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

[Honorsmum]

What is it you want to accomplish in court? Recognition of Halford' s liability? More money?

You have been told by several posters that your best bet is to settle now. If you don't, you stand to lose. My experience that, even if you feel you have an absolutely water-tight case (we did), that is not a guarantee of you winning, nor is it a guarantee that you will be awarded all/any costs you feel are due.

 

Read your letter to Halfords back again - you say that you recognise you are only asking £150 more than they 're offering; turn that around, and what you are actually saying is that you are prepared to carry on and fight to the death for the sake of £150. Are you really? You will lose a day's pay to go to court and will only get £80 back, even if you win...which is not certain.

 

For the sake of £150, I'd take the money and get on with the rest of your life.

[Guest]

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

 

just to note, that i didnt suggest (or even send anything) anything re 'incentives' or 'non independence' on their part. rather you just to ask them if they wld agree to the lower cost one (with costs in mind) which was also approved and independent (post #212). which they did? as it transpired though, you were a bit late.

 

as the guys suggest, for 150 (which wld be yr cost of the expert), take it? if they come back with that extra 150, take it?

[Brownguy53]

Friday 18th December 2015

 

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Not without prejudice

 

 

 

Further to my email sent today.

 

I am now writing to raise the issue of an alleged BBC E-mail.

 

 

 

I have already told the mediator at mediation (without prejudice) - as you may surely know - that I have no knowledge of any BBC Watchdog email.

 

 

 

I require to know where you have got this information and I require you to disclose a copy of the alleged full email to be sent to me.

 

 

 

It is an extremely serious allegation that I am attempting to pervert the course of justice, in this way.

 

 

 

I require you to provide me with whatever evidence you claim to have which established that such a email has been sent and that I am implicated.

 

 

 

Frankly, I take this as a desperate attempt by you to bully me into dropping a claim against you which you have no hope of defending when we get to court due to the strong audio and video evidence I have alongside my court bundle evidence.

 

 

 

Please notice that this letter is being sent to you NOT without prejudice and this means that I shall be informing the court of your serious allegations and I shall be asking the court to demand from you the proof I am requesting in this letter.

 

 

 

I notice that you have attempted to use the without prejudice device in order to make these allegations and yet to hide them from the court.

 

 

 

Both the court and I fully understand - even if you do not- that without prejudice is only used in respect of negiotated offers and not to hide these kind of allegations from the court.

 

 

 

Therefore, I shall be producing your letter with your allegations to the court and I fully expect that the court will be prepared to consider the contents of your letter because of the way you have attempted to manipulate the without prejudice rules against a litigation in person who I suppose you imagine must not know any better.

 

In terms of your most client’s most recent instruction, you will have to tell them that I will see them in court unless they can come up with a REASONABLE offer – and by the way, you are effectively proposing a Part 36 offer which is not applicable to the small claims track as you well know.

I am confident that in view of the evidence I have, your latest attempt to scare me off with false accusations and also your quasi-part 36 offer, the judge will see enough merit in my claim and the way that I have conducted myself reasonably as a litigant in person, to apply the usual part 27 rules.

 

 

 

Yours Faithfully,

[Brownguy53]

Well what you all say is true I assume, but I've addressed their rubbish allegation now, probably of which theyve created IMO.

[Brownguy53]

What is it you want to accomplish in court? Recognition of Halford' s liability? More money?

You have been told by several posters that your best bet is to settle now. If you don't, you stand to lose. My experience that, even if you feel you have an absolutely water-tight case (we did), that is not a guarantee of you winning, nor is it a guarantee that you will be awarded all/any costs you feel are due.

 

Read your letter to Halfords back again - you say that you recognise you are only asking £150 more than they 're offering; turn that around, and what you are actually saying is that you are prepared to carry on and fight to the death for the sake of £150. Are you really? You will lose a day's pay to go to court and will only get £80 back, even if you win...which is not certain.

 

For the sake of £150, I'd take the money and get on with the rest of your life.

 

Hmm suppose so. I'm going to think over the weekend

[Eversir]

Looking at this objectively, try and see things from the judge's perspective on the day.

 

Chances are they are not going to be 100% knowledgable with vehicle mechanics and will have to rely on the evidence presented to them on the day; whether from you, Halfords or an independent expert witness (if instructed). As much as you know you've been wronged (and Halfords are no doubt pretty aware of it), the judge is an outside party; the legal system is overburdened at the moment and as it stands it really could go either way.

