Halfords overfilled engine oil then bodged repair then denied liability! Legal action starting! HELP needed!**SUCCESS**

[Curtainsplitter]

Good news. So the hearing was exactly what we expected.

 

yes ii suppose so. Will be good when the independent mechanic rules the same, so will await that report.

[Ganymede]

You will need to agree to the content of a joint letter of instruction to the expert with the other side's solicitor.

[Brownguy53]

wow...interesting

[Ganymede]

Why did you delete your post?

[honeybee13]

Why did you delete your post?

 

Was there a post, Gany?

 

HB

[Ganymede]

Was there a post, Gany?

 

HB

 

I got an email notification of a new post with a long post from the OP and came in to answer him and it had disappeared.

 

Weird.

[honeybee13]

Ah yes, good point. Hopefully brownguy will be back to enlighten us.

 

HB

[Curtainsplitter]

hi sorry brownguy is my brother, we use a shared computer. He's really upset today as he has had a CCJ put against him about rent arrears..and was on the forum earlier. I didn't realise he will still logged in and by accident posted on his username..apologies about that.

Here is what I put:

Hey so just an update..Halfords's solicitors suggested a mechanic who is £600 so it would be £300 each upfront paid..they sent me his expertise as such. And said they had had quotes of £2000-3000 so they felt this £600 quote they had' liased' to get was correct. I looked into the company and although there was no link of ties online to them and Halfords or any sub-contracts of which my main concern was... I just do not trust their solicitors as to the matter and perhaps I am wrong here in this?I did wonder as to how they had contacted this 'expert' first as to what had been said and if any incentive had been offered as they had spoken to them first and of course have their client-halfwords best interests at hand. Therefore Halfords asked me if I accepted their witness expert they produced. My understanding from speaking to them was they would produce a list of experts and or the court would appoint an expert that was independent, as the only reason the judge had not given me reason that my witness could not be used was that I had spoken with him before mentioning it to the court and therefore the court do not know what was said between me and him and if such if any incentive such as money was agreed. I therefore explained all of this to Halfords Solicitors and thus that I don't agree to their expert on the same grounds as I did not know what had been 'liaised' to get this price and also what had been said. Since then haven't heard anything from them. Don't know if i made the right move..but haven't heard from them since...what are the options for moving this forward..I have researched and seen some sites that offer car mechanics who do court approved and trading standards approve mechanic inspection and reports for £200 with the same qualifications as Halford's witness?

[Brownguy53]

so sorry (its his bro now)..could really do with help on my CCJ issue guys..sorry bro..hope this works out for you! Seems like everyone is behind you.

[Brownguy53]

Deleted - Wrong thread

Edited December 10, 2015 by andydd
Wrong thread

[Brownguy53]

we are on each others accounts again ffs..sorry about this guys..but seems our devices are keeping us logged in on vice versa as we share devices as we on the same bloody internet IP..please consider this

[Guest]

ask them if they wld agree to the approved independent 200£ one you found?

[Brownguy53]

Hi just to update you all on this..I refused Halfords offer of a witness due to the cost..and as I said the judge gave some written directions he was going to direct at the preliminary hearing..he said at that hearing I could not use my witness as the courts and halfords/their firm did not know if any incentive have been offered or what price has been agreed or what had been said.

He did give me permission to use the audio and video evidence and said that I must notify the court and halfords 2 weeks before the trial date which is in febuary of the audio/video by sending it to both of them.

[Brownguy53]

I got an email about 1 week later offering me Halfords witness who was £600.00. I did not get the judge's written hearing notes from the preliminary hearing, so ideally I was aware that dec/january was the time the car needed to be done by by request of the judge.

I therefore wasn't sure how to proceed and did write to the court asking them if I could make my expert witness a normal witness and I had no reply and on 23rd November emailed the courts asking for advice on wether I had to accept or reject Halford's expert witness offer,of which I had no response.

I have done what Ford sent yesterday and last week sent Halfords this email of an offer of another witness and have received this email today:

 

Dear Mr XXXXX

 

Firstly, any suggestion that any expert put forward by us has been offered an incentive or is not independent of us is unfounded. Secondly, the failure to meet the Court's deadline for agreeing the identity and cost of an expert is not as a result of our client. Our client's suggestion for an independent expert was provided to you in good time before the deadline. You reverted after the deadline had passed and indicated that you had written to the Court requesting an expert.

 

Notwithstanding the above, we are prepared to agree your proposed way forward by the instruction of My Car Inspections. We have contacted them this morning. They have confirmed that fees can be firmed up upon receipt of instructions. Further, they have also confirmed that the vehicle will already need to be in a condition such that it can be inspected without the need to be stripped down in any way. Please confirm the condition of the vehicle.

