Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi DX   I have amended the WS and I hope i have taken out the meaningless gibberish.    Thanks, Roland    IN THE County Court AT                                                                              CLAIM NO:      BETWEEN: CABOT FINANCIAL (UK) LIMITED   -and- (DEFENDANT)     ___________________________________________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF      INTRODUCTION    1. I, XXXX, the Defendant in this case, make this statement in support of my defence against the Claimant, Cabot Financial (UK) Limited.  The matters set out below are within my own knowledge, except where I indicate to the contrary.    THE DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO THE CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT    2. The Claimant states in Paragraph 3, ‘….refer to various documents, true copiesof which are contained in the paginated bundle to this statement marked “JK”1’, but then states in para 4, ‘Acopy of the reconstituted agreementwith associated terms and conditions….pages 1-10’. There is an Agreement and 2 sets of Terms & Conditions and according to para 4 they are not the original but ‘a reconstitutedversion’. The agreement in the JK1 exhibit on page 2 shows an agreement with my name, address and a date but no Account Number or Reference Number as the same was not mentioned in the Claimant’s Particulars Of Claim, which was addressed in my Defence Para 1, ‘the particulars of claim are vague and generic…’.    3. The Claimant’s Witness Statement does not state how the agreement was made, via telephone, post or electronically.   4. There are 2 sets of Terms & Conditions Pages 4-10 which does not show my name and address as per the Consumer Credit Act 1974 Request.    5. Pages 1-10 can easily be downloaded from various internet forums and image sites and have my details inserted with any picture manipulation software.   6. The Claimant states in Para 9 that my defence is a ‘templated defence’, requesting documents pursuant of CPR 31.14 and Section 78 of the Credit Card Act 1974, this is a defendant’s right for request of information but the Claimant has failed to provide the true original Credit Card Agreement and Terms & Conditions.   7. The Claimant states in Para 25 that, ‘the Claimant allowed the proceedings to be stayed in order to allow the parties to attempt settlement negotiations…..’ this is not correct as the Claim was stayed due to the Claimant not being able to provide the requested documents pursuant of my CPR 31.14 and Section 78 of the Credit Card Act 1974. 8. Para 30 and 31of the Witness Statement requests to restore the proceedings, to strike out the Defence, has requested for a Summary Judgement, together with costs to be assessed summarily by the court. I, the Defendant, strongly object to the Claimant’s Witness Statement requesting to lift the stay and enter Judgement. I believe therefore, that this should be denied and I respectfully ask for you to strike out the claim. My reasons for this have been outlined in points 1 to 7.  9. By the reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief and invite the Court to strike out the claim.     I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.    Signed:  Dated: 
    • Thanks ericsbrother, I'll get on to it.  It appears that they had taken on the contract that very morning, so I'm one of their very lucky first victims. Waaaay 
    • Yep I sent a copy to them also. Just send strange saying yes to then say no, I'm not used to all this though. It definitely doesn't come naturally to me 😕🙂 Will arrange a date ASAP!    Thank you again
    • @BearLake1   I have a similar PCN from the same place. I've just received 'Letter Before Claim' today. I wonder if you are able to share your reply to CVS? Did you send your reply by email or mail?   Thanks!
  • Our picks

Mod Kieren

Ford Evans Halshaw dealership refusing to cover vehicle with warranty **WON 100% covered**

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1030 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

Incidentally, if they suddenly come up with an offer then I think that you should insist that they put anything in writing and that you will need time to consider it.

 

I suggest that you then come to us and we can have a look and see whether you think that it properly protects you.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that makes sense. If they got Ford to offer anything of like 70%+ contribution, I'd be in a situation of serious consideration - as you mentioned earlier in the thread, I have used a proportion of the engine's lifespan already.

 

Feeling semi hopeful - but not expecting too much at the minute. Just want this nightmare to be over with really, not being able to drive is quite a downer, specially this time of year.

 

My understanding of MCOL online, is that I can set up the claim fully, up to the point of actually sending it, and it is saved in the system for me to come back to - I will likely do this at the weekend so it is ready to fire come 28th. I'll be away from home at the time, until the first week of the new year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the moment, I wouldn't settle for 70%. I would go for the lot. They cause you too much trouble and too much hassle. If they offer you 70% then they will go the whole hog.

 

Of course, keep a full tab of all your losses and extra expenses and also we better factor in something for the inconvenience. You may well decide that getting 100% of the claim will be sufficient for this.

 

Yes, that's the way that MoneyClaim online works. Get it ready, refine it, save it down and then click it off when your deadline expires.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much is normal for claiming back "inconvenience"? Is this generally something that's looked for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may as well try. It won't hurt.

 

However, you need to justify in detail. Judges don't want to get involved with anything that amounts to a land grab.