 

To have been offered pretty much the full amount prior to a hearing, you clearly have enough of a case that it worries Halfords. If nothing else, take pride in that. It is more justice than most receive.

 

Is the prospect of an extra ~9% that you'll have to spend £x on, with what might be a 50% chance of winning really worth two months of preparation and stress? Only you can decide that. The experience of a court room on the day is certainly worth something, but choose your battles wisely

[Brownguy53]

Looking at this objectively, try and see things from the judge's perspective on the day.

 

Chances are they are not going to be 100% knowledgable with vehicle mechanics and will have to rely on the evidence presented to them on the day; whether from you, Halfords or an independent expert witness (if instructed). As much as you know you've been wronged (and Halfords are no doubt pretty aware of it), the judge is an outside party; the legal system is overburdened at the moment and as it stands it really could go either way.

 

To have been offered pretty much the full amount prior to a hearing, you clearly have enough of a case that it worries Halfords. If nothing else, take pride in that. It is more justice than most receive.

 

Is the prospect of an extra ~9% that you'll have to spend £x on, with what might be a 50% chance of winning really worth two months of preparation and stress? Only you can decide that. The experience of a court room on the day is certainly worth something, but choose your battles wisely

 

They wouldn't be making offers if they weren't scared..they've let this go on 1 year so whats 2 more months to me? No skin off my back. If they want to create fictional fraudalent emails to blackwash a judge good luck to them as I'll be getting a detailed report from my Internet Provider including my IP address matched to that of that alleged email when as per above I get the email back from them..to prove I have not sent it and nothing to do with it, one thing I am not is a liar. Also will do the same for my mobile phone..and when I prove I have nothing to do with this alleged email I will be asking for a apology from them.

 

I think Halfords will make another offer, last time they said no offers blah blah after mediation..then now they come with another offer. So they talk rubbish and change stories constantly..I won't be bullied by anyone..going all the way!

[king12345]

My two shillings that they will offer you the £1900

[Guest]

brownguy

re supposed email(s) you/they mention above.

recall bankfodders posts # 67 and 76.

maybe it was another 'spoof' email?

[Eversir]

...as I'll be getting a detailed report from my Internet Provider including my IP address matched to that of that alleged email when as per above I get the email back from them..to prove I have not sent it and nothing to do with it, one thing I am not is a liar. Also will do the same for my mobile phone..and when I prove I have nothing to do with this alleged email I will be asking for a apology from them.

 

Pointless excercise, IMO. Unless the IP addresses match, it wouldn't prove it wasn't you, just as they couldn't prove it was you without some extremely intensive data forensics.

 

They need to either substantiate the allegation they are making or retract it. It is defamatory in nature and they should know better.

[Brownguy53]

Pointless excercise, IMO. Unless the IP addresses match, it wouldn't prove it wasn't you, just as they couldn't prove it was you without some extremely intensive data forensics.

 

They need to either substantiate the allegation they are making or retract it. It is defamatory in nature and they should know better.

 

Halfords have rejected my £1900 offer said its £1750 or court.

 

I did not send emails of the nature they state and to be honest I will prove it and that they have created these emails IMO! I can't prove it (that they created them as a dustraction but I know its true!!) but I think its some smog to take the heat off their weak case , and I am even tempted to going to say to them will they pay for an expert witness or go 50/50 on an expert witness to analyse my mobile phone/laptop to prove that the emails were not sent by me.

[Eversir]

I did not send emails of the nature they state and to be honest I will prove it and that they have created these emails IMO! I can't prove it (that they created them as a dustraction but I know its true!!) but I think its some smog to take the heat off their weak case , and I am even tempted to going to say to them will they pay for an expert witness or go 50/50 on an expert witness to analyse my mobile phone/laptop to prove that the emails were not sent by me.

 

You'll probably find this exercise will exceed the value of your claim. Chances are it wouldn't be allowed as the costs are disproportionate; failing that it is unlikely you'd be allowed to recover it even if you won.

 

It still wouldn't rule out the possibility you borrowed a device or asked a friend to do it, so it doesn't actually prove you didn't send it.

 

My point is, the burden of proof lies with Halfords. If they want to make wild accusations that damage your character, they better be able to back them up.

[Ganymede]

Halfords have rejected my £1900 offer said its £1750 or court.

 

I did not send emails of the nature they state and to be honest I will prove it and that they have created these emails IMO! I can't prove it (that they created them as a dustraction but I know its true!!) but I think its some smog to take the heat off their weak case , and I am even tempted to going to say to them will they pay for an expert witness or go 50/50 on an expert witness to analyse my mobile phone/laptop to prove that the emails were not sent by me.