 

We anticipate being in touch early next week regarding the instructions to the expert.

 

Yours faithfully

 

XXXXXX

Associate

[Brownguy53]

i've then had a second offer made to me in reference to the case in this email:

 

Without Prejudice Save As To Costs and Subject to Contract

 

Dear Sir

 

Claim No: XXXX

 

We write further to the previous without prejudice discussions on this matter.

In short, our client denies that it is the cause of the extent of the engine oil overfill suffered by your vehicle or any subsequent damage as alleged (for the reasons set out in our client's Defence). Consequently, our client does not therefore accept that it is also liable for the expenses that you have sought to claim as a result.

Notwithstanding the above, our client is willing to look at this matter commercially given the costs of proceeding to a trial on this matter. Therefore, on a purely commercial basis, our client is prepared to settle this matter by way of a payment to you of £1,750 by way of a full and final settlement.

 

Should you refuse this offer, our client reserves its right to bring your conduct in this claim to the Court's attention including in relation to the matter of costs (even though this is a Small Claims Track matter, the Court still retains a jurisdiction to impose costs sanctions on parties that have behaved unreasonably – Rule 27.14(2)(g) of the Civil Procedure Rules). In particular, we are referring to the email purporting to be from CAG/BBC's Watchdog alleging that our client is being investigated in this matter. The BBC has confirmed to us that this email is not genuine and was not sent by the BBC/ Watchdog/CAG. Our client can therefore only conclude that this was a misguided attempt by you to put pressure on our client. Our client reserves its rights to submit to the Court that this constituted unreasonable behaviour on your part.

 

Please confirm whether or not our client's offer of £1,750 is accepted within 14 days of the date of this letter.

If it is agreed, we will forward draft terms of settlement for signature. If the offer is not agreed, our instructions are to attend the trial to dispute both liability and quantum.

 

Yours faithfully

[Brownguy53]

1750 is what the car was worth and I would ask for you guys at CAGS help now, as in my reply should I not be saying that I was not sent the hearing notes from the prem hearing with dates and that I did email and write to the courts? My understanding was a email was that of the same of a letter. Moreover unsure on what you guys think about this 'unreasonable behaviour' argument they are bringing. Am slightly unsure as to who sent what emails but can only assume it's someone who was a troll or doesn't like Halfords? I have suffered a short loss of earnings, the towing cost and also the original petrol costs that Halfords promised for picking the vehicle up next to that of the car value..

[Honorsmum]

Here's my take, having recently gone through mediation:

 

Take the money.

The saying, "a bird in the hand," springs to mind.

In our case, we had to lose the cost of an expert witness and the cost of an electrician in order to "win" in mediation - costs of nearly £600 in a case that was originally worth around £1400.

Yes, it feels unfair BUT you have no way of knowing which side the judge will come down on, and do you really want this hanging over you into the New Year?

[Eversir]

The BBC has confirmed to us that this email is not genuine and was not sent by the BBC/ Watchdog. Our client can therefore only conclude that this was a misguided attempt by you to put pressure on our client. Our client reserves its rights to submit to the Court that this constituted unreasonable behaviour on your part.

 

 

Quite a serious allegation on their part.

 

Not withstanding, the thing you need to consider is how likely you are to be awarded a sum greater than what they are offering you. If the answer is the same or less, take the money and have a less stressful start to 2016!

[Eversir]

Yes, it feels unfair BUT you have no way of knowing which side the judge will come down on, and do you really want this hanging over you into the New Year?

 

This.

[Honorsmum]

This.

 

Great minds, Eversir!

[Ganymede]

i've then had a second offer made to me in reference to the case in this email:

 

Without Prejudice Save As To Costs and Subject to Contract

 

Dear Sir

 

Claim No: XXXX

 

We write further to the previous without prejudice discussions on this matter.

In short, our client denies that it is the cause of the extent of the engine oil overfill suffered by your vehicle or any subsequent damage as alleged (for the reasons set out in our client's Defence). Consequently, our client does not therefore accept that it is also liable for the expenses that you have sought to claim as a result.

Notwithstanding the above, our client is willing to look at this matter commercially given the costs of proceeding to a trial on this matter. Therefore, on a purely commercial basis, our client is prepared to settle this matter by way of a payment to you of £1,750 by way of a full and final settlement.

