Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • best to be sure it is a N279. not that they pull any underhand stunts of course   but we have seen it. your bal is now £0 but we'll still attend court as you'll probably not as we've said we've closed the account and we'll get a judgement by default. dx  
    • Sorry, last bit They had ticked that they wanted the application dealt with without a hearing, so is there any relevance that a date and time to attend said hearing has been sent out ?
    • I've not seen it personally but I think that's the letter Dad has had from Overdales. I'll see it tomorrow. It states balance: zero
    • Agreed as you clearly have little faith in your star runners, mind you - I have less - conditional on the welcher clause I defined being part, and that we are talking about the three defined candidates: Tice Farage and Anderson - not anyone anywhere as reform might (outside chance) get someone decent to run somewhere. If any of the three dont run - they count as a loss.   welcher clause. "If either of us loses and doesn't pay - we agree the site admin will change the welchers avatar permanently to a cows ass - specific cows ass avatar chosen by the winner - with veto by site on any too offensive - requiring another to be chosen  (or of course, DP likely allows you can delete your account and all your worthless posts to cheapskate chicken out and we'll just laugh) "
    • This is the full details, note they have made an error (1) in that paragraph 5 stated 14 days before hearing not 7. Surely a company of their size would proof read and shouldn't make basic errors like that 1) The Claimant respectfully applies for an extension of time to comply with paragraph 5 of the Order of Deputy District Judge XXX dated XX March 2024 i.e. the evidence upon which the parties intend to rely shall be filed and served not later than 7-days before the hearing. 2) The Claimant seeks a short extension of time allow them to further and properly investigate data provided to them by Royal Mail which is of importance to the proceedings and determination of the Claim. 3) The Claimant and Royal Mail have an information sharing agreement. Under the agreement, Royal Mail has provided data to the Claimant in respect of the matters forming the basis of these proceedings. The Claimant requires more time to consider this data and reconcile it against their own records. The Claimant may need to seek clarification and assurances from Royal Mail before they can be confident the data is correct and relevant to the proceedings i.e. available to be submitted as evidence. 4) The Claimant's witness is currently out of the office on annual leave and this was not relayed to DWF Law until after the event which has caused a further unfortunate delay. 5) The Court has directed parties to file and serve any evidence upon which they intend to rely not later than 14- days before the hearing i.e. by 4pm on 6 June 2024. Regrettably, the Claimant will have insufficient time to finalise their witness evidence and supporting exhibits as directed. We therefore respectfully apply to extend the time for filing/serving evidence so that the evidence upon which the parties intend to rely by filed and served not later than 7-days before the hearing i.e. by 4pm on 13 June 2024. 6) This application is a pre-emptive one for an extension of time made prior to the expiry of the deadline. In considering the application, the Court is required to exercise its broad case management powers and consider the overriding objective. 7) In circumstances where applications are made in time, the Court should be reticent to refuse reasonable applications for extensions of time which neither imperil hearing dates nor disrupt proceedings, pursuant to Hallam Estates v Baker [2014] EWCA Civ 661. 😎 It is respectfully submitted that the application is made pursuant to the provisions of CPR 3.1(2)(a) and in accordance with the overriding objective to ensure the parties are on an equal footing when presenting their cases to the Court. The requested extension of time does not put the hearing at risk and granting the Application will not be disruptive to the proceedings.   They have asked for extension Because 2) The Claimant requires additional time to consider and reconcile data received from Royal Mail which is relevant to these proceedings against their own data and records in order to submit detailed evidence in support of this Claim.
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1039 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

Tony Connelly of RTE has a Twitter thread about the letter sent yesterday from Maros Sefcovic to Michael Gove about being asked to rewrite the agreement from the end of last year.

 

Tony thinks Sefcovic is playing hardball and you can see that he's pointing out various actions that the UK hasn't carried out as promised since signing the agreement.

 

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1359590841619275776

 

  • Like 1

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If changes were agreed ... johnson and gove would quickly renegue on those too

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at all

I'm quite positive that would be the case

 

But the Tory populists are learning ...

Learning they can get away with more every week.

Edited by tobyjugg2

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

That PPE:

"Suffolk County Council said 5.9 million products failed to comply with UK safety standards, which was more than half the items checked.

It found nearly all hand sanitiser consignments did not comply."

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Conniff said:

'some populist garbage about who won the war

 

'Yes, America and its puppet mouthpieces like to remind us that America saved us all' said Macron

Edited by tobyjugg2

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

and in addition to the 5% increase in council tax which will hit the poorest hardest

Rishi Sunak ‘plotting £6bn raid on personal tax allowances’

The plans could cost the average family £250 per year by 2024-25

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rishi-sunak-personal-tax-allowances-budget-b1801319.html

 

 

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Conniff said:

I know we paid them an obscene amount but it wasn't in the £trillions

as you seem to have missed it, the figure referred is

Rishi Sunak ‘plotting £6bn raid on personal tax allowances’

a total of a little over a quarter of the 22 BILLIONish spent on just the PPE mentioned here, with apparently half of that PPE duff as tested.

Just get that half that squandered PPE cost back from the Tory selected suppliers and you would have almost double the amount Sunack is planning on grabbing form the poorest BRITISH public

 

When you also take into account that 4 times the rate was paid for the crap/undelivered PPE from those specially selected Tory populist pals ... there would even be money to feed hungry british kids - not that the Tory populist **** would.

In fact just the £20 million plus  one middleman referred that got over 20 million for crap .. that one persons 'bonus' alone would have been 20% of the money needed to feed hungry British kids that the Tory populist **** voted against.

 

The bottom line is that Johnson and Hancock bypassed proper tender processes and shunted money to their carefully selected pals outside a transparent tender process

 

 

and permanently removing the transparent tender process which was bypassed in wasting billions is part of the planned NHS reorganisation

It should start hitting the headlines in not too long.

 

Edited by tobyjugg2

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

£6bn is nowhere near the £trillions we are in debt.

 

it matters not where the money has gone. There was a moan about tax increases and a suggestion that the debt be paid back using the Brexit Dividend.

It has to be repaid so if not by tax increases then how ??

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Conniff said:

 

it matters not where the money has gone.

 

Of course it does if the services the money was paid for have NOT been delivered - Get the money back rather than have the taxpayer pay both the original sum and interest for years

 

... and get rid of the incompetent numpties who misused it  before they waste more.

 

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brexit is causing problems for companies up and down the country. The added costs have meant that some business is no longer profitable and UK companies will lose consumer trade in EU market to companies based in EU market. 

 

This was talked about during the Brexit debate, but was labelled as "project fear",  but now is "Brexit reality". Over the next few years the UK will suffer during a period of adjustment as it tries to work out how to fix the economic conditions to enable UK businesses to be competitive. This is going to be very expensive at a time when Covid-19 has caused a 10% drop in GDP and record Government borrowing. 

  • Like 1

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1039 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...