 

Sorry but you're getting a bit silly with that last part.

 

I think you should be giving very serious consideration to accepting their offer and putting this whole thing behind you.

[Honorsmum]

Sorry but you're getting a bit silly with that last part.

 

I think you should be giving very serious consideration to accepting their offer and putting this whole thing behind you.

 

 

 

Hear, hear.

Small claims aren't interested in the "he said, she said" rubbish. They will look at facts relating to the claim, ie did Halfords bodge your car or not.

 

We had an issue last year with a tenant forging a tenancy agreement, to change it from 12 months to 6 months so that he could get out of it. We could prove it - my nephew is an IT expert and the agency that manages the property has electronic records if every document issued. We went to a solicitor to take things further, and at a lot of expense he advised us to concentrate on cutting our losses, getting our property back and moving on.

 

You have posted on here throughout the year, presumably because the advice and expertise and experience offered on here has a value. Forget about not losing face, and take Halford' s offer.

[Eversir]

You have posted on here throughout the year, presumably because the advice and expertise and experience offered on here has a value. Forget about not losing face, and take Halford' s offer.

 

Spot on. Spend the time on something more worthwhile.

[andydd]

Sorry but you're getting a bit silly with that last part.

 

I think you should be giving very serious consideration to accepting their offer and putting this whole thing behind you.

 

I agree it's all beginning to sound like childish name calling, who cares about the bbc letters,they have no relevance and I doubt very much they would mention them in court.

 

I'd strongly recommend settling for 1750 and put it behind you, don't get involved in some sort of personal crusade. You are free to suggest you will settle for 1900 but then accept the 1750 depending on wording of the offers.

[Brownguy53]

Well Halfords's solicitor tried to call me yesterday regarding my letter sent to them re-the BBC letter and they've made me another offer to update you all of £1825 now. They also mentioned Halfords want done with the matter and that it would be agreed in a Tomlin Order. I understand what all of you are saying and such about the he/she said stuff but, my claim is for roughly £3300 in total. So £1825 is a bit low. I also accept what your all saying that maybe an IT expert won't be accepted by the court in terms of cost, but the claim can go up to £5000 in small claims court from my understanding and as i did not send this BBC alleged email, perverting the court of justice is very serious and if I'm not allowed to pay and split the costs of a 50/50 IT expert then I will source one and make them a witness for the matter and add their expenses to the court claim as I feel this is fair, unless of course like you all say Halfords withdraw this allegation.My credibility of character is at stake here and in a court of law that means alot if this goes to trial, so its important this issue is addressed.At the end of the day with it being Xmas eve now, a tomlin order will take 3-4 weeks, by then we're talking the end of January lol..so whats the point really? i may as well go have some fun and let it go to trial and get the full amount as the trial date is Feb 2016..

[BazzaS]

Well Halfords's solicitor tried to call me yesterday regarding my letter sent to them re-the BBC letter and they've made me another offer to update you all of £1825 now. They also mentioned Halfords want done with the matter and that it would be agreed in a Tomlin Order. I understand what all of you are saying and such about the he/she said stuff but, my claim is for roughly £3300 in total. So £1825 is a bit low. I also accept what your all saying that maybe an IT expert won't be accepted by the court in terms of cost, but the claim can go up to £5000 in small claims court from my understanding and as i did not send this BBC alleged email, perverting the court of justice is very serious and if I'm not allowed to pay and split the costs of a 50/50 IT expert then I will source one and make them a witness for the matter and add their expenses to the court claim as I feel this is fair, unless of course like you all say Halfords withdraw this allegation.My credibility of character is at stake here and in a court of law that means alot if this goes to trial, so its important this issue is addressed.At the end of the day with it being Xmas eve now, a tomlin order will take 3-4 weeks, by then we're talking the end of January lol..so whats the point really? i may as well go have some fun and let it go to trial and get the full amount as the trial date is Feb 2016..

 

Does your claim include matters of "credibility of character"?

Would that not be an action for defamation (libel or slander) which would be a whole different kettle of fish (& not heard in the County Court). Just make sure the Tomlin Order states it relates only to the engine litigation.

 

Deal with the engine matters, then reconsider if you have a viable cause of action for, and resources to, pursue any other matters.

[andydd]

Nothing to do with perverting the course of justice, this is a civil claim.

