Jump to content
  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The Chinese-owned app is tying up with Shopify to create video ads and hiring thousands of engineers. View the full article
    • Hi Everyone, hope you are all keeping well in this strange new era.   On the 17th Sept, my friend booked a delivery to send a parcel to the USA, a vintage sewing machine. The collection and delivery was booked through MyParcelDeliver.Com, and UPS was the chosen courier. They collected it about four days later.   He paid for additional insurance along with the transportation of the item, to the tune of £128.75.   He packaged the parcel very well, packed with bubble wrap and paper and also styrofoam so that the sewing machine was safe in the box. He placed some plastic wrap over this, and he then sealed the box with tape. He videoed this for the buyer, so she could see how well he had packed the item because they were both concerned about the package being well protected.   The item arrived in the USA a few days later. The buyer instantly notified my friend that the parcel packaging was damaged, showing stress from water and general mishandling, and the item was also damaged in various parts, mainly the casing and the base.   He complained to MyParcelDelivery.Com on the1st October, they responded with 'You need to contact UPS...', which he did and also the buyer contacted them and got a response on the 2nd October.   UPS informed the buyer they would like to come and take a look at the packaging and the item, and this is the last she heard from them, she has called them several times, and always they say someone will call tomorrow and no one calls. She called my friend to ask if he could call them too and chase them up, he is Italian, and though he speaks English generally well, he asked me to talk with them on his behalf because he felt they were not listening to him or that he was missing something.   I spoke with them on the 26th October, they said they had sent my friend an email about this, we checked all of his emails, junk/spam too. There is nothing in there, I asked them to resend it, but nothing has appeared despite them saying they have sent it, we know they have the correct email address because they sent a message on the 2nd confirming they are looking into the claim of a damaged package, they also said they were planning on calling the seller 'again' on the 27th, which of course never happened, which she confirmed with me on the evening of the 27th.   Now it would seem to me that MyParcelDelivery is trying to say it has nothing to do with them, despite the booking being made through them, UPS US are pretending they are doing something but have so far done nothing, and we have heard Zilch from UPS UK.   I would like, if possible, some guidance on how to go about getting this resolved because this is just not right, the agent/courier have had their money, but the seller and buyer have been the victims of poor service and damaged goods.   If anyone could point us in the right direction on how to tackle this and get some redress for this, then I would be most grateful.   Thanks and kind regards   Mr B                 pox.pdf
    • From December, NS&I is phasing out posting warrants - a type of cheque - to winners. It instead wants bondholders to provide bank details so it can pay the money into their account. View the full article
  • Our picks

    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies
    • Oven repair. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/427690-oven-repair/&do=findComment&comment=5073391
      • 49 replies
    • I came across this discussion recently and just wanted to give my experience of A Shade Greener that may help others regarding their boiler finance agreement.
       
      We had a 10yr  finance contract for a boiler fitted July 2015.
       
      After a summer of discontent with ASG I discovered that if you have paid HALF the agreement or more you can legally return the boiler to them at no cost to yourself. I've just returned mine the feeling is liberating.
       
      It all started mid summer during lockdown when they refused to service our boiler because we didn't have a loft ladder or flooring installed despite the fact AS installed the boiler. and had previosuly serviced it without issue for 4yrs. After consulting with an independent installer I was informed that if this was the case then ASG had breached building regulations,  this was duly reported to Gas Safe to investigate and even then ASG refused to accept blame and repeatedly said it was my problem. Anyway Gas Safe found them in breach of building regs and a compromise was reached.
       
      A month later and ASG attended to service our boiler but in the process left the boiler unusuable as it kept losing pressure not to mention they had damaged the filling loop in the process which they said was my responsibilty not theres and would charge me to repair, so generous of them! Soon after reporting the fault I got a letter stating it was time we arranged a powerflush on our heating system which they make you do after 5 years even though there's nothing in the contract that states this. Coincidence?
       
      After a few heated exchanges with ASG (pardon the pun) I decided to pull the plug and cancel our agreement.
       
      The boiler was removed and replaced by a reputable installer,  and the old boiler was returned to ASG thus ending our contract with them. What's mad is I saved in excess of £1000 in the long run and got a new boiler with a brand new 12yr warranty. 
       
      You only have to look at TrustPilot to get an idea of what this company is like.
       
        • Thanks
      • 3 replies
    • Dazza a few months ago I discovered a good friend of mine who had ten debts with cards and catalogues which he was slavishly paying off at detriment to his own family quality of life, and I mean hardship, not just absence of second holidays or flat screen TV's.
       
      I wrote to all his creditors asking for supporting documents and not one could provide any material that would allow them to enforce the debt.
       
      As a result he stopped paying and they have been unable to do anything, one even admitted it was unenforceable.
       
      If circumstances have got to the point where you are finding it unmanageable you must ask yourself why you feel the need to pay.  I guarantee you that these companies have built bad debt into their business model and no one over there is losing any sleep over your debt to them!  They will see you as a victim and cash cow and they will be reluctant to discuss final offers, only ways to keep you paying with threats of court action or seizing your assets if you have any.
       
