Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Embracing your unique selfView the full article
    • Hearing held today in court. I attended in person and Evri had an advocate attend on their behalf to defend their position that my contract is with Packlink and not with them. I also provided a copy of Evri's terms and conditions which explains that a contract is entered into when a parcel is sent with Evri. The judge pointed this out to the Advocate and agreed there is a contract between me and Evri under the Ts and Cs. The judge explained that while Packlink are responsible for organising the delivery of the item, it is Evri who are responsible for handling the goods and delivering them, and therefor Evri has a responsibility to handle the goods with reasonable care and skill. So am pleased to say the judge found in my favour. Hearing lasted about 75mins. Evri has been ordered to make payment within 21 days. Also nice to meet @jk2054 in person.
    • Good morning,    I just wanted to update you on the situation.    I have visits piling up with my current employment and they need doing before I finish at the end of this month.  I am moving to Wiltshire in 3 weeks for a new job helping care homes with their Dementia patients. I tried to work it out and at a guess I will be doing about 20-25,000 miles a year. So need a vehicle that can cope with that mileage, my old car would have done it easy but 🤷‍♂️ I have taken out a loan and got a friend to find me a reliable car that can cope with the miles and hasn't been written off in the past.   I phoned Adrian flux to see if I could use the last months insurance on a new car I have bought, the girl I spoke to phoned Markerstudy and asked them but they said no, my new car doesn't have any modifications.    I had an email from someone who saw one of my appeals for information, they live near the site of the accident and know a nearby farmer who has a security camera at his entrance that catches the traffic and specifically registration plates as he has been robbed before. They said they would reach out for me and see if he still has the data. Unfortunately it wont catch the scene of the crash.   The Police phoned me and said they were closing the report I made, even if they found footage of the vehicle at the time I said the actual incident would be my word vs theirs.  My first response was I am sure google maps would show that they turned around at that location which would verify my version of events, but upon reflection I do understand, I have seen people doing make up with both hands while driving, eating from a bowl steering with their knees and veering all over the place. I am sure some of these people go off the road and claim that someone forced them off.    Markerstudy phoned me yesterday to say that my car is now at Copart, the £80 tank of Vpower diesel was emptied on entry to the site for safety reasons, which I get but it sucks.  It is awaiting being assessed and shouldn't be too long, which is a relief.  I am really glad things do not seem to be going the way of the other stories and they seem to moving quickly.   However I was informed that my car was a structural write off before I bought it - this destroyed me, I was almost sick.  and this is going to affect any offer of money - after hearing the first statement this didn't affect me.   They need to wait for the assessor to check it over but it is highly likely to be written off and the maximum they can offer is £2300.  I was desperate for a car as I was working for an agency at the time, no work no pay, and did not do a vehicle check because I didn't know about them.  The seller did not tell me that it had been structurally written off, he told me that it had the front wing damaged while parked and was repaired at an approved repairer.  Markerstudy records state that it was sold at auction, no record of repair at an approved repairer.  I bought it bank transfer with hand written receipt.    It gets worse.    It turns out my airbags should of gone off. For some reason they are not working. I think we can figure out why.  If I had hit that car head on and had no airbags.    Some good news.    I can arrange a time with Copart to go and take my stereo equipment and any personal items that are left in the car only. I cant live without music and need quality sound, my speakers and amps are Hertz and JLaudio, (no I am not a boy racer with booming subs, I am an audiophile on a budget) I was really worried I wouldn't get them back so this is a huge relief for me. It is stuff I have built up over years of saving and collecting. Everything to do with the vehicle and mods I have declared need to stay to be assessed.   The accident has gone as a fault on my record, I have to remove 2 years NCB which means I still have some to declare which is good.  So it appears at this point that it may be resolved quickly, not in the way I was hoping, but not as bad as I presumed it was going to be based upon that tow truck drivers attitude and behaviour and the horror stories I read.   I am not going to buy the car back and try to make money with all the parts on it, I don't have the time or energy.   I may need an xray on my back and neck.  The whole situation has left me feeling physically sick, drained and I need it done.   The lesson learnt from this  -  My conscience is 100% clear, my attitude to safety and strong sense of personal responsibility - A rated tyres even if on credit card, brake fluid flush every year, regular checks of pads and discs, bushes etc, made avoiding what I believed to be a certain broadside collision possible.   Get a dashcam (searching now for the best I can afford at the moment)  -  Research your insurance company before you buy  -  Pay for total car check before you go and see a car and take someone with you if you are not confident in your ability to assess a vehicle.      Thank you to everyone here who volunteers their time, energy and information, it is greatly appreciated.  You helped my sister with some advice a while ago but we weren't able to follow through, she is struggling with long term health conditions and I ended up in hospital for a while with myocarditis, when I got out and remembered it was too late.  I am going to make a donation now, it is not a lot, I wish I could give more, I will try to come back when things are on a more even keel.    Take care
  • 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


