Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well I'm just butting in on this thread and I don't really know at all what's going on – but what I am certain of is that if you decide to take a legal action against somebody – it means that you have a plan to do so. This means that you understand the route, the threat you are going to make, what you are asking for, and when the deadline for the threat has expired then issue the action – no delays, no discussion – nothing. So I understand here that you not even sure who you are going to sue. This means that effectively you may not even have sent your letter of claim to the correct party.
    • Yes BF. I was about to issue that evening before I wondered whether the summons should actually be issued to them (Barclays Partner Finance at their head office) or to Clydesdale who own them? Or even to Barclays  as the owners of the groups. Thing is, I will issue as soon as I know and they have had a few more days grace if they think an NBA during Covid should allow more time.  
    • Johnson and Gove must think that Scottish independence is a certainty and Irish reintegration in the EU very likely - and they dont give much of a monkeys about wales Knowledge of Scotland not essential for government’s new ‘union unit’ jobs https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scotland-uk-union-unit-jobs-gove-b1800250.html   "The job ad at Michael Gove’s department demands candidates “demonstrate good political judgement” and have the “credibility to build a strong network of relationships across Whitehall”. " "However, it states that “understanding of policy issues relevant to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland” is only “desirable”"
    • many thanks DX I will do follow this advice.    one comment on what I've read on here. IDR  / the banks seem to rely on the non exclusive jurisdiction clause. However surely that would mean once its been through court here, it would no longer be active in UAE. Of course that is not how they work ie they would go for both UK and UAE if you ever returned. Is there not a way of highlighting and fighting there use of this clause on that basis?
    • Did you apply for a refund before you took any reclaim action?  If Ryanair refunded you for your flight then you have chosen to "end your contract" with them and they have no further liability for your travel.  This is pivotal because as long as you have a paid up ticket (and booking reference) then they have full liability and responsibility for you.  The minute they refund you, they have discharged their duty and you are on your own.   I am still trying to understand the basis for your claim.  The law says that if you are delayed then you have the option to refund or re-route (but not both which seems to be the case here).  You can go with the original carrier or not despite what Ryanair would have you believe.  You should tell them what you intend to do so they cannot claim later that you did not give them the option.     If I were to apply the best case to your situation it would be that the flight was delayed, you somehow told Ryanair that you were re-routing and off you went with your alternative travel arrangements.  You then put in your claim and waited.  If you then asked for a refund after your travel claim went in then you (and they) could argue that Ryanair has already part-paid your claim but you have a better case.  If you asked for a refund before your claim went in then the emphasis sits more with you to say you made a procedural error and they have a stronger defence.
  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 27 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1961 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

Millions of people, including motorists, home owners and pet owners face seeing their insurance costs increase.

 

The standard rate of Insurance Premium Tax - the tax paid each time an insurance policy is purchased in the UK - will increase from 6 per cent to 9.5 per cent from November 1

 

The ABI said the change will affect 7.3 million car policies, 4.7 million household policies, three million pet policies and three million private medical insurance policies.

 

Any of the affected insurance policies with a start date after October 31 will have IPT charged at the new rate.

 

The ABI warned that the change is likely to add: nearly £13 to the average comprehensive motor insurance policy; more than £10 to the average combined building and contents cover; more than £10 to average pet insurance; more than £40 to average private medical insurance.

 

 

Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-3288548/Millions-face-insurance-costs-rise-IPT-hike-effective-Nov-1.html#ixzz3pggBomZQ

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...