Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I am trying to follow your advice in post 21 which suggests the kennels T&Cs are over ruled by the CRA As I understood it , even if the kennel felt they good reason to refuse the dog boarding, which would be a difficult point to argue , as I am unable to get the vet to confirm they said the dog “should “ be ok ,the most the kennel  would be entitled to would be reasonable admin expenses due to refusing to accept the dog . Then I read in you last post , which  to me seems a contradiction . Paragraph 3 suggests a Judge would favour the kennel and its stance ,then paragraph 4 says to deny a refund in unenforceable . Surely if to deny me a refund is unenforceable at common law , then a Judge would have to rule in my favour . So if I continue I need to be sure I am citing the correct sections of the CRA
    • To clear this up !This new ccj claim from cabot/Mortimer is  for  a bank i have no account with.And is obviously trying to make out my older debt is not statute barred.They think i will respond and start the six years all over again for a totally diferent debt. I have no debt with the bank they are claiming against me with. Do people not understand this?
    • The site has a drop down for different postal services, implying the exclusions are based on the service you use, yet when you select different services the exclusions appear to remain the same, and certainly in the case of Parcelforce do not tally with the cover included by Parcelforce.   My P2G account still shows the declaration I made.
    • Finally go  a little time to myself, so knocked the defence from your given examples. How does it look?   1.The claim is for the sum of £882.53 due by the Defendant under the CCA 1974 for a Shop Direct account with the account ref of ********************    2.The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default notice was served under s.87(1) of the CCA 1974 which has not been complied with.   3.The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 08/01/18, notice of which has been given to the defendant.   4.The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £70.60 - The claimant claims the sum of £953.13   #####Defence######   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. Paragraph 1 is denied. Whilst it is admitted I have held various catalogue agreements in the past, I have no recollection of ever entering into an agreement with Shop Direct and do not recognise the specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request pursuant to The Consumer Credit Act 1974.   2. Paragraph 2 is denied I have not been served with a Default Notice pursuant to sec87(1) the Consumer Credit Act 1974. They have sent an alleged copy dated 28th Jan 2018 from my cpr31.14 request. this is the first time I have seen this letter.   3. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of a legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1)   4. On receipt of this claim form I, the Defendant, sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of the said request.   5. A further request made via CPR 31.14 to the claimant’s solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The claimant has not complied.   6. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim   7. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed   8. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.   If you think it's okay, I'll get it put in today.    Thank you for all your help on this. 
  • Our picks

poor-boy

Motor Trader Issues on vehicle functions. Small Court Claim now issued ** Full Refund Given **

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1583 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

Nothing wrong in getting a bit aggressive when they continue to fob you off. I like it, lets see what they come back with.

 

Cheers buddy.

 

They think I am going to go away but I have no intentions too lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right an update for all -

 

The court papers were delivered to the Motor trader and they have filed a defence stating:

The faults were all mentioned to me (even though their emails state there were no faults)

 

I bought the car even though they stated faults to me prior to purchase (If £5600 of faults were mentioned then I doubt I would have bought the car for £5300 that is only worth around £5500).

 

They alleged that I called a mechanic on my mobile whilst I was viewing the car (I cannot recall this as I had not called a mechanic).

 

They alleged that I was aware and they ensured I was aware the Sat Nav system was jamming and not operable (Yes they did make me aware on 22nd Oct 2014 although the vehicle was bought on 18th Oct 2014).

 

They have alleged the BHP was not written on the V5 or service history so it was only a guide in their advert and should be dismissed (I have found it on the V5 and service history that it states 103KW which is 140BHP)

 

They also state the advert was generic and not specific to the vehicle sold to me (Did I mention that they have just admitted to not complying with the Consumer Regs 2008?)

 

The defence was filed on 21st January 2015.

 

The retailer called myself on 26th January 2015 advising the management will refund me for the vehicle but the onus is on me to return the vehicle (this offer was rejected as they must collect the vehicle)

 

The retailer called myself today 28th January 2015 advising they will get the vehicle collected and then send me a cheque for the vehicles price paid, I have stated to the retailer that expenses would need covering inc court costs etc (total £558.32) and also I would prefer BACS payment or cash on collection but the retailer has advised this not acceptable to them.

 

The court have asked if I would like to meditate with the retailer but as they have constantly lied, not responded and have provided fictional events I would prefer to just go straight to court.

 

HSBC

 

They have failed to respond to my letter asking for strict proof to their alleged wear and tear and I will writing to them again to escalate the matter.

 

VISA EUROPE

 

They are still trying to investigate and overdue on the response by 4 days so will chase them up too.

