Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Please can you avoid posting solid blocks of text. It is difficult for people to read especially when they are using a small screen such as a telephone. Well spaced and punctuated please. I hear what you say about the evidence – but do you have copies of it? And if so can we see it please. That's the point. We want to know what you have. As long as you have the evidence in your possession then you have some kind of control
    • Hi, the vehicle went to Audi Chingford on Thursday 13th May. I did state beforehand that I only wanted a diagnostic. The technician out of courtesy opened the drain letting huge deposits of water escape the seals. Video evidence was provided via AUDI cam. The link for the audi cam has been forwarded to BMW and Motonovo. I spoke to branch manager explained the situation and he stated he would sent me an email outlining the issue. Audi state this is not really an issue and more of a design flaw. However, the seals still have water ingress. I purchased the vehicle with £0 deposit on a 60 months HP plan for £520.00. The vehicle total was £21000. I did not go for any extended warranty. I live almost 70 miles away from the aftersales centre in Peterborough. I have previously uploaded the document I forwarded to BMW however it was in word format. I have had to buy a new tyre almost three days after purchasing vehicle. BMW still have not compensated me for the v62 cost as they said they would. 
    • I would suggest that you stop trying to rely on legal theory – as you understand it. Firstly, because we are dealing with practical/pragmatic situations and at a low value level where these arguments tend not to work. Secondly, because you clearly have misunderstood the assessment of quantum where there are breaches of obligations. The formula that you have cited above is the method of loss calculation in torts. In contract it is entirely different. The law of obligations generally attempts to remedy the breach. This means that in tort, damages seek to put you into the position you would have been in had the breach not occurred. In other words it returns you to your starting position – point zero. Contract damages attend put you into the position that you would have been had the breach not occurred but this is not your starting position, contract damages assume that the agreement in dispute had actually been carried out. This puts you into your final position. You sold an item for £XXX. Your expectation was that you your item would be correctly delivered and that you would be the beneficiary of £XXX. Your expectation loss is the amount that you sold the item for and that is all you are entitled to recover. If you want, you can try to sue for the larger sum – and we will help you. But if they ask for evidence of the value of the item as it was sold then I can almost guarantee that either you will be obliged to settle for the lesser sum – or else a judge will give you judgement but for the lesser sum. This will put you to the position that you would have been had there been no breach of contract. I understand from you now that when you dispatch the item you declared the retail cost to you and not your expected benefit of £XXX. To claim for the retail value in the circumstances would offend the rules relating to betterment. If you want to do it then we will help you – but don't be surprised if you take a tumble.  
    • I was caught speeding 3 times in the same week, on the same road. All times were 8-12mph higher than the limit. I was offered the course for the first offense and I now need to accept the other 2 offenses. I just want to be ready for what might come. Will I get the £100 fine and 3 points for each of them or do I face something more severe?  These are my only offenses in 8 years of driving.
    • I'll get my letter drafted this evening. Its an item I sold, which I'm also concerned about, as whilst I don't have my original purchase receipt (the best I have is my credit card statement showing a purchase from Car Audio Centre), I do unfortunately have the eBay listing where I sold it for much less. But as I said before this is now a question of compensation: true compensation would seek to put me back into the position I was in before the loss ie: that title would remain with me until my buyer has accepted this, and so compensation should be that which would be needed to replace the lost item. But in the world of instant electronic payment, it could be argued that as I had already been paid, the title to the goods had already transferred, and I was required to refund the buyer after the loss. And so, despite my declared value being the retail price - that which is needed to return me to my pre-sales position, the compensatory value should be the value I sold it for, which being a second-hand item from a private seller is lower. I still believe that I should be claiming for the item's full value, rather than how much I sold it for, as this is the same for insurance: we don't insure the value we paid, but rather the value of the item to put us back into the position we would be in if we ever needed to claim. Its for the loss adjuster to argue the toss
  • 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

Repossession questioned by deeds not being signed


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3761 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 6.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi UNRAM

 

You may re-call that I referred you to the case of "HILMI".......that is where I have been able to source the information....

 

See.....The Law Commissions Consultation Paper on the Execution of Deeds and Documents by or on behalf of Bodies Corporate, Consultation Paper 143 (1996), para 2.2 and 2.3

 

It was referred to by the Judge in deciding the case in HILMI & Associates Ltd v 20 PEMBRIDGE VILLAS FREEHOLD LIMITED [2010] EWCA Civ 314 at para 29

 

Hope this helps?

 

Apple

 

Are there any other court cases to reinforce the principle? Surely this issue came up before 2010?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there any other court cases to reinforce the principle? Surely this issue came up before 2010?

 

Hi UNRAM

 

I'm sure there will be and it will have done....but for present purposes....I believe 'HILMI' will suffice.....

 

There is no need to bombard the Lender and the courts with every single piece of case law that you can get your hands on......

 

The Chamber already are considering 'Gargillo' and 'Bibby'.....and reference to the RRO.....

 

The combined effect of the three should make a difference to the outcome for all Borrowers.....

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

....Just to follow on......it is not the finding that the HILMI Case was not decided until 2010 that is significant per se..... the significance in that case is that in 2010 the Judge relied on the report of the Law commission that was way before 2010.....

 

So.....the principle is the principle regardless of when one needs to rely on it....

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to pop off the forum for now.......due to other commitments.....but, do post any queries as usual.... I will pick up on them anyway : )

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Law Commissions Consultation Paper on the Execution of Deeds and Documents by or on behalf of Bodies Corporate, Consultation Paper 143 (1996)

http://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/...nsultation.pdf

 

2.2 The law of England and Wales makes an important distinction between instruments which are executed in “solemn form” as deeds, and other instruments which are generally referred to as being in “simple form” under hand.1 Where the instrument is a contract, this is recognised by the distinction made between a contract executed as a deed, which is a specialty, and an instrument under hand, which is a simple contract.