 

Need to keep the claim very modest and fully justified by detail. Judges don't like simply "inconvenience". Judges are far more interested in the fact that your normal 10 minute school run has taken two hours every day. That's the kind of thing that a judge might look upon favourably. You don't ask, you don't get. Also, if you bulk up the claim a little bit then it gives you a bit of space to back down and negotiate without finding yourself out of pocket later on.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been speaking with my work shop team regarding the engine issues you have had and I understand that you were speaking with Stef my aftersales leader prior to speak with myself.

 

For some reason there is no open session on ETIS for your vehicle which is the 1st step prior to speaking with Fords prior approval department, also they seem to have carried out a lot of work before carrying out these actions and then telling you Ford would not cover this under warranty.

 

What I suggest is that you go back to Marshalls and ask them to contact Ford as to why this is not covered, I would also contact Ford customer services and ask them to speak with Marshalls direct.

 

We will help out where we can but without the vehicle being on site and an session being opened on ETIS, there is not much more we can do from here.

 

If you need us to supply any evidence regarding service history and work that was done, please feel free to contact myself or Stef.

 

Regards

 

This is the response I just received by email - I have forwarded it on with comments about my conversation with Evans Halshaw, to my contact at Marshall Ford anyway, to find out their comments and to inform them.

Do you suggest responding to Evans Halshaw making it clear it is them I am holding responsible?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand the first few lines at all – board I do see is that there still trying to pass the buck.

 

I would simply say a brief message that their response is not satisfactory to you. They are the supplier. They are bound by the provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and that you are proposing to send them a 14 day letter before action on Friday – after that you will issue the claim.

 

You are not interested in buckpassing (I suggest you use those very words). You are not interested in any further delays. It has gone on too long and you too inconvenienced.

 

Please don't bother to make any further contact unless you have a proper and unconditional written proposal to make.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, I would say to them now that in view of their intransigence, they should consider this letter as your letter before action and that you will be issuing proceedings at the expiry of 14 days and without any further notice.

 

That gets the whole thing en route and avoids any further steps.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is what it looks like to me - I don't know the actual process details behind the scenes with ETIS, all I know is that it's Ford's online technical info centre, I don't know if repair garages have to use it, even if Marshall have made a mistake there, that doesn't make Evans Halshaw innocent under my potential claim.

 

With regards to LBA, that's already what I've sent and they are responding to now, with 14 days notice, mentioning specifically 28th December as the date I will send out court action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, I'd forgotten that you'd already sent the LBA.

 

In that case I would simply send them a short note:

 

Dear XXX,

 

Thank you for your message of XXX date.

 

Response is not satisfactory and the clock is still ticking.

 

Yours faithfully


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"If you need us to supply any evidence regarding service history and work that was done, please feel free to contact myself or Stef."

 

I will make a response along those lines, but should I request those documents at this time - given that they are offering?

 

Also, I am going to get in contact with Barclays to update them on the situation, and find out if they've gotten anywhere for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest that you tell them that any service history should have been supplied with the vehicle at the time – and it wasn't. If they wish to send it to you now then fair enough but if not they will be required to disclose it as part of the pre-trial disclosure process.

 

By all means update Barclays – but don't hold your breath for any response. They just want it to go away and they don't care about you – or about anyone else except their own executives and their own shareholders


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I responded

 

Dear Darren,

 

Irrespective of the warranty, you, Evans Halshaw are the supplier, and are bound by the provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015. I am not interested in buckpassing, or any further delays.

 

This response is not satisfactory, and the clock is still ticking following my letter before court action.

 

I would appreciate the full detailed service history and any and all work done on the vehicle being sent over, preferably, it can be sent over via email, or posted to my address:

 

...

 

Yours sincerely,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have quickly received the response

 

"Please confirm what it is you are expecting from us, you have had a vehicle for 6 months and done above average miles in that period, so the vehicles was sold to you in good conditional and very much fit for purpose, therefore this is not an issue of consumer rights.

 

We are actually trying to help you not pass the buck but your issue is with what is covered by warranty and not if the vehicle was fit for sale, as the belt that went was not due for replacement and there is no way we could have predicted this failure.

 

I will therefore pass your emails on to our legal team and inform them to expect your legal action, they can then correspond with yourself direct any legal representation you wish to use, you will therefore need to speak with Marshall’s and Ford UK about having your vehicle repaired with them.

 

I will send copies of the services carried out as a spate email but as I stated before, the belt was not due to be changed so therefore will not be on any invoices.

 

Regards

 

Darren"

 

I'm not sure what I feel in receiving that. Makes me feel a little more uneasy in being confident that I'd win in court - what do you suggest I respond to this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, whats the score now then?

 

H


40 years at the pointy end of the motor trade. :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ford are covering it all! Woohoo! 100% contribution to the repairs. That's a brand new engine, when replacing one that has done 40k miles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done, there is a very good result indeed.

 

Did you actually issue proceedings? Or what happened? Was there any further correspondence or to-ing and fro-ing?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...