 

Overall I could take the offer from the retailer and suffer the loss of £558.32 but this is a matter of principle now and I will no longer tolerate any losses due to the negligence of the retailer.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The claim that you phoned a mechanic on your mobile - do you have access to your call log for that period of time to check if a call was made to anyone ?


Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy -

HERE

2: Take back control of your finances -

Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors?

Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt

Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated -

Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I have checked the log and I had called the Mrs to say that I had arrived to the garage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Update:

 

As the retailer that vehicle was purchased from reads the comments on here, they may find it useful to know that I am not giving up and their own emails, invoice and the vehicle is evidence against their own defence (AJ and ALI hope you are both well and keeping my refund including all my additional costs/ interest nice and warm J )

 

Central Motor Company

I have decided to mediate with the retailer first of all and let them present their defence and evidence. The paperwork has been posted back to the courts.

 

HSBC

 

HSBC complaints department have been in touch and after all the gibberish they have finally admitted that they have NOT used the Visa rules and regulations to decline my claim but it is based on an individual’s opinion as they cannot understand the “the claim” and has no knowledge about Visa. The constant repeat I get is “Sold as seen” and the vehicle matches “The description as advertised” and they state that the BHP is fair wear and tear even though it was advertised as 170BHP and the vehicle was manufactured as 140BHP.

 

But then all of a sudden I was advised by Apurva the complaints investigator that they used: Reason Code 53 to decline the claim (please Google search the code and you will laugh)

 

HSBC complaints manager Veren has also advised that staff are not trained to deal with these issues and it is far too simple to decline the claim and not respond to the customer if they ask for information or evidence.

 

I have advised the Complaints manager that his response will be forwarded onto Stuart Gulliver and ask for his views regarding these training issues and providing false information to customers / consumers (email prepped to send).

 

VISA EUROPE

 

They have been updated with the lack of information from HSBC and they are appalled as the bank are not responding to them either.

 

Visa have tried to contact the people whom have made the decisions within HSBC but they have to date not received a response but this has now been escalated within Visa Europe.

 

Claims Court

 

This is still ongoing and we are at early stages but will keep you updated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today the mediation service has taken place.

 

The vehicle retailer has stated that they will refund ONLY for the vehicle as long as I get the car to them and then they will send a company cheque within 14 days, this was declined as they are refusing to cover all other costs that have incurred.

 

So the matter is now going to court and just waiting on the dates from the court etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The final straw.

 

Statement of truth including all Exhibits of communication have been logged with the court.

 

A hearing date has been set and I am just waiting for the defendants statement of truth and exhibits which should be here by 4pm today (I will not be holding my breath)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they fail to comply with the directions...then inform the court and ask that they impose sanctions on the defendants (strike out their defence)

 

Andy


We could do with some help from you.

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

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted on behalf of poor-boy.

 

They have made me an offer to not to go to the hearing but it is short of £355 (my losses) so I have rejected it.

 

The reason for rejection is that they have no evidence to support themselves and neither have they sent the paperwork to the court. The ball is currently in my court and I have asked them to add the £355 so the dispute can be resolved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we can expect some good news on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think we can expect some good news on this.

 

Lets hope so :)


Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy -

HERE

2: Take back control of your finances -

Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors?

Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt

Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated -

Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right guys,

 

1st of all the claim has been settled out of court and the trader has refunded me in full including my expenses.

 

There had been a battle to get there but I finally settled with their third offer as going to court would have cost them dearly due to the District Judge accepting an interest rate of £88.88 per day :)

 

All I can say is I am very thank full to the support and information on this forum and without it I would have never achieved what I have, I have learnt a lot from this and although a novice at any kind of law the District Judge thanked me for the preparation of my documents and exhibits.

 

The defendants did not send a bundle to the court as the only evidence they had to back themselves up was the invoice that they wrote 'sold as seen, customer aware of engine faults'.

 

I will over time add my statements to the forum as they are a very interesting read.

 

Thanks all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is absolutely cracking news and I'm so pleased for you. I just wish others would go down this route when all else fails. The only reason car dealers get away with breaking the law is because any threats against them are very rarely carried out so they are confident that selling rubbish will make them a nice profit with no comeback.

 

I'll look forward to the statements and once again congratulations.

Edited by Conniff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't mind poor-boy I will move this back into the motoring section so hopefully it will give encouragement to others.

 

The subject heading has now been amended to 'Motor Trader Issues on vehicle functions. Small Court Claim now issued ** Full Refund Given ** '.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fine if you wish to move it back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...