Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • UK citizens will be subject to the same rules as other Third Country Nationals. Keir Starmer to warn of 'major disruption' risk ahead of new UK-EU border checks | ITV News WWW.ITV.COM Ministers will announce measures to try to blunt the impact of the changes, writes ITV News Deputy Political Editor Anushka Asthana. | ITV National...  
    • Oh I see! thats confusing, for some reason the terms and conditions that Evri posted in that threads witness statement are slightly different than the t&cs on packlinks website. Their one says enter into a contract with the transport agency, but the website one says enter into a contract with paclink. via website: (c) Each User will enter into a contract with Packlink for the delivery of its Goods through the chosen Transport Agency. via evri witness statement in that thread: (c) Each User shall then enter into its own contract with the chosen Transport Agency. Packlink does not have any control over, and disclaims all liability that may arise in contracts between a User and a Transport Agency I read your post at #251, so I should use the second one (and changing the screenshot in the court bundle), since I am saying I have a contract with Evri? Is that correct EDIT: Oh I understand the rest of your conversation. you're saying if I was to do this i would have to fully adjust my ws to use the consumer rights act instead of rights of third parties. In that case should I just edit the terms and stick with the third parties plan?. And potentially if needed just bring up the CRA in the hearing, as you guys did in that thread  
    • First, those are the wrong terms,  read posts 240-250 of the thread ive linked to Second donough v stevenson should be more expanded. You should make refernece to the three fold duty of care test as well. Use below as guidance: The Defendant failed its duty of care to the Claimant. As found in Donoghue v Stevenson negligence is distinct and separate to any breach of contract. Furthermore, as held in the same case there need not be a contract between the Claimant and the Defendant for a duty to be established, which in the case of the Claimant on this occasion is the Defendant’s duty of care to the Claimant’s parcel whilst it is in their possession. By losing the Claimant’s parcel the Defendant has acted negligently and breached this duty of care. As such the Claimant avers that even if it is found that the Defendant not be liable in other ways, by means of breach of contract, should the court find there is no contract between Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant would still have rise to a claim on the grounds of the Defendant’s negligence and breach of duty of care to his parcel whilst it was in the Defendant’s possession, as there need not be a contract to give rise to a claim for breach of duty of care.  The court’s attention is further drawn to Caparo Industries plc v Dickman (1990), 2 AC 605 in which a three fold test was used to determine if a duty of care existed. The test required that: (i) Harm must be a reasonably foreseeable result of the defendant’s conduct; (ii) A relationship of proximity must exist and (iii) It must be fair, just and reasonable to impose liability.  
    • Thank you. here's the changes I made 1) removed indexed statement of truth 2) added donough v Stevenson in paragraph 40, just under the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 paragraph about reasonable care and skill. i'm assuming this is a good place for it? 3) reworded paragraph 16 (now paragraph 12), and moved the t&cs paragraphs below it then. unless I understood you wrong it seems to fit well. or did you want me to remove the t&cs paragraphs entirely? attached is the updated draft, and thanks again for the help. WS and court bundle-1 fourth draft redacted.pdf
  • 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
      • 162 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

Will/Probate


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3725 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 all,

A sticky/tricky situation I have which requires your clever minds for advice.

My father recently passed away (1/5/14), and I believe he has made a will, according to my younger sister. My sister has told me that herself and my fathers' wife are named in the will although I do not have any proof of this and also have no reason to believe otherwise.

The thing is, prior to his death, my father had expressed his wishes that he would like to leave money to his five children (including myself). This money is what is left after he received compensation for contracting mesothelioma (asbestos cancer).

My fathers' wife had encouraged him to withdraw money over a period of time and he kept £30,000 at home in a shoe box so his wife would not have to pay rent on their flat when he passed away.

She also persuaded him to transfer money to her account from his and also to open a joint account.

He has left jewellery including a £10,000 Rolex watch and also a £5,000 ring, amongst other things.

My question is this; do I and my siblings have any right to his belongings. My younger sister has said that his belongings automatically pass to his wife and when she dies, what is left, passes to my younger sister and my fathers' wife's daughter?

