Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • absolute rubbish, whomever told you that lied to make them sound important. no stores are using face recognition, they are not allowed too it's not been generally licenced by the gov't. it's only in a very few stores in central london. and they most certainly would never waste staff time searching old CCTV they dont even have. it should be wiped by GDPR laws etc after 30days. if you get any silly letters BIN THEM. go see your GP ASAP 
    • Thank you both so much for the reply. I am worried because they told me they have face detection systems in place, that they go back through the CCTV from their other stores and find out I've shoplifted from them before. How likely is this? Also they did not mention anything about DWF solicitors or retail loss prevention. Should I still expect a letter from them? 
    • OK, I've found some time, new version here. Bit in blue that seems to me to be superfluous - but you decide. Crossed out bit where the law has changed. Added bits in red. Only one bit rewritten for clarity in magenta. Here are the two exhibits I mention. That's enough playing with colours by me 🤣   Defendant's WS - version 3.pdf 17_extracted_IPC Code of PracticeV9 V4.pdf Transcript - Excel v Wilkinson.pdf
    • Five fiercest moments from Penny Mordaunt and Angela Rayner’s blazing TV debate leaving Farage a sideshow Nigel Farage and Stephen Flynn were the sideshow as the largest parties fought it out Five fiercest moments from Penny Mordaunt and Angela Rayner’s blazing TV debate – leaving Nigel Farage a sideshow – The Sun | The Sun WWW.THESUN.CO.UK ANGELA Rayner and Penny Mordaunt launched into several fierce clashes in their debate last night.Their tense rows included divides...  
    • Shorter than sunak visit eh?   Nigel Farage dunked on Sunak’s D-Day exit – and this response deserves a medal WWW.THEPOKE.COM Reform leader Farage criticised PM Rishi Sunak for leaving the D-Day anniversary events in order to film a TV interview - and writer Rick... Watch: Nigel Farage has drink thrown over him WWW.BBC.CO.UK The new Reform UK leader was leaving a pub where he had been meeting voters in Clacton.  
  • 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

Hudu V Lloyds (Getting Money Back)


hudu
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5294 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

  • Replies 133
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Tick yes and send to SCM.

 

Usually no other witnesses.

 

Just tick no regarding agreement of the directions.

 

That quick enough for you.

 

Yay! :cool: Quick enough indeed.

 

But can you just clarify point 2.

 

Secondly, Section C (Witnesses) - I have put my own name obviously, but it asks "witness to which facts'?.

 

Its the "Witness to which facts?" bit that is throwing me.

 

I'm tempted to write "All of them innit!" ;-)

 

What goes in there?

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heeeheee. :p

 

Ok...I'll go with that. Thanks for the quick response.

 

Been at this for hours (Hand Written) - time to go and relax and I'll take it to the court tomorrow.

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry on reflection, 'All facts and matters relevant to this claim.'

 

Probably a bit late, but you can use the PDF version in my post 46, it it easier to complete as you can cut and past and it looks better.

If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry on reflection, 'All facts and matters relevant to this claim.'

 

Probably a bit late, but you can use the PDF version in my post 46, it it easier to complete as you can cut and past and it looks better.

 

I went with "All facts to be contained in court bundle"

 

As i said, it's handwritten - as I have no printer :x

 

I used my poshest scrawl though. :p

 

Hope the above will suffice after all that? :confused:

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

AQ delivered to County Court today. :)

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Awwwww...

 

Had a really nice letter from Lloyds today saying that they thank me for my letter of 20th december where i rejected their goodwill offer and that they know that their solicitors are now dealing with my county court claim.

 

It only took them a month to do that. How sweet.

 

I'll see them in court. Well...probably not...:rolleyes:

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Awwwww...

 

Had a really nice letter from Lloyds today saying that they thank me for my letter of 20th december where i rejected their goodwill offer and that they know that their solicitors are now dealing with my county court claim.

 

It only took them a month to do that. How sweet.

 

I'll see them in court. Well...probably not...:rolleyes:

 

Doubt it. lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

A bump and a "Should I be calling the court by now..as I have heard nothing?"

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not unusual to wait this long for directions, however it will do no harm to call the court, they are usually quite helpful and friendly.

If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

*update*

 

Called the court yesterday. Lady told me that the AQ was with the district judge but he has about 3-4 weeks backlog and is very busy.

 

Couldn't tell me any more.

 

Patiently I wait. :-?:(

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...update...

 

no movement.

 

That is all. :(

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rotherham Crown Court.

 

Glad there are others at the same stage...I lost all my contemporaries when they won ages ago! :lol:

 

Shouldn't be long now...but this has seemed the most frustrating time as everything is out of your hands.

 

Will take a read of your thread.

 

Good luck. :)

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

May 18th!!! Yay!

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks folks... Maybe I jumped the gun a little. :confused:

 

I've been home and actually read the letter now. I don't seem to have a court date after all.

 

Before District Judge ****** in the *****county court

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT

 

The court is considering allocating this matter to the small claims track. The parties shall lodge any objection by 4pm on 18th May 2007.

 

Does anyone know how much longer for a court date after that time? And do Lloyds use such orders to further draw out the process?

 

A confused and slightly dejected hudu. :|

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This order is unusual, looks like the judge is playing is safe before allocation, as your claim in around the small - fast track threshold.

 

Nothing to do with Lloyds delaying tactics.

 

At a guess, it will probably be another month before you hear again with directions that will usually include a hearing date.

If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It did seem odd, as I was quite clear in my AQ that it was below the threshold before interest and asked that the judge would consider this.

 

You say the judge was probably 'playing safe' - what would be the reasoning behind that?

 

I'm confuzzled. :confused:

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He just wants to give the parties the opportunity to object, prior to allocating a borderline claim to the small claims track, this is speculation on my part though.

If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

*UPDATE - such that it is*

 

I called the court and they said the court date could be anything up to 15 weeks away.

 

Why have I paid these people money? :mad:

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...