      They are not your friends and you owe them no loyalty or moral duty, that must remain only for yourself and your family.
       
      If it was me I would send them all a CCA request.   I would bet that not one will provide the correct response and you can quite legally stop paying them until such time as they do provide a response.   Even when they do you should check back here as they mostly send dodgy photo copies or generic rubbish that has no connection with your supposed debt.
       
      The money you are paying them should, as far as you are able, be put to a savings account for yourself and as a means of paying of one of these fleecers should they ever manage to get to to the point of a successful court judgement.  After six years they will not be able to start court action and that money will then become yours.
       
      They will of course pursue you for the funds and pass your file around various departments of their business and out to third parties.
       
      Your response is that you should treat it as a hobby.  I have numerous files of correspondence each faithfully organised showing the various letters from different DCA;s , solicitors etc with a mix of threats, inducements and offers.   It is like my stamp collection and I show it to anyone who is interested!
        • Thanks
        • Like

Full and Final - Without Prejudice(?)


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2693 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Personally I cannot see any advantage, unless you are considering challenging the existence of the agreement and the debt. But it is an interesting question and I would like to hear other views.

 

I am sure that the creditors acceptance would be so headed however.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well yes making an F&F would acknowledge owing the debt in full or part, so if there is any chance of court or current case, then you should mark 'without prejudice'.

 

An F&F offer is usually where you owe a debt, but your financial position is such, that any reveal of your I&E would tell a creditor that they would be better of accepting any money they are offered. If you have any assets and/or are currently working, then creditors may not be willing to accept, unless it was for a reasonable percentage of the debt owed.

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

So in the case of say a statute bar, would the without prejudice offer serve to reset the clock ?

 

In other words does" without prejudice" refer to the "offer" in which case presumably it would reset it because the correspondence it self would be an acknowledgement, or does it refer to the letter itself in which case it wouldn't.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

any F&F acks the debt. even if paid eventually or not.

 

is this not solely that the contents of the letter 'itself' cannot be used in court.

 

however in my eyes

the more important aspect is the impact this has on the debtors future

the credit file MUST be marked as settled [NOT PS ]

and ALL negative data removed.

 

else you might as well burn the money for all the good it will do.

 

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
So in the case of say a statute bar, would the without prejudice offer serve to reset the clock ?

 

...

 

this HL case, bradford & bingley v rashid 06, provides an interesting discussion and authority of some of the issues. don't know if there is any subsequent authority?

Edited by Ford

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes also Muller vs Lindsay and Mortimer[1996]

 

It seems that the "without prejudice " only includes subjects under current or imminent dispute , or those in process of an action. Usually these are negotiations of a settlement.

 

The restriction is limited to these maters only, so if for instance a F and F is accepted, and the creditor then chooses to ignore it once the contract is made, the debtor can use the without prejudice correspondence to support the contract, because the dispute would involve the agreement as the subject matter, and the without prejudice negotiations would be just supporting evidence.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

"It was unclear as to whether the courts would permit evidence of without prejudice exchanges to be relied on where there is a dispute as to the

proper interpretation of the settlement agreement. The decision of the Supreme Court in Oceanbulk Shipping & Trading SA -v- TMT Asia Limited

and 3 others [2010] UKSC 44 has now confirmed that without prejudice evidence will be admissible in such circumstances"

 

Re: above

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to Ford for the case. This is from analysis of that case.

 

16. The solution which I would therefore favour, and which I think is in accordance with principle, is that the without prejudice rule, so far as it is based upon general public policy and not upon some agreement of the parties, does not apply at all to the use of a statement as an acknowledgement for the purposes of section 29(5). That, I would infer, is what everyone thought in Spencer v Hemmerde [1922] 2 AC 507. It is in accordance with principle because the main purpose of the rule is to prevent the use of anything said in negotiations as evidence of anything expressly or impliedly admitted: that certain things happened, that the party concerned thought he had a weak case and so forth. But when a statement is used as an acknowledgement for the purposes of section 29(5), it is not being used as evidence of anything. The statement is not evidence of an acknowledgement. It is the acknowledgement. It may, if admissible for that purpose, also be evidence of an indebtedness when it comes to deciding this question at the trial, but for the purposes of section 29(5) it is not being used as such. All that an acknowledgement does under section 29(5) is to allow the creditor to proceed with his case. It lifts the procedural bar on bringing the action. Questions of evidence to prove the debt will arise later.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

it is an interesting case, that deserves to be read in full, and 'cherry picked' :) depends on the individual circumstances. it seems that if the WP comms are genuine (ie not just an attempt to run time down) then contents may not be admissible re acknowledgement?

also, '..It is of course open to the parties to agree that whatever they say in negotiations will not be capable of being used even as an acknowledgement for the purposes of section 29(5), but in such a case the creditor will be alerted to the fact that the debtor intends to rely upon the statute. ..'