I do not think it is right for her daughter to gain financially from my father's death as this is not money or possessions they had acrrued together, it is from an unfortunate situation.

Any advice would be truly appreciated. Thank you for your time

Mark

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would depend entirely on what is written in the will.

 

If there is no will then on a very basic level all personal belongings and the first £250k of the estate would pass to the wife; the remainder would pass to the children in equal shares but the wife would get a 'life interest' in that.

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

Thank you for your reply steampowered.

 

Because there is £30,000 cash sat in his flat, is this to be declared to HMRC or any other related body because as i see it, this is kind of illegal money.

 

How would i find out what is in the will and if there is one at all?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you think its illegal, if the whole estate is under £250,000 and there is not a Will, it would pass to the Wife anyway. If there is a Will naming the wife, again it would pass to the wife. Nothing illegal there.

 

If you ignore the £250,000 limit for now, this is how it goes. If there is no Will, everything passes to the wife (if under £250,0000). This includes all personal possessions. If you are not named on the Will, you are not legally entitled to personal possessions.This may seem unfair on the children of the deceased's former marriage, but thats what the law states. On her death, her estate would pass to who ever she named in her Will. If no Will, it would pass to her children and you would be entitled to nothing..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Illegal in that my father's wife persuaded him to withdraw the cash over a period of time so she wouldn't have to pay rent on their flat after he passed away. Before his illness, as pensioners, they were entitled to a reduction in rent but because my father had the compensation and illness related benefits, they had to pay full rent. My father's benefit now obviously stops and if the £30,000 was in an account, this would put her over the savings threshold thus making her liable for full rent.

How do I find out if there is actually a will and what is in it, if anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could report her to housing benefit, but what would that achieve if there's a Will naming her. She will still be entitled to everything.

 

Back to the Wills existence.

 

- ask your sister for a copy. If she is unwilling, ask for executor details and contact them.

- check with his bank as they sometimes store copies (although if your not an executor they may not be helpful)

- check with his solicitor. If they have the Will they have a duty to tell the executor that they should distribute according to the Will. If you are a named in the Will, you are entitled to a copy.

- contact York probate sub registry office. For a £5 fee, if there is a copy registered they will provide one. You can also do a standing search so that when private is granted, you receive a copy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your father got married and as his wife is entitled to ALL that has been left and if they have been frugal to keep cash, then good luck.

That's just the way it works. In the absence of any will to the contrary then it will be up to the wife if she wants to give anything to his children. ( you can always ask for something, cash or goods as a gift. )

I would presume she is the one who has lodged the death certificate and claim form with the probate office for letters of administration, to get access to any bank accounts, insurances etc.

Edited by ims21
Link to post
Share on other sites

Also if any accounts are in joint names, they will automatically pass to his widow anyway (subject to IHT if applicable).

 

By all means check if there's a will and go from there, but as I've said if it only names his widow then she gets everything and its up to her who she leaves it to when she dies. If she doesn't leave a will her estate goes to her children.

 

Also if your fathers widow dies before your fathers probate is carried out, everything would form part of her estate and go to her children (assuming dad and widow didn't leave a will).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your reply steampowered.

 

Because there is £30,000 cash sat in his flat, is this to be declared to HMRC or any other related body because as i see it, this is kind of illegal money.

 

How would i find out what is in the will and if there is one at all?

 

I know nothing about probate law, sorry, but just to be clear - it is not legal to claim Housing Benefit while having £30 grand stashed under the mattress. This money must be declared to the local authority when the claim is made.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The poster doesnt know that the widow will try to claim housing benefit. I think it may appear that its a case of her being annoyed shes got her dads money so is trying to make life difficult for her. Like I've said, she should check for a Will. If it turns out that everything goes to the widow then that's the end of it. Stirring trouble will just split the family in two so what's the point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The poster doesnt know that the widow will try to claim housing benefit. I think it may appear that its a case of her being annoyed shes got her dads money so is trying to make life difficult for her. Like I've said, she should check for a Will. If it turns out that everything goes to the widow then that's the end of it. Stirring trouble will just split the family in two so what's the point.

 

Sure, yes. Just pointing out the legalities of the situation.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...