Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • OK.  So you lent your car to a friend in 2019 and he racked up three parking tickets that he tells you he didn't know anything about(!).  You were the registered keeper (RK) at the time at your family address, but you got chucked out and could not change your RK address with DVLA because you were homeless.  You knew nothing about the parking tickets and enforcement action until you got a bailiffs' letter passed on to you.  You made an Out of Time (OOT) application in respect of one PCN but Birmingham CC objected to it and the traffic court rejected your application.  A solicitor helped you make OOTs in respect of the other two PCNs but you don't yet know the outcome of those two applications.   Is that the situation you are in?   dx100uk thinks you can resubmit the application saying your friend was the driver.  I don't think saying that will help as the driver is irrelevant.  It's the owner who is liable to pay the charge and that is the RK (unless the RK is a car hire firm).  I assume you are not a car hire firm so you are stuck with the liability, not the driver.   Whether you actually can resubmit an OOT once one has been rejected I do not know, but why not try.  What did the solicitor put on the applications they helped you with?  Did you not ask their advice about the rejected application while you were with them?  I think you would have to say something to the effect that you never received any paperwork in relation to the PCNs because you had been chucked out of your home and because you were homeless you did not update your address at DVLA.  That is the truth isn't it?  You don't want to lie on the application.   To me that's a good reason for you not doing anything about the PCNs, but I suspect that Birmingham CC will object again and that the traffic court will reject again.  And, as I said above, I don't even know if you can submit a second OOT application in respect of a PCN if the first has been rejected.   So it looks to me like you might be a bit stuck.   Unless dx100uk, or spaceman61, or another poster with expertise in local authority PCNs comes along I'm not sure what you do.   If you get no more helpful suggestions here you could try on National Consumer Service.  If you do go there, do not register with a hotmail address.  You will also need to provide them with a timeline of everything for all the documents you actually have, and you will need all the facts and dates etc at your fingertips.  And make sure they are accurate.   http://forums.National Consumer Service.com/index.php?showforum=30   And get your friend to contribute to paying off the PCNs.  Do you believe he really knew nothing about them?
    • To enjoy the protection offered by s.75 CCA 1974 for a credit card payment, you must pay over £100 and under £30,000 for the goods or service (even if part payment for a larger total amount).
    • Hi Charlie and welcome to CAG   As an Executor, you have a duty to insure the property and tell the currect insurer of the passing of the deceased.   Most insurers will refuse normal contents cover on a house left unoccupied beyond 60 days. So, unoccupied, the home will not be insured against break-in damage, theft, flood, accidental damage, etc.   You may be able to obtain FLEE insurance covering only Fire, Lightening, Explosion and Earthquake. It may cost more than usual contents cover  because the home is unoccupied, even though the level/amount of cover is less than for an occupied home.   As said here already, an Executor would be wise (or indeed have a duty) to remove valuables from the home if you have somewhere safer to store them pending Probate, distribution, sale, etc.   I hope if you can explain the insurance risks to YB and assure him that you are not taking items just for your own benefit, he may see sense.   Please keep us updated ............
    • yours is not the next move   dx  
  • Our picks

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2304 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

Hi folks,

 

I've been prompted to look for answers regarding a situation that happened today. Basically I took my watch in to a Timpson shop and asked if they could install a new battery, they said yes it'll be 15 mins and gave me a ticket. I returned to collect my watch only to be told they couldn't replace the battery as they couldn't get the backing of my watch. That was fine but when I looked at the watch they had damaged the bezel and the face quite badly (deep gauging) and also scratched the backing. This is a watch I've had for around 18 months and it didn't have a single mark on it before they touched it. The watch also has sentimental value.

 

I immediately pointed out the damage and in fairness they accepted responsibility without any argument and agreed to pay for a new watch. They kept the damaged watch in order of finding the replacement but within an hour of leaving the shop I sourced the model from a nearby jewellers and so I called Timpson to let them know where they could get it. They requested I go to purchase it and they will reimburse me the cash when I take in the receipt for proof of purchase.

 

What I want to know however is, do I have the right to request my original watch back when I go in to be reimbursed ,even though they are replacing it, or do they keep it now that they paid for the replacement.

