Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

tsb DD Guarantee GB Energy/Co-Op Energy - Indemnity Claim ?


the thinker
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2604 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

That looks all right but I think I would put the full name of the company – not just TSB

 

Is that the full address that you used?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 135
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Well get ready for them to file an acknowledgement at the last moment. But if they miss the deadline then move in straightaway and apply for judgement.

 

Then put the bailiffs in as soon as you can – no warnings, no delays. (But we are probably getting ahead of ourselves!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not too sure. Keep on logging on to the MoneyClaim website until it allows you to apply for judgement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Until 4pm on the last day, if the 8th is the last day for acknowledging.

Apply fo judgment on 9th, if thats how things pan out

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As per Bankfodder above, keep checking MCOL and apply for judgement if nothing received as a response

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi,

 

TSB plc filed an acknowledgment of service on 06/02/2017.

 

regards

.

 

No surprise .

 

now wait and see if they put in a defence or if they try to start talking to you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If errors were made with payments from your account then why wont you tell the person on the phone the amounts?

You say you told them errors were made that's all they need to know. Surely if you give the full story the person will be able to help. I bank with RBS and they are very good if I ask about or raise an issue.

It appears to me that it is you with an attitude problem not the TSB.

Now grow up and sort it by being civil to the people you talk to on the phone.

Every little helps.

TTFN.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it DD payments to GB energy go towards your outstanding balance for gas and electricity used. If you overpay you are in credit and that credit can be refunded or used to offset future bills. If your DDs did not cover the amounts billed then you need to make up the difference.

 

I imagine you did use GB energy's products so why are you asking for a refund of all DDs. Surely it is only any credit balance that should be refunded.

 

I also find it incredible that you did not receive the advance notice and you did not check your DD payments for 7 months and you have acted only after GB has gone bust and the COOP has taken over.

Edited by Shaken
Spelling
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had been following this thread with great interest, quite a bit of difficulty (due 'text-speak') and now with growing scepticism. Does anyone else know what is happening, now - or have I missed something?

Willumn

Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite the note which you have received indicating that they are treating the return date as the 23rd February, keep on checking MCOL and the moment it allows you to apply for judgement, do it. This may be before 23 February. Don't worry, if you haven't received a defence then just go ahead and apply for the judgement without asking anyone or discussing with anyone.

 

Also, I fully expect that you will receive some kind of without prejudice, gesture of goodwill offer of settlement.

 

I suggest that you come here before you accept it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite the note which you have received indicating that they are treating the return date as the 23rd February, keep on checking MCOL and the moment it allows you to apply for judgement, do it. This may be before 23 February. Don't worry, if you haven't received a defence then just go ahead and apply for the judgement without asking anyone or discussing with anyone.

 

Also, I fully expect that you will receive some kind of without prejudice, gesture of goodwill offer of settlement.

 

I suggest that you come here before you accept it.

 

For a so called knowledgeable person your advice is poor and sometimes counter productive. You also criticize other people's grammar when yours is not much better.

 

If the bank refund you, Surely they will then go to the utility company to recover it, At which point you will then owe it to the utility company

 

I really don't see what you will get out of it

 

You are spot on. My previous post alluded to this and I think the OP is trying a fast one

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...