Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've been reminded by one of my site team colleagues of the proposal apparently to strike the company off. Once again, this suggests that you are going to lose all your money – but maybe beginning an action for a smallish amount might produce information that you hadn't expected. Also it might help to establish that you do own the car – although once again, the fact that they are attempting to fold the company illustrates your risk of losing everything – the money you have spent and even a new court fee. I'm simply alerting you to this extra risk factor. Frankly given the amount of money that you are owed – the cost of bringing an exploratory court action in the way that I have suggested is relatively low and if you can afford it I would be tempted to go ahead. Of course we will help you all the way.
    • Please answer the questions that have been put to you above – particularly as to the identity of the company. Also please confirm that the installation and supply has been done by the same company – although the draft letter that you have uploaded seems to suggest that. The letter is okay but it really would be much better if it referenced your six month right to reject the goods subject to an opportunity to repair. In other words you should be invoking the consumer rights act – as you have done but you should point out that is the defect has materialised within the first six months of the date of the contract you are now asserting your right to reject the goods subject to their right to make a single attempt to remedy the situation. On the basis that there seems to be some resistance from the installer, you may as well set out now that if they will not honour their statutory obligations under the consumer rights act that you will then get your own inspections carried out to see whether either the situation can be remedied or whether there has to be a completely installation and then a purchase of a new system elsewhere for reinstallation. Point out to them that although you will keep them notified that all times, if there are any costs incurred as a result of independent inspections that you would look to them for reimbursement. Furthermore if you are obliged to incur expenses to address the defects in their installation you will be looking to them to reimburse those expenses as well. Finally point out that if independent inspection eventually decides that the entire installation has to be removed and replaced that you will be looking to them to reimburse these costs as well. I think it's important this point for us to understand who your contract is with.  
    • I'm wondering whether you would be interested in spending a small amount of money bringing a legal action against this company in order to test the water – a sort of Pathfinder. We want to minimise your losses in the most likely event that you would not be able to enforce the judgement that we would want to maximise the risk and liability for them. It is clear that you are the owner of the vehicle and it is clear that they are depriving you of the use of it and by withholding it from you they are treating it as if they were the owners. There is a tort called "Conversion" which is where you do somebody wrong by treating their goods as your own. It is pretty well the civil equivalent of the crime of theft. "Conversion" refers to the act of converting your ownership into their ownership. It seems to me that that is what is happening here. You could bring a small claim in the County Court for conversion. Damages for conversion are awarded effectively for the insult of the fact that your ownership has been interfered with. This means that the damages don't necessarily have to reflect your actual losses and when one makes the claim in conversion, one generally identifies an upper limit for damages and asked the court to exercise its discretion in making its award. You could bring an action in conversion for anything from, say maximum damages £50 – to thousands of pounds if you wanted. Bringing an action for a large sum would incur greater costs. I don't see any point because as I said, the chances of enforcement are very slim. However, it might be interesting to sue for conversion damages not exceeding £650 in the discretion of the court. If you are awarded £600 or more then you could instruct High Court enforcement officers to enforce the judgement. These people have enormous power and they don't stand for any nonsense. Also the cost of enforcement by High Court enforcement officers is expensive but this would be borne by the defendant. Although this wouldn't provide any instant solutions for you, it would be interesting to see what the response of the seller might be – if anything. It might even prompt them to refund your money – although don't bank on it. The cost of bringing an action for conversion for damages not exceeding £650 would be £70 to begin the action and then a hearing fee of £80. The cost of attempting to enforce the judgement would be £66. As I said, you may consider that this would be throwing good money after bad but it might produce some interesting results. If they defended the claim then you are probably be risking all of this money – about £210. If they didn't defend the claim then you wouldn't pay the hearing fee – although the rest of the cost would have to be incurred. Please think about this. Frankly as far as I can see it is the only way you might be to make some kind of progress.
    • When she died us 3 wives of her sons were offered to choose a piece from her vast collection.  I chose this piece. When I told my husband I wanted out, I asked if I could keep the piece and he said no.  He still has a key to my house and I did say he could come whilst I am out to collect his things but I may just rethink that! 
    • I think we need to see the RAC report We need to see the advertising which was used to sell the car We need to see the exchange which you have already had with the dealer.   We will also need to see this invoice or other evidence that people are relying on to suggest that it is a trade sale. Please can you post these documents up in PDF format - single file multipage. The right way round and in the correct order   Also, it is likely that you will have to litigate on this. Are you prepared to do so? Are you happy to do it on your own with our assistance?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 32 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2527 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

In 2005 I started claiming as a single mother. The claim was legit. However in 2006 I traveled abroad and became ill and ended up staying abroad for several years with my kids. I never notified the benefits office or housing benefit and kept getting my claims paid until 2008. Then I applied for tax credit whilst still living abroad, until I returned to UK in 2011. What are the chances of my being prosecuted if this is found out and is it harder to prosecute historic frauds? Is there a time limit to prosecutions being taken?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As stated, there's no time limit for a prosecution based on benefit fraud. And also as stated, they will seek to recover overpaid benefits whether or not they decide to prosecute. Now, is it likely they'll seek to prosecute when (not "if") they find out? I don't know. That depends on many factors including the amounts claimed, the specific circumstances surrounding the claim, the evidence they have available to them, and whether prosecution would be "in the public interest".


Under the circumstances, I'd say you should seek a consultation with a solicitor experienced in benefit matters. I mean, people do occasionally get away with things, but do you really want this hanging over you? Whatever happens, it will be a lot better for you if they find out from you.




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...