Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • £85PCM to sky, what!! why are you paying so much, what did you watch on sky thats not on freeview?  
    • Between yourself and Dave you have produced a very good WS. However if you were to do a harder hitting WS it may be that VCS would be more likely to cancel prior to a hearing. The Contract . VCS [Jake Burgess?] are trying to conflate parking in a car park to driving along a road in order to defend the indefensible. It is well known that "NO Stopping " cannot form a contract as it is prohibitory. VCS know that well as they lose time and again in Court when claiming it is contractual. By mixing up parking with driving they hope to deflect from the fact trying to claim that No Stopping is contractual is tantamount to perjury. No wonder mr Burgess doesn't want to appear in Court. Conflation also disguises the fact that while parking in a car park for a period of time can be interpreted as the acceptance of the contract that is not the case while driving down a road. The Defendant was going to the airport so it is ludicrous to suggest that driving by a No Stopping  sign is tacitly accepting  the  contract -especially as no contract is even being offered. And even if a motorist did not wish to be bound by the so called contract what could they do? Forfeit their flight and still have to stop their car to turn around? Put like that the whole scenario posed by Mr Burgess that the Defendant accepted the contract by driving past the sign is absolutely absurd and indefensible. I certainly would not want to appear in Court defending that statement either. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I will do the contract itself later.
    • Yes - ignore. Because of another MET victim today I looked at all our MET cases back to June 2014 ... yes, 10 years. They have never dared take a motorist to court and argue their case before a judge.  They have started the odd court case, but as a means of trying to intimidate the motorist into coughing up, when the motorist defended and refused to give in it was MET who bottled it and discontinued.
    • Unpaid wages should be pretty straightforward if you did the work. Don't be intimidated. You need only show you were due money, and did not get money.   The risk is that they have no money to pay you (and legal fees) - frankly a solicitor maybe be costing them more than your claim is for and I might have expected them to make a commercial decision to settle before this point regardless of the merits of the case.
    • Thanks so much FTMDave.  This is so much better   I'm still tempted to leave the blue section in is as if I lose it will at least save me a little bit of money.  But I get your point that it's pretty superfluous.   Thinking I'll get this in the post on Monday unless you think it's worth delaying?   
  • 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

Different Money/My mate solictors issued County Court Claim form, help!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3303 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

Defence sent, so we'll see how they respond..

 

Hope it was CPR compliant.

 

Best of luck

 

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

1: On the particulars of the claim, they claim that the amount to

be repaid on the 01.05.2014 was £609.50, this is false.

 

On the 07.03.14, I went into an agreement with *MyMate* for a

payday loan for £300 to be paid back in two equal repayments of

£198.26. The first scheduled for the 01.04.2015 and the second

01.05.2014 making the total of £396.52, the contract had a 55 day

agreement.

 

2: In addition to that the charges are not listed in particular,

they would be unfair and unenforceable and should only reflect

reasonable cost.

In particular, their solicitors sent me a default notice and put

£50 on top of the debt because of this notice, even though in the

contract with MyMate, it would cost £20.

 

3: They claim they have done *extensive chasing*.

 

They changed their name last year to *Different Money*, which I

was not aware of until I discovered an email in my junk folder

where they say they would sent their debt to *Alph Legal*, I did

not see it in time to question the debt, and they confirmed I had

to talk to their debt collectors *Alph Legal*.

 

No written letter was ever received of the name change/company

change, so I had no knowledge of this as any email would not be

sufficient confirmation of this as it ended up in my junk folder

without my knowledge.

 

If they could not set an agreement with me by email or phone I

would have expected a written letter to come to myself, this has

not been the case.

In addition, no written *Notice of assignment* was sent to me to

inform me of them handing them over to Alph Legal, so I had no way

of taking action before we got to this stage.

 

And finally, when I received the letter of Intended Action from

Douglas Wemyss (not Alph Legal as informed by Different Money),

asking me to contact them before 10th of April to discuss this

case, which I did by email on the 8th of April to Jane Blowers as

instructed in their letter. I heard nothing back until I received

the claim form.

 

When I was made aware of the this case I did cooperatively work

with Different Money, and have a current payment plan with them

for the original amount of £300 where I already paid in £20.

 

Based on this, I believe that the Claimant has not followed

Pre-action protocols to solve it without proceeding to a claim, in

particular as I responded to the letter they sent within their

deadline.

 

This was my defence, I just put the best I could to my knowledge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Received the "Notice of proposed Allocation to small claims track".

 

I will of course suggest mediation.

 

 

What happens further after I deliver this?

 

 

Do the claimant have to pay a court fee to actually process to a hearing stage (if they don't want to go through mediation) ?

 

 

Do they have a deadline?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Different....:-D but obviously the court has accepted hence the allocation.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...