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3903 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

Well I've had my letter back from EGG who don't uphold my complaint for thefollowing reason (card taken out online in 2003 by the way)

1) Online sales at that time did not require i take out ppi as condition of obtaining card

2) Online sales at that time did not provide an advisory service.

3) Online sales at that time required you to positively confirm that you wish to purchase policy

4) Online sales provided full T&C and requested you read them before you submitting application.

 

I have sent a SAR request off, which i know may take a little while.

 

Am I dead in the water here. I don't remember asking for PPI or 'positively confirming' - i guess that means a tick - anything.

 

They've said this is their full and final response.

 

HELP!

 

Hx

Link to post
Share on other sites

it well known that the egg site required you to tick the box

before allowing the loan to be granted

 

DONT give up at the first hurdle.

 

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

Hi,


It was a credit card - does that make a difference?


I certainly don't want to give up. I'm not sure how to prove/ disprove the tick thing.


 

i

Other threads mention asking for screen shots (before and after I guess). Was it standard practice for Egg to pre-tick in Dec 2003?



They did repay for missile ppi on a loan that was taken out later.>
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry about all the gumf in my pervious message!

 

Does anyone know if online applications in 2003 pre-ticked the ppi box?

 

I've found reponse letter by dx100 for another cagger but it would be great if someone knew this tick box thing for sure. I've read that guardian article but that seems mainly to focus on phone sales whereas mine was an online application.

 

Hx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some forms ask a consumer to "deselect" PPI – usually by ticking a box if they do not want PPI. Where this happens, we are likely to conclude that a policy was mis-sold – because the consumer doing nothing would have been interpreted as the consumer choosing to have PPI. This might not have been the case.

 

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/ppi-our-approach.html

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

Ok, how does this sound? I've cribbed it together from other replies i have seen posted on the forum..

 

Dear Sir,

 

I am writing in response to your letter dated xxxx.

 

I believe your response is speculation based upon how EGG ‘think’ the process worked at that time.

 

I can assure you I would not have ever taken out CRP if the option were allowed. The CRP box was pre-ticked, with little or no obvious method to deselect it, or to be able to progress with the application were it un-ticked.

 

I respectfully refer you to the Financial Services Authorities findings of 2008 with regards to sales techniques employed by EGG in previous years.

 

Please forward me screenshots of my application to prove I DID manually select CRP rather than it being the case that I did not ‘unselect’ a pre-ticked box. Please also provide an electronic log to show I looked at, and confirmed reading, the Terms & Conditions of a policy I did not request.

 

If you are unable to provide these items I respectfully request you reimburse me all CRP payments made, with correct interest rates applied since each CRP payment, on the factual basis the policy was mis-sold.

=====

 

Does that sound ok? Firm but not sh*tty?

 

Hx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all,

 

I tweaked the above response before i send it giving them 14 days to send me the screen shots or confirm the refund of ppi.

 

However - I am totally aware it will most probably get bounced back BUT i have been reading how some pre-2005 creditors were not covered by the FOS. I opened this account in 2003 - so will the FOS be an option for me does anyone know?

 

Hx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Egg tuned down my initial claim so I sent a letter asking for screen shots to show i ticked a box rather than didn't un-tick it or if they couldn't provide that please refund my premiums plus interest etc.

 

The 14 days I gave them is almost up and i suspect I am unlikely to hear a dicky bird.

 

Has anyone ever got screen shots if they have asked for them?

 

Has anyone ever gone down the court route rather than the FOS route?

 

I'm not even sure where to begin or the costs involved but i would welcome any imput.

 

Hx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

Well thanks to CAG I am fired up and looking to deal with the mis-sold PPI rejections I have.

 

From what I have read the FOS can be good but are snowed under so I have been looking into the possibilty of going the court route.

