now thinking about contacting the other insurance company to get their view on this and their view on Hastings paying out more than they have to and to see if the other Insurance company will pick the repair bill up. Does anybody think this is a valid route to take and investigate?

 

All advice is appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You would probably be better off dealing with Tesco Insurance if they have accepted liability for the accident and will pay for the repair. Tesco may want the car inspected and they may also write it off, rather than repair. But if you go through Tesco, it may be easier, as there is then no excess to worrry about. Any claim under your own Insurance, will mean the excess is levied and you will then have to claim back from Tesco.

 

Check the cars value on glass.co.uk ( it costs about £4 to get the value) and negotiate with whichever Insurers

 

Try Tesco and explain the situation to them to see how they can help.

 

Sometimes what some people do in this situation, is to accept the write off value, but to ask to pay to keep the salvage. Then out of the write off money, they get the car repaired themselves. It does obviously depend on the salvage value.

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

If you deal with Tesco, you can also send them details of your out of pocket expenses for them to consider and pay. I think I would try this route and see if is better. If you are happy with Tesco. just keep Hastings informed of what you are doing.

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

Thanks Unclebulgaria I asked about buying the car back at the scrap value and was told that Hastings dont allow that and I couldnt do it, if they did that would definatley be an option I would of considered. I think I will give Tesco a shout to see what they say as they may be more accomodating than Hastings since I will be saving them money.

 

Jamie - unless you / Hasting want to agree to one of my settlement options I am not sure there is much you can do, but I will be in touch if things get much worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jamie - I have dropped you an e-mail, it has now been 4 weeks since my non fault accident and Hastings are not giving me updates when I call and are simply not acting in my interests. I have now been without a car for 4 weeks and I am having to rely on friends and work colleagues to get me to work etc. If you could read my e-mail and get back to me ASAP.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...