 

Any help and advice on this would be appreciated. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi folks,

 

I've been prompted to look for answers regarding a situation that happened today. Basically I took my watch in to a Timpson shop and asked if they could install a new battery, they said yes it'll be 15 mins and gave me a ticket. I returned to collect my watch only to be told they couldn't replace the battery as they couldn't get the backing of my watch. That was fine but when I looked at the watch they had damaged the bezel and the face quite badly (deep gauging) and also scratched the backing. This is a watch I've had for around 18 months and it didn't have a single mark on it before they touched it. The watch also has sentimental value.

 

I immediately pointed out the damage and in fairness they accepted responsibility without any argument and agreed to pay for a new watch. They kept the damaged watch in order of finding the replacement but within an hour of leaving the shop I sourced the model from a nearby jewellers and so I called Timpson to let them know where they could get it. They requested I go to purchase it and they will reimburse me the cash when I take in the receipt for proof of purchase.

 

What I want to know however is, do I have the right to request my original watch back when I go in to be reimbursed ,even though they are replacing it, or do they keep it now that they paid for the replacement.

 

Any help and advice on this would be appreciated. Thanks.

 

You can claim for the cost of the damage (the loss in value) for the original watch and keep the original, OR

 

Claim for the cost of a replacement, but they keep the original (which they can then do with as they wish).

 

Either way you end up with a watch (one!) and are compensated for your loss. They end up paying for the damage, either:

So, if X is the replacement value of your watch (undamaged), and Y it's value damaged

 

Then can pay you (X-Y) and give you the damaged watch back OR

They can pay you X. You use that to get a replacement. They keep your watch, (and can sell it).

 

Either way you get one watch to the value of (X-Y), which is what you started with, and they loose (X-Y) : the cost of the damage they caused.

 

Let's just say the watch cost. £500 new, but is now £300 value (undamaged), and they cause £100 of damage (so it is now worth £200).

 

You can claim £100 and keep the damaged watch.

They can give you £300 to get a replacement, but they can sell yours for £200.

 

Either way you end up with a £300 watch (so, are not "unjustly enriched") and they end up £100 out if pocket, representing the damage they caused.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That pretty much sums it up, 'no' you can't keep the old watch if you except the replacement watch. The retailer is making good the damage done to your watch by replacing it.

 

You can claim for the cost of the damage (the loss in value) for the original watch and keep the original, OR

 

Claim for the cost of a replacement, but they keep the original (which they can then do with as they wish).

 

Either way you end up with a watch (one!) and are compensated for your loss. They end up paying for the damage, either:

So, if X is the replacement value of your watch (undamaged), and Y it's value damaged

 

Then can pay you (X-Y) and give you the damaged watch back OR

They can pay you X. You use that to get a replacement. They keep your watch, (and can sell it).

 

Either way you get one watch to the value of (X-Y), which is what you started with, and they loose (X-Y) : the cost of the damage they caused.

 

Let's just say the watch cost. £500 new, but is now £300 value (undamaged), and they cause £100 of damage (so it is now worth £200).

 

You can claim £100 and keep the damaged watch.

They can give you £300 to get a replacement, but they can sell yours for £200.

 

Either way you end up with a £300 watch (so, are not "unjustly enriched") and they end up £100 out if pocket, representing the damage they caused.

Link to post
Share on other sites
+1

 

Very nicely put Bazza!

 

 

That's great, thanks for clearing that up guys. Much appreciated.

 

Phew! Thanks.

 

Sometimes I think I've explained stuff well, but I haven't done so as well as I'd hoped.

I don't mind algebra, so the 'X-Y' made sense to me, but not everyone gets on with it, so I thought a made up example would help (I'm not suggesting anyone is 'dumb' - just some people don't "get it" as algebra!)

 

If it makes sense, and has helped : I'm glad! (Otherwise it's not best use of your time or mine!)

 

The mathematical approach to damages doesn't take into account sentimental value ; you might want to have the damaged watch rather than a replacement!

 

If so, can the damage be repaired?

You could ask them to pay the cost of repair, if you really want to keep that watch : if they say "cost of a replacement is less, and you have a duty to mitigate your loss" (keep the costs down as far as possible), then point out that the aim of damages is to put you back into the position you should have been in, as far as money possibly can.

 

You are asking for "undamaged watch that had sentimental value" rather than "any undamaged watch of that model"

 

Cases:

the aim of damages is to put you back into the position you should have been in, as far as money possibly can. (Robinson v Harman, from 1848!)

 

"You have a duty to mitigate the loss" (British Westinghouse)

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...