 

Should you refuse this offer, our client reserves its right to bring your conduct in this claim to the Court's attention including in relation to the matter of costs (even though this is a Small Claims Track matter, the Court still retains a jurisdiction to impose costs sanctions on parties that have behaved unreasonably – Rule 27.14(2)(g) of the Civil Procedure Rules). In particular, we are referring to the email purporting to be from CAG/BBC's Watchdog alleging that our client is being investigated in this matter. The BBC has confirmed to us that this email is not genuine and was not sent by the BBC/ Watchdog. Our client can therefore only conclude that this was a misguided attempt by you to put pressure on our client. Our client reserves its rights to submit to the Court that this constituted unreasonable behaviour on your part.

 

Please confirm whether or not our client's offer of £1,750 is accepted within 14 days of the date of this letter.

If it is agreed, we will forward draft terms of settlement for signature. If the offer is not agreed, our instructions are to attend the trial to dispute both liability and quantum.

 

Yours faithfully

 

I'd take the money.

[Brownguy53]

l..ive emailed them and said this..

 

Dear xxxxx

 

Firstly, I am sorry if Halfords felt I was being overzealous in refusing their witness and if you did Mr xxx also, but I do not know what words have been exchanged by Halfords/xxxx in agreeing a expert witness and this is all of which the context of my email referred to, in the same advice put forward to me at the preliminary hearing and no accusation was meant towards Foot Anstey to being dishonest.

 

Secondly, the failure to meet the Court's deadline for agreeing the identity and cost of an expert is not as a result of myself I feel, as I wrote to the court of which I have proof of postage for, to ask that the expert witness who had witnessed and seen the car's condition on return from Halford's Autocentre Nottingham could be made an additional witness as I felt this was a important witness to the case. I have had no correspondance from the court regarding this and I have been awaiting a response.

 

I further emailed the courts directly regarding the expert witness as stated, which of my understanding is that of the same context of a letter on the 23rd November regarding the expert witness and again had no response and have been awaiting a response from the courts for.

 

Subsequently I responded to your email of an expert witness offer within 14 days (as I replied on 2nd December 2015.)

Therefore as I did not recieve the preliminary hearing dates and notes from the court and only the final trial date, I responded within the earliest timeframe I could, considering that I work in a full time professional management position.

I therefore feel that my advice for for an independent expert was provided to you in good time considering the above and research that must be done,therefore no fault of my own.

 

Despite this,I can confirm that the car's condition is exactly that of what Halford's Nottingham's Autocentre returned it to me (of which I have photographs and videos of taken at that time).

I note that at the preliminary hearing, I asked the judge if I use special equipment for the final trial and If I may use video and audio evidence and he granted me this permission after explaining the context of why this evidence would be required and this was granted on the basis that I submit these to you two weeks before the trial, I will of course keep to this and submit this with my court bundle to you.

As asked by the judge at the preliminary hearing, the car has been kept under my carport in a locked driveway and been SORN since the return of the vehicle due to the damage it suffered from the overfill and the fact I did not want to touch the car any further.

 

I can also confirm reciept of the reviewed 14 day offer of a settlement also which is of course without prejudice I note.

I am as a gesture of goodwill also under no acceptance of liability and without prejudice (that of the same of Halfords as to save costs involved), willing to be open to any reasonable offer to resolve this matter out of court as per the Protocols set out under the Small Claims Court rules.

Therefore are Halfords/Foot Anstey open to consider a final and full settlement offer of £1900 of which I will sign a settlement agreement.

The justification of context as to my offer is that I also have suffered a loss from the promised taxi journey (promised by the claims handler- Charles at Halfords at the time of the matter) of reimbursement to pick the vehicle up from Barnsley Cortonwood Branch from the 'gesture of goodwill' repair conducted by Halfords, I emailed these costs to Halfords/Customer Services as was originally agreed with this Halfords employee at the time and did not recieve any response.

Further to this on return of the vehicle from Halford's Nottingham Autocentre, I had to tow the car back to my home to store it under the carport as Halfords would not return the vehicle to me although it was my property and I thus suffered a loss on the cost of this towing.

If the matter had been resolved correctly I would not have suffered the above costs and regardless of acceptance of liability, these costs have been incurred to me unfairly.

I feel that my full and final offer is extremely fair and i note it is only £150 more than Halford's/Foot Anstey's offer.

I am happy to supply reciepts to justify these costs if the need should arise as they are already in my court bundle.

If you could reply at your earliest convience that would be beneficial.

 

 

Regards

 

 

xxxx

[Brownguy53]

am gunna see what happens now..f...so i will see if they reply within 14 days and re-consider things then.. cool

[Eversir]

Bear in mind if they read these forums, they are now aware of this fact

[Brownguy53]

Yeah Eversir going to see what they say now really and have a good think, but you all raise good points. Thanks for the advice and help everyone...unsure what to do moving on but will have a deep think..if they give £1900 will settle..