Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • You are the OP of this thread. As I said, I doubt the OP of the original question is following this as she has more important things to worry about.   I'll ask you this:   1. have you ever been in a Magistrates' Court when a Statutory Declaration to set aside a motoring conviction was made?   2. If so did you ever see the maker quizzed or questioned  to test their honesty in connection with the SD?   3. Have you ever seen such a Declaration rejected for want of truthfulness (rather than a procedural or administrative error or mistake)?   My answers to the above would be as follows:   1. Yes on, I would estimate, at least two hundred occasions (six or seven on one day last week alone). It may be more, I've never kept a proper count.   2. No, never.   3. No, never.   Now it could be of course that I have been particularly fortuitous and that all the makers of those SDs were paragons of virtue and/or that all the Magistrates concerned were exceedingly gullible and believed everything they were told without question. On the other hand it could be that during their training the Magistrates were instructed that when hearing an SD they were simply witnessing that it had been made before them and that they were not testing its truth. I imagine they were either shown or have probably seen since a copy of this form which is completed before making an SD:   https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/criminal/docs/2014/crim-pr-form-part37-statutory-declaration-revised-feb-2014.pdf   In the "Notes for Guidance" is this:   "Under the Statutory Declarations Act 1835, the defendant’s declaration can be made before anyone who is authorised by law to hear it (e.g. a solicitor), or before any Justice of the Peace (a magistrate or District Judge (Magistrates’ Courts). The person who hears the declaration need not enquire into the truth of it. That person’s function is limited to hearing the declaration, and certifying that he or she has done so by signing it. If the declaration turns out to be untrue, the defendant making it may be punished for perjury."    The bold type is my emphasis so I think I know which of my two scenarios above is more likely. I hope this wasn't too rude or arrogant for you and  I'll leave it at that now. But I will ask you (politely) once again to please stop providing misleading information to people who have enough to worry about. It confuses them, others have to correct it and it leads to unnecessary stress for the posters.
    • Thank you for your help, just to clarify please. In the CPR 31:14  request do I just ask for 1. the agreement .....etc and delete the the items 2. to 6. as listed since these have already been sent to me by the claimant (btw the 'solicitor' is IDEM's litigation dept) or do I ask for all the documents again as they are part of the 'Particulars of the Claim'    Thank you again
    • As its council tax, they have no right of entry, so don't let them in, and they cannot force entry nor  climb through windows, but cn walk through unlocked door  They have no right to snoop into your bank accounts, and would be in serious trouble if they did.  I'm sure others will be along soon with further advice/suggestions.  Did you apply for Council tax Relief, if not do so NOW, and get your local council member involved pronto as in now.
    • Sorry its so complicated right now.... totally temporary but totally complicated.  I just dont want bailuffs knocking in the interim, thats my main concern. The standing order is going out still to Lowell,  what was happening was other things were going out the same date and that was leaving not enough money in the bank to pay lowells SO.....hence it looked like Id just stopped paying, hence CCJ. It went out last month and again this month though.
    • A fixed rate mortgage does not change due to SVR changes. It sounds like you were not on a fixed rate?   do you still have the paperwork you signed to set it up?
  • Our picks

bossogasa

Stockport Truck Centre - work done without permission & excessive charges

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 857 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

As soon as you leave the meeting, you should write up notes of the conversation.

 

It would be best if she wrote her version – and you wrote your version independently and then you compare the two which will allow you to remind each other of what each of you might have missed or have forgotten.

 

You should at the very least have been able to inspect the vehicle – if you're lucky, you will be able to agree a price and to drive it away. The price might not be the best one that you could hope for, but it might be a lot better than having to get into litigation because if that is the way it goes, it will be quite a few weeks and even months before you see the vehicle again


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, when she contacts him to arrange the appointment, she should tell him that she will be bringing you along. Don't let it be a surprise. Frankly it's a shame that they can't be some other person to come along and support who is familiar with the situation and who might even be able to drive the vehicle away.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brilliant. I'll do just that. Your support is I hate confrontations anyway and always choose the non-aggressive way. I will report back as soon as possible. Your support is invaluable and I'd be totally lost without it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick question please, the meeting is set for tomorrow between 9.30-11am. My ex would like to know if as the owner of the truck she has any rights over the holding of it? If the garage can still hold it even though she owns it and was not involved in the original dispute. If she has a right to repossess the vehicle then that could force the garage to negotiate a settlement. If the garage cannot forcefully hold the vehicle, is there any law she can quote so to speak?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She is protected by the torts interference with good act and she would have to bring an action for conversion.

 

however,if she has to start talking about legal rights then the negotiation has failed. I would not start mentioning anything about legal rights . the best thing she can do if the negotiation fails is simply to walk out politely saying that she will be obliged to take action to recover her vehicle.

trying to avoid talking about anything legal because it simply mean that the negotiation has failed.

 

She doesn't understand enough about the subject to start talking about legal rights in a threatening way


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My father had a saying - "Icily polite". Thats the way to play it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes i'll explain that to her. I'll post back as soon as we get out of there.