 

I have read a few posts where poeple have done this with mixed results, but I am a bit confused. Is it small claims or County court that I need to use, or can i use either? If i were to lose would I have to pay the other sides costs (that is the scary bit)? What kind of timeframe do county or small claims work to?

 

I'd really welcome any advice or caggers experiences in this area

Edited by siriusb
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of a lottery win but sadly it's not quite that much. The figures tend to be around the £2000-£3000 mark.

 

I have responded to one of the rejections, but they have failed to provide the screen shots I requested to substantiate them not upholding my complaint or acknowledge my second letter in anyway.

 

I am still waiting on two more responses but let's just say i am not hopeful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For the values you mention your action will be brought in the county court and should be allocated to small claims track.

 

If you are suing for mis-sold PPI then bear in mind that the onus of proof (civil burden on the balance of probability) will be on you as the claimant. As a result you will need to have all of your facts, evidence and arguments well prepared beforehand. In addition you will need to ensure that the amount you are claiming is quanitfiable and that you can argue your case for this effectively.

 

You have some threads running on PPi already...which one are you thinking of taking to court?

 

By your opening statement as to whether it is Small Claims or County Court it would appear that you need to do some research as to what the court process is all about before you issue a claim.

 

We will help you all we can but at the end of the day it will be your case and yourself who is in court arguing your case with a Judge and, quite possibly, representatives from the other side.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing I am the least worried about is the actual 'day in court'. For me it is getting all the right papers together and what scope of costs could be levied at me if I lose

 

Going through the Gov website it would seem that both are initiated the same way.

 

The first one on my radar is Egg.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally there are no costs in small claims track provided you follow the court protocols and directions as required.

 

You will issue your claim in the county court and it is more than likely be allocated to small claims track given the quantum of the claim.

 

With respect, I think you ought to be worried about the day in court and ensure that you prepare, prepare and prepare again. If it gets that far then that is the make or break time where your claim will be decided one way or the other.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't think i was being glib - i mean that i am more concerned about the preparation and getting that spot on (in as much as i have no experience of taking anyone to court).

 

I see it can all be done online (initally) but as I have not had sight of the forms I do not know whether I include any previous cases etc at the early stage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant no offence but just wanted to make sure that you were aware of what might be ahead.

 

There is a sticky here which was written by andyorch which is a guide to the issue of proceedings in court.

 

Have a read as it has some excellent information in it

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?356814-The-Process-of-Litigation..-Court-Claims-Defences

 

You might like to have a read of some of the other stickies in the legal forum to get a grounding on some of the legal matters.

 

Come back here when you have had a read.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Just a general query. If you have been sent a rejection final response letter and you have sent a letter back asking for proof of certain things to substantiate their position (or if they can't then refund the ppi etc please) are the compies under any obligation to:

a) acknowledge your letter?

b) provide the proof you require within a given timeframe?

 

Hx

Link to post
Share on other sites

The final response letter can be taken as your being clear to pass the case to fos.

 

It doesn't necessarily mean that you cannot challenge their findings.

 

Some lenders will write back and say they have issued their final response and will not engage any further so in that case fos is the option. Others will still engage with a claimant especially if there is new information presented. We have seen cases on here where decisions have been reversed after being challenged by the claimant.

 

There isn't any obligation (apart from common courtesy) to acknowledge a letter.

 

For your final question, in what contact are you talking about "proof"? what proof are you asking for?

 

EDIT: I mean what items are you asking for in terms of proof?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the quick response.

 

I am asking for screen shots to verify point 3 of their bog standard rejection - that being that the online sales process at that time required me to 'positively confirm that i wished to purchase this policy during the online application'.

 

I have asked for screen shots to confirm that i actually ticked a box rather than not 'un-ticking' a pre-ticked box,and i have asked for proof that i read the terms and conditions of the policy (point 4 of the rejection being that online sales requested you read t&cs before submitting).

 

In my response I have asserted that a pre-ticked box is very much akin to 'advising' that a product be taken out - my rather rudimentary rebuttal on point 2 of the rejection.

 

Whilst I doubted they would change their mind I am surprised at the lack of acknowledgement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but no screen shots in with it.

 

Think out of courtesy (and the fact that it may show greater reasonableness on my part with FOS or court) i will send them a chase up letter (maybe even to their CEO too) and see if that elicits any response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...