Edited by Ford

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what is being said (massive generalization~)

 

Is that the information contained with the statute barred document does not acknowledge the debt under the definition of the SOL, however the letter itself would.

 

In other words the WP applies to the information not to the existence of an acknowledgment.

 

Not that the letter may not meet the requirements of acknowledging the debt under other criteria of course.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

so, the crux is, in general, if definitely barred don't communicate, apart from perhaps the stat bar letter?

if using WP comms to try and stretch out time re bar, then beware as those contents might be admissible as an acknowledgement? unless otherwise noted?

and, if bar is not in issue, then WP comms stand as they are. ie not admissible save as to costs?

Edited by Ford

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
so, the thrust is, if definitely barred don't communicate, apart from perhaps the stat bar letter?

if using WP comms to try and stretch out time, then beware as those might be admissible as an acknolwedgement?

and, if bar is not in issue, then WP comms stand as they are. ie not admissible save as to costs?

 

Yes basically do not rely on without prejudice when it comes to the SOL acknowledgment notwithstanding that there may be other measures you can include within your correspondence to protect you, dependent on circumstances.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi

 

just a quickie - if considering putting forward a full and final offer to a creditor (of course once you have concluded all your research and undertaken all process) should you head the offer 'without prejudice' if there is a court case outstanding for the debt?

 

 

would putting forward the offer of F&F mean that you accept liability for the debt?

 

 

Thanks

NEVER USE WITHOUT PREJUDICE WHEN DEALING WITH DEBT MATTERS, you may need the letter in court yourself, and be precluded from using it.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites
NEVER USE WITHOUT PREJUDICE WHEN DEALING WITH DEBT MATTERS, you may need the letter in court yourself, and be precluded from using it.

 

It is not as simple as that Brigadier, it depends on which particular debt matter you are pursuing. it may be that you do not want the substance of you negotiations to be used in proceedings.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very simple to use this phrase if you are inexperienced in such matters does and I have many ye ears of experience of it causing extreme problems when litigation has been started.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites
It is very simple to use this phrase if you are inexperienced in such matters does and I have many ye ears of experience of it causing extreme problems when litigation has been started.

 

Really, perhaps you could elaborate and give us a few illustrations.

 

Because in my experience it is never wise to give such blanket advice when referring to a vast variety of unknown scenarios.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

The greatest number of difficulties occur with F&F offers which are declined and later are the subject of litigation and the debtor wishes to show the court that they have attempted to reach a resolution.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

but that is n/a re a defence. goes to costs, if applicable, re unreasonableness. at which stage WP comms can be considered anyway?

Edited by Ford

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really?

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes :)

it's no defence to say i made an offer but they didn't accept it! except re any costs

depends on individual circumstances re whether to use WP

Edited by Ford

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes really.

In my first post I said that, I could see no advantage in marking an offer Without prejudice in these circumstances, but that is a long way from saying that you should never use the term in debt negotiation.

 

In MY experience without prejudice negotiation is a very valuable tool, particularly when securities or other issues are involved. Also if you read the earlier posts you will ser that when a contract is formed using a WP statement, the rule is extinguished and the evidence admissible.

 

Like I said it is not that simple.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi

 

just a quickie - if considering putting forward a full and final offer to a creditor (of course once you have concluded all your research and undertaken all process) should you head the offer 'without prejudice' if there is a court case outstanding for the debt?

 

 

would putting forward the offer of F&F mean that you accept liability for the debt?

 

 

 

Thanks

 

Is your question in connection to your thread here Lindy ? :-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?385251-Lloyds-Taking-Me-To-Court-With-A-Recon-Agreement

 

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 OTHERS

 

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

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Marking an offer "without prejudice" has limited legal significance. Genuine attempts to settle a dispute are covered by "without prejudice" privilege whether or not that is marked on the letter. This is set out clearly in the case Rush & Tompkins v Greater London Council [1988] UKHL 7:

 

"the application of the [WP] rule is not dependent upon the use of the phrase 'without prejudice' and if it is clear from the surrounding circumstances that the parties were seeking to compromise the action, evidence of the content of those negotiations will, as a general rule, not be admissible at the trial and cannot be used to establish an admission or partial admission."

 

The point of marking the letter WP is to avoid any doubt. WP privilege means you cannot show the letter to the court during the main proceedings. However WP letters can be shown to the court when it decides who should pay legal costs, which is important on fast track and multi track.

 

If you want to make a settlement offer but also want to say something else, it is best to write two letters. One WP letter and one open letter.

 

Making a F+F offer is not an admission of liability. Make the offer, with a very brief explanation why this is a good offer and the Claimant's case is rubbish, and mark the letter WP.

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

 

 

Making a F+F offer is not an admission of liability. Make the offer, with a very brief explanation why this is a good offer and the Claimant's case is rubbish, and mark the letter WP.

 

Depends upon the contents of the letter and which parts of it are to be considered as without prejudice, as for the letter being an acknowledgment of the debt in terms of the SOL , the case law is clear that the "without prejudice" notice will not effect this, one way or the other.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...