 

2.5 It will be seen that at common law, all deeds were documents under seal.6 Hence contracts executed in solemn form were and are still commonly referred to as “contracts under seal”.

 

11.6 [section omitted] A deed is an instrument in solemn form. Such an instrument (or, depending on how the term “specialty” is used, any obligation contained in it) is a specialty because it is in solemn form.[section omitted] A contract which is executed by an individual as a deed (that is by attested signature), and which makes it clear on its face that it is intended to be a deed, will therefore be both a deed and a specialty.

Edited by UNRAM
Link to post
Share on other sites

http://lawcommission.justice.gov .uk/...nsultation.pdf

 

What is required for delivery?

 

6.2 Originally, delivery was the physical act of handing the deed over to the other party, or instructing him to take it up, but the matter is now essentially a question of the intention of the maker of the deed. A deed is delivered in law “as soon as there are acts or words sufficient to [show] that it is intended by the party to be executed as his deed presently binding on him”, and even though that party retains possession of the document.1 It does not matter whether this intention is actually communicated to the other party, so long as it is shown by some sufficient act or words.

 

The mortgage deed I signed only says "signed as a deed" not "executed as a deed"... I've checked T&C's... Nothing anywhere about intention to execute a deed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

God Apple having time off as WELL as tea! what next LOL

 

I agree fully with your posts 1567 and 1573 when you hand documents in get them to stamp them and at NO time just leave them there, as in our case the WHOLE file went missing for two months!

I also agree that posters SHOULD be able to do PM for their defence papers BEFORE going to court with them so any problems could be dealt with, as you and I knew there are more solicitors , there staff and all and sundry looking at these threads now and for us to go this far with this is some thing no one not even me thought off.

Al, then you had in your papers you will not get a hearing date there and then they will give it to the judge to look at and he or she could just give an order to adjured until six months or what ever, but if not don't worry I'll come along, just let me know.

Do you know who the agent was for the other side?

Link to post
Share on other sites

God Apple having time off as WELL as tea! what next LOL

 

I agree fully with your posts 1567 and 1573 when you hand documents in get them to stamp them and at NO time just leave them there, as in our case the WHOLE file went missing for two months!

I also agree that posters SHOULD be able to do PM for their defence papers BEFORE going to court with them so any problems could be dealt with, as you and I knew there are more solicitors , there staff and all and sundry looking at these threads now and for us to go this far with this is some thing no one not even me thought off.

Al, then you had in your papers you will not get a hearing date there and then they will give it to the judge to look at and he or she could just give an order to adjured until six months or what ever, but if not don't worry I'll come along, just let me know.

Do you know who the agent was for the other side?

 

Im happy to set up a google docs or similar facility and we can share the passcode through CAG if document sharing is going to become an obstacle...

Link to post
Share on other sites

God Apple having time off as WELL as tea! what next LOL

 

I agree fully with your posts 1567 and 1573 when you hand documents in get them to stamp them and at NO time just leave them there, as in our case the WHOLE file went missing for two months!

I also agree that posters SHOULD be able to do PM for their defence papers BEFORE going to court with them so any problems could be dealt with, as you and I knew there are more solicitors , there staff and all and sundry looking at these threads now and for us to go this far with this is some thing no one not even me thought off.

Al, then you had in your papers you will not get a hearing date there and then they will give it to the judge to look at and he or she could just give an order to adjured until six months or what ever, but if not don't worry I'll come along, just let me know.

Do you know who the agent was for the other side?

 

hi is it me i agree with you on the pm to many eyes now looking i could do with your help to i have never been to court for this kind of situtation..i handed my first lot of papers in they wouldn't stamp them as received they just said your on camera handing the envelope over so when i hand in my defence this week i will double check the judge got them i will carry another copy just incase.

 

pj

e-petition is live please sign it.. unlawful repossessions..!!!

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/56915

Link to post
Share on other sites

PJ,

 

No that's not right, if you hand them in and ask for your copy's to be stamped they HAVE to do it.

No prob with help where are you ?

 

hi is it me thanks thats good to know i am in nottingham.i did insist on them stamping them and giving me a receipt of hand delivery they just kept on saying your on camera theres your proof.

 

pj.

e-petition is live please sign it.. unlawful repossessions..!!!

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/56915

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello CAG whats the policy regarding allowing people to share information privately. is CAG against this?

 

Why can you not post documents on the open forum?

 

One major point is that you never know who you are dealing with off forum despite what they may appear to be on the open forum.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It didn't refer to anyone.

With an anonymous forum you never know who anybody is.

 

Unless my name birth name is UNRAM (pretty as it might be its not) then that's what this is and that not topic of discussion which is private messaging on public forums.

Link to post
Share on other sites

got my letter back from the tribunal and its good to go they have excepted the case and given me documents to serve on the lender.

 

its says send a copy of my application plus a copy of the order to them and the court.

 

am off to sort it asap.

 

p.j

e-petition is live please sign it.. unlawful repossessions..!!!

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/56915

Link to post
Share on other sites

PJ

Thats good news yes HAND the copy in to the court with a letter just asking if the matter could be adjourned until the tribunal hearing

well done.

 

yes good news is it me off to get it handed in they want proof of delivery and proof of sending to lender.

 

pj

e-petition is live please sign it.. unlawful repossessions..!!!

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/56915

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes good news is it me off to get it handed in they want proof of delivery and proof of sending to lender.

 

pj

 

When did u send off your application pj?

 

Is it me? Has your application been accepted despite your lender's attempt to strike it out?

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3761 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...