Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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

Another Hastings total loss problem


beela.1
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4100 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

i am in the same boat i have been with hasting since 2010 never claimed or had any problems untill january the 12/1/13. i reported a claim as my mini one 1.4 had broke down on me. it took the insurance company one wek to collect my car due to the snow and yet when they did collect it, it took them over 2weeks to decide what is wrong with it.

i purchased my 57 plate mini 1.4 in black for £8,000 in 2010 and its mileage was 16,666 the current mileage was only approx 49,000 the insurance company stated that i it will be atotal write off as my water pipe has been leaking for so long that the oil leeked out that this caused the engien to seize, this could not of be aproblem from awhile ago as my partner serviced it and had it mot and it passed, i am annoyed as i have been cjasing them up non-stop as i have not been hearing from any body or been contact in regards to what is happeining with my car in total i have spend £350 in phone calls on my contact phone bill and also £567.00 in getting taxi's as i was promised a courtesy but never got one, in the end i took out a rental on 14/2/13 which cost an additional out of my own pocket £700.00 for the month, its been nearly 3months for my claim goin through and i wanted to buy my car back but the insurance company was not having it and said they will be selling it in auction. i have not received a pay out and they value my car only at £5,800 and estimate repair cost at £5,200, i am totally offended as they valued the vehicle at £400 after repairs and don't forget they take out £195 for there excess charge and i loose my 4years no claim bonus dispite i did not hit anyone my car just broke down on me, i have not been refunded any money apart from being given a £50 cheque as i put in aformal complaint which i found disappointing, we pay insurance for a reason but its all acon and a money scandal to them , i am phyiscally am struggling to eat and go work and it is disppointing dispite i have argued about my value of my vehicle they managed to agree at £6300. it is disppointing as it was esitamated at £6950, and i am disappointed they will not agree in me buying my car back but yet have the cheek in taking it to auction and getting more for there money back when i have loss out in all the way around. if i was going to buy a like for like car i would phyiscally have to fork out the money from my own pocket again which is not acceptable

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi beela.1, Thank you for taking the time to post about your experience. I am sorry to hear you are unhappy and I would like to help you get this matter resolved. Can you please contact me directly at [email protected] with your policy details and I will make sure that this is followed up for you and resolved. Many Thanks, Jamie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Beela,

 

Sorry to hear about your situation seems you have been very unlucky with your car. I sympathise with your situation and think Hastings have dealt with this like other insurance companies do. Saying that they could have helped you out by dealing with this very quickly and efficiently. That would have avoided the delays, hire car and phone call costs. I agree totally that insurance is a bit of a scandal and hope you get this sorted out quickly and back on the road asap.

 

I don't think you will lose all your NCB. It's usually a step back scheme so your 4 years will go to 2. Check your policy documents it should be on the back of them. Defiantly query this if you can’t find that information. :-)

 

You didn’t get a hire car because Hastings don't provide them the repairing garage do. So unless your car is being repaired you don’t get a hire car. I know this stinks and when you look at the adverts for most insurance companies they are clever how they word this "courtesy car whilst yours is being repaired". The exception is if a third party crashes into you then a hire car will be provided as it's not your fault and costs can be recovered from the third party.

 

People often think the MOT test checks everything on their car. It's really just a basic test to make sure your cars not going to fall apart. Would they spot and tell you about an oil leak?....Maybe. It would have to be large enough to be a concern. The problem it's not uncommon for cars to get tiny oil leaks and MOT testers are not allowed to remove things like under trays which can hide most of the engine from view.

 

 

This next bit is me just trying to explain why things have happened. It's not having a go but it might help others understand how things work in this industry.

 

You have not received the 'red carpet' treatment because there was no other party involved. That means the insurance company cannot recover costs from a third party. To be fair I think you have done well getting insurance to pay out for mechanical breakdown. Not sure if your failure was a water leak that caused overheating then engine seizure, or oil leak that caused seizure. Either way if you put yourself in the assessors shoes you start to ask questions like:

- What caused the water or oil leak.

- When was the car serviced and by who. How often was the water and oil level checked.

- Did the servicing cause the water leak e.g. Is the garage liable

- Was the leak caused by road debris

- Was the car being used when the oil temperature was shown to be high

- Did the oil light come and was the car stopped immediately to prevent damage.

- Did the engine start to sound rough over time as the oil level dropped. Or did the car overheat as the water leak developed e.g. fan running on for long periods of time.

 

As you can see those sort of questions could lead to many avenues of blame which is what insurance is all about. It's like the whole debate of should we check our cars over before every use. It would be highly impractical and take too much time so like everyone else I too just get in and drive. I check my oil and tire pressures once a month but some people would argue that's not enough :-). Once you get a good payout try to just chalk it up to very bad luck and try and move on. Hope you find a worthy replacement for the mini and buy a lottery ticket, your overdue some good luck now!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't think this needed a new thread. It was a post commenting about the situation of the OP on the other thread.

 

I can only presume the case concerned a car fire, where the Insurers were considering whether their Policyholder was to blame for the fire, as they had not maintained their car. Without seeing the engineers report into the damage, it would be difficult to comment. As with all Insurance issues, Policyholders have to understand that they are responsible for minimising the risk to their Insurers, by taking measures to avoid any loss happening.

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

Is this in relation to a Hastings mechanical breakdown policy ?

 

Normal Car Insurances don't cover mechanical breakdown, so I am not sure why Hastings have become so involved with a broken down car, unless it is for Car Breakdown cover.

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

my policy is fully comp, and it does cover break down and repairs, nationwide stated my leakage was the water pipe and the piep was leaking fior a while and you could not miss it

i was driving on the a38 when i heard a click and them when i got to birmingham i heard a knock which made me loose control of the car and then the steam started coming out this was not a fire to the it was seize/cooked.

i am a freak in checking the oil and water on the car aswell as the tyres and this i used to do every sunday once a sweek.

the most disappointment is that i can not buy my car back from the compnay its not in there policy but my mini was a sentimental value to me n was a birthday present, it would be nice to have some sort of goodluck i seem to be kirst with threads of badluck :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

my policy is fully comp, and it does cover break down and repairs, nationwide stated my leakage was the water pipe and the piep was leaking fior a while and you could not miss it

i was driving on the a38 when i heard a click and them when i got to birmingham i heard a knock which made me loose control of the car and then the steam started coming out this was not a fire to the it was seize/cooked.

i am a freak in checking the oil and water on the car aswell as the tyres and this i used to do every sunday once a sweek.

the most disappointment is that i can not buy my car back from the compnay its not in there policy but my mini was a sentimental value to me n was a birthday present, it would be nice to have some sort of goodluck i seem to be kirst with threads of badluck :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...