Icily polite. I need to remember that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My father had a saying - "Icily polite". Thats the way to play it.

Warmly polite will produce better results.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Warmly polite will produce better results.

 

Always polite which has caused many to take advantage and be dismissive to me but let's hope for the best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We came back from the meeting and have been told to wait for Ian to discuss with Gareth and get back to me.

In the meeting, I introduced my ex as the owner of the truck with the documents (Logbook & loan agreement secured on the truck signed when I borrowed the money from her to buy the truck) present. Ian dismissed that completely and said that that does not have an impact at all on the matter and is irrelevant.

He would talk to me as the "contract" is with me. They then went on to say I absolutely and clearly gave them the go ahead to find, fix and repair any and all problems and that I will be paying the bill whatever it was at the end. I politely confirmed that that was untrue and I was not there to argue rather to negotiate a fair settlement. Ian said the bill cannot be reduced because of their position that I gave them the go ahead but he is willing to offer me a reduction to end the matter. He said if I paid 2000 then that will be the end of the matter. I insisted I never gave the go ahead and pointed out that I had noticed on the MOT that the load sensing valve (LSV) had been written down as seized and as this is what controls the amount of pressure going to the rear brakes, it would have been simple to repair that first before trying anything else. It would have equated to 165 for the part including an hours labour to fit it. He said they have to look elsewhere first as is their practice to determine if anything else might be faulty. This led to the many many hours of investigative work hence the very high labour costs. I also explained the cost of the parts used where excessive even if I was to buy them directly from suppliers without a trade discount. He explained they use their own suppliers to guarantee quality. This is ridiculous as a couple of those parts are coming from Iveco themselves.

 

I insisted I wasn't trying to remove the vehicle without paying nor was I there to have an argument or a full discussion of how things work as we are all mechanics and should be familiar already. I increased my offer to 1200 including VAT and let him know that was my absolute final offer. He (Ian) said he cannot see that offer as being acceptable to his company but he will discuss it anyway and let me know. We agreed and left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the email promised before the end of the day was not received. How long should I wait before contacting them again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BankFodder, I recieved the email from Ian this morning and it reads:

 

Good morning,

 

I have spoken to my MD yesterday and we both agree that we have done everything correctly and carried out the repairs in good faith. We cannot give a reduction on the invoice and would like the matter resolved by the end of this week.

 

If payment isn’t made by the end of this week then we will have to start charging storage of £25.00 per day.

 

What would be the next step in terms of a reply I could send to them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
this is disgusting i hope you get it sorted

 

Yes it is. It really sickens me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After speaking with my ex, she was willing to loan me £500 to help remove the truck and then I could pay her back after I go to court. I spoke to a friend of mine who was also prepared to loan me £1300 by calling in with his credit card. I would pay the rest. I emailed Ian and told him I would the £2395.05 under protest and explained that my friend will call up and pay with his card and once payment is received to let me know so I can come and pay the balance and collect the truck.

 

He replied saying he would not be taking payment over the phone and my friend would need to to come in and pay in person. Trust issues. The problem is my friend is currently in Belgium working away so I'm stuck. This got me thinking and made me feel angry because even though he is trying to fleece me by going ahead and doing work not agreed to I have been making offers and trying to negotiate to release the truck. Not only did they do that, they did unnecessary work and then charged a ridiculous amount for it. After all that, I manage to secure payment to release the truck and he refuses even that just to make life difficult and in an attempt to increase the payment by charging £25 a day storage. I've decided enough is enough. I won't let him bully me and hold me to ransom. This is bad practice and blatant robbery masquerading as a professional outfit. I'm going to inform him I am cancelling all previous offers. I should not have to pay for their errors. I will then compile a letter of intent asking for the truck to be put back to how it was and returned to me.

I'll then issue small claims proceedings to recover the truck.

 

I could do with some pointers on writing the letter of intent. How long to wait etc. BankFodder are you still there, some advice on how to proceed with be invaluable right now so I get it right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to check, because I haven't paid so no money to claim, am I able to use the small claims court when all i'll be asking for is the truck back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone help with my questions please, i'd appreciate a solid definite answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have now spoken to a solicitor (a good one recommended by a colleague) who after reviewing the case confirms what I've been saying all along that we did not have an agreement. For even a verbal agreement to be relied upon, it needs to be complete and meet certain criteria. He will handle my case should I instruct him to do so. I've got a reference number from CAB who will refer my case to the Trading Standards should I wish to report them. I've written my letter explaining the situation which has been sent today to STC and detailing my request. If they refuse my request which by their track record is inevitable, then hopefully things will start moving much more structured to bring their vile injustice and bad practice to an end. I will then go full steam ahead and firstly report them to Trading Standards before continuing down the road to justice. I'm now more determined than ever to not let them bully me into paying when the fault was theirs.

 

Companies should really cut out this bad practice of carrying out work when not instructed to do so then charging what they want causing misery to honest and hard working motorists who feel pressurized to pay and then have their vehicles held to ransom.

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...