 

Solicitors letters/offers to settle often contain all sorts of crap, they always go on about how strong their position is and that they are only settling for commercial reasons, this is mostly [naughty word], if they had a watertight case theyd be happy to continue fighting.

 

My credibility is at stake is, no offence, but a stupid comment, this is a court claim, it wont be of interest to anyone else at all, there are no credibility issues, it is NOT important this issue is addressed at all, this is purely a civil claim for a monetary amount, you have done really well so far, dont get sidetracked into silly secondary issues, either you accept the amount or want to continue the claim, I doubt a Judge will be happy if either side start mud slinging and bring up other issues.

[Vauban]

i may as well go have some fun and let it go to trial and get the full amount as the trial date is Feb 2016

. It appears that you want your day in court regardless, though I don't think it should be regarded as a form of entertainment!

 

The fact that you have a serious offer means, as others have said, that Halfords are far from confident they will win. But don't underestimate the capricious nature of the small claims process - it can throw up unexpected results and there must be a serious risk you will get nothing at all. But if you are accepting of that, then I wish you the best of luck!

[Old Cogger]

A BMW outlet tried that in a similar case, expert witness (HAHA ) a dumb oil company l salesman, the DJ laughed them out of court pointing out they were lucky this was a small claim as the incident would likely to have cost them a hell of a lot more in the higher court.

[Ganymede]

Well Halfords's solicitor tried to call me yesterday regarding my letter sent to them re-the BBC letter and they've made me another offer to update you all of £1825 now. They also mentioned Halfords want done with the matter and that it would be agreed in a Tomlin Order. I understand what all of you are saying and such about the he/she said stuff but, my claim is for roughly £3300 in total. So £1825 is a bit low. I also accept what your all saying that maybe an IT expert won't be accepted by the court in terms of cost, but the claim can go up to £5000 in small claims court from my understanding and as i did not send this BBC alleged email, perverting the court of justice is very serious and if I'm not allowed to pay and split the costs of a 50/50 IT expert then I will source one and make them a witness for the matter and add their expenses to the court claim as I feel this is fair, unless of course like you all say Halfords withdraw this allegation.My credibility of character is at stake here and in a court of law that means alot if this goes to trial, so its important this issue is addressed.At the end of the day with it being Xmas eve now, a tomlin order will take 3-4 weeks, by then we're talking the end of January lol..so whats the point really? i may as well go have some fun and let it go to trial and get the full amount as the trial date is Feb 2016..

 

You have no permission to rely on an IT expert's report and so the Judge will not allow it to be submitted at Court. You would need to make an application to rely on one and any event no judge would allow it so please don't waste your money.

 

You have not been defamed and there is no allegation of "perverting the court of justice". You need to let this issue go as it is sidetracking you from the main point.

 

The Defendant's correspondence was marked "without prejudice" and so you can't reveal it's contents to the Court regardless.

[panther12]

Be carefull it doesn't back fire. If you were prepared to accept 1900 a couple days ago then for the sake of £75 is it really worth the hassle and risk.

[steampowered]

I also would be inclined to accept their offer. I appreciate the offer is not everything you wish for and that you may feel Halfords have not fully owned up to their mistake, but I do think the offer is reasonable. If you took this to trial there is a chance you might get nothing and so the risk should be factored into your decision whether or not to accept the offer.

 

If you do not want to accept the offer, then you should put forward a counter offer in writing. This reduces the risk that Halfords might try to claim legal costs later on the basis by trying to say that you behaved unreasonably in refusing to properly consider their offer.

 

I also think this stuff about the email is not relevant. The judge's job is to decide on the claims you have brought before the court, as set out in your particulars of claim. The claim in this case is that Halfords have damaged your car by overfilling it and so that is what the judge will be interested in. It is not the judge's role to decide on other possible disputes between the parties - if you wanted to raise an additional claim you would need to apply for permission to amend your particulars of claim; and if Halfords wanted to make a counterclaim they would need to apply for permission to amend their defence. It seems unlikely that either application would be granted at this late stage in the case.

[Brownguy53]

hey just to update everyone, I did win the case..well in a way. Halfords lawyer rang me about 3 weeks before the trial date and stated there client was 'desperate' to settle this outside of court. Their lawyer did try and trick me with a confidentality claus but thanks to a great member on here who has asked not to be named they spotted this clause and i told halfords it needed to be removed, they did remove it..got a cheque for the amount i wanted which was suitable to replace the vehicle a week later . Morale of the story if you know your right go with it..big thanks to everyone on CAG who helped me win