Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've looked through all our old NPE threads, and as far as we know they have never had the bottle to do court. There are no guarantees of course, but when it comes to put or shut up they definitely tend towards shut up. How about something like -   Dear Jonathan and Julie, Re: PCN no.XXXXX cheers for your Letter Before Claim.  I rolled around on the floor in laughter at the idea that you actually expected me to take this tripe seriously and cough up. I'll write to you not some uninterested third party, thanks all the same, because you have are the ones trying to threaten me about this non-existent "debt". Go and look up Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd, saddos.  Oh, while you're at it, go and look up your Subject Access Request obligations - we all know how you ballsed that up way back in January to March. Dear, dear, dear - you couldn't resist adding your £70 Unicorn Food Tax, you greedy gets.  Judges don't like these made-up charges, do they? You can either drop this foolishness now or get a hell of a hammering in court.  Both are fine with me.  Summer is coming up and I would love a holiday at your expense after claiming an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g). I look forward to your deafening silence.   That should show them you're not afraid of them and draw their attention to their having legal problems of their own with the SAR.  If they have any sense they'll crawl back under their stone and leave you in peace.  Over the next couple of days invest in a 2nd class stamp (all they are worth) and get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.
    • Yes that looks fine. It is to the point. I think somewhere in the that the you might want to point out that your parcel had been delivered but clearly had been opened and resealed and the contents had been stolen
    • Hi All, I just got in from work and received a letter dated 24 April 2024. "We've sent you a Single Justice Procedure notice because you have been charged with an offence, on the Transport for London Network." "You need to tell us whether you are guilty or not guilty. This is called making your plea."
    • Okay please go through the disclosure very carefully. I suggest that you use the technique broadly in line with the advice we give on preparing your court bundle. You want to know what is there – but also very importantly you want to know what is not there. For instance, the email that they said they sent you before responding to the SAR – did you see that? Is there any trace of of the phone call that you made to the woman who didn't know anything about SAR's? On what basis was the £50 sent to you? Was it unilateral or did they offer it and you accepted it on some condition? When did they send you this £50 cheque? Have you banked it? Also, I think that we need to start understanding what you have lost here. Have you lost any money – and if so how much? Send the SAR to your bank as advised above
    • In anticipation of lodging my court claim next Weds 1 May (14 days after advising P2G that was my deadline for them to settle my claim) I have completed my first draft POC as below: Claim Claim number: xxxxx Reference: P2G MAY 2024   Claimant xxxxx   Defendant Parcel2Go 1A Parklands Lostock Bolton BL6 4SD  Particulars of Claim The defendant has failed to arrange for the safe delivery of the claimant's parcel containing a 8 secondhand golf clubs (valued at £265) that was sent to a UK address using their delivery service (P2G Reference xxxxx). The defendant contracted Evri to deliver the parcel (Evri Reference xxxxx) and refuses to reimburse the claimant on the grounds that the claimant did not purchase their secondary insurance contract. The defendant seeks to exclude their liability in breach of section 57 Consumer Rights Act. The secondary insurance contract is in breach of section 72. The claimant seeks reimbursement of £265, plus P2G fees of £9.10, plus postage costs for two first class letters to P2G of £2.70, plus court fees, plus interest. The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from xxxxx to xxxxxx on £276.80 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxxx   Details of claim Amount claimed £276.80 I look forward to your thoughts and comments guys! As ever, many thanks - G59    
  • 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

ccj setaside - help


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2475 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

There is no counterclaim at present

a part 36.6 is a offer to settle

 

 

this may be their adr

the offer would not come unless the manufacturer was in loop,

 

 

a part 20 would join in the big guns

what may effect their reputation

and i must be fair they do have a good reputation

 

 

however the retailer has much adverse,

took to court TS ,

bad press

daily mail lots of bad reviews

the list goes on and

 

 

they have been leaned on by the drat and punished disabled people

 

 

the dirts all out their

me would love to type this in for all to google

then ya see me not speak with fork tongue yea man

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

"We are offering ADR" is not a valid Part 36 offer.

CPR r36 lays out strict formalities for an offer to comprise a Part 36 offer.

 

Meanwhile, OP : slow up.

You keep conflating different issues, and as a result your posts come across in a way that confuses people. Stick to one issue at a time, be that Part 36, Part 20, or what you believe is the conspiracy against your postings........

Link to post
Share on other sites

How could i name the retailer with a live case in progress

 

Citizens advice/trading standards recorded complaint july 2013

 

Trading standards local signed for documents last week

retailer/manufacturer,certification body all the other non parties not yet aware will be on 18.7.2017

 

Back at case management soon where it was likely a Single joint expert witness would be ordered plus other directions.

 

Defendant was asked to file some other docs before hearing

 

 

in that bundle they requested more time for manufacturer to respond and in this bundle they also stated it would allow a window for ADR/MEDIATION during 15 months

this flag has never been waved till now.

 

About the posts

i am not having a pop at this forum it is not connected to the industry,

as i said the ones that are remove the postings even when you tap dance around the issue.

 

Another point very easy to give bias spin to all it may be all lies,look at the lingo i use where would a grunt get this from.

 

Any one taking the kings shilling from TS knows these statements are bang on.

 

If there is a proven safety issue

i have won the case and also there are enough clues in the posts to guess the product then you would no some of the players involved i can not

state this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, it's a big company? you feel vulnerable. Reading your posts there's movement in the process and hopefully soon you will have recompense and the company will be scrutinised to make sure safety issues are dealt with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok part warm the industry is all about party jellie,

in the early days me thought with my stupid mentality i could boo em off

they would back down

 

 

in my previous lives i have put sum on notice of high court that worked,

these crews it did not and

 

 

i understand the comments to the factory revved em up like got advice take bar out of factory u produce beta gear and

mine looks good from 500 mtrs,

the sad part about this the true claimant is a protected party and been deprived use 5 years.

 

That why me said in this industry ,golf,hand shake ,closing ranks and all that jazz

but me the legal anti grunt with pointy ears when the manufacturer Md as his running shoes on thats a laff .

 

When the manufacturers generals say we are very sorry

got the lettos 5 years later

not sorted

cant use the scrap

its not a washing machine

 

 

this is to the death yea man

Link to post
Share on other sites

mine looks good from 500 mtrs,the sad part about this the true claimant is a protected party and been deprived use 5 years.

 

I would like clarification of this sentence

 

aah is this how you feel, your case looks good but you're not convinced, if not correct me. The next question is what does 'the true claimant is a protected party' mean. Is that still how you feel as not to expose more of who you are claiming against.

 

If something is wrong in life, keep calm and carry on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you know the law there is nothing to clarify

if yow doe it is well above your station

read the previous quotes

get a feel for how complex this is,

 

 

soon me will find out if the big cheque book crew are on board as me say telephone numbers.

 

Some people walk the walk

some walk the walk and talk the talk

 

 

the beak said time r u off your ed do you know what u r getting into

me said to the beak

no me not off me ed

but out mybrains

 

 

this was not received very well ,

this is not messers court

 

 

i have to create a different ATE

how else could i trade against big guns

 

 

i only have a small gun but alot of bottle

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think its time you had a nap Jackthemondoe

 

 

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...