Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • when mediation call they will ask the same 3 questions that are in their email you had to accept it going forward. simply state 'i do not have enough information from the claimant to make an informed decision upon mediation so i refuse. end of problem.  
    • Food prices, including a $40 chicken, has stoked fury and calls for big foreign supermarket chains to come to Canada.View the full article
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Civil National Business CEntre Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio i Ltd How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self   Date of issue –  15 Feb 2024 Particulars of Claim What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?  The claim is for the sum of £922 due by the Defendant under and agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a Capital One account with an account reference of [number with 16 digits] The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit ACt 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 16-06-23, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of the issue of these proceedings in the sum of £49.15 The Claimant claims the sum of £972 What is the total value of the claim? £1112 Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? I dont know the details of the PAPDC to know if it was pursuant to paragraph 3, but I did receive a Letter of Claim with a questionaire/form to fill. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? no Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Assigned/purchaser Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I was aware, I'm not certain I received a 'Notice of Assignment' from Capital One but may have been informed the account had been sold without such a title on the letter? Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Not since the debt purchase, and not from Capital One. Why did you cease payments? I can't remember - it was the tail end of the pandemic and I may not have had enough income to keep up payments - I am self-employed and work in the event industry - at that time. I also had a bank account that didn't allow direct debits and may have just forgotten payments and became annoyed at fines for late payments. What was the date of your last payment? Appears to be 20/4/2022 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No Here is my Defence: Defence - 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had an agreement with Capital One but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request.. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of having been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) 5. The Defendant has sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request. 6. A further request has been made via CPR 31.14 to the Claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The Claimant has not complied and to date nothing has been received. 7. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 88 CCA1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim 8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed 9. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of section 136 of the Law of Property Act and section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. .................. Please note that I had to write a defence quite quickly as I hit the deadline. At the time of writing the defence, I hadn't been able to find correspondence from Capital One, but had since found default letter etc. I submitted CCA request and CPR 31.14. However, I didn't get any proof of postage or use registered post for the CPR (an oversight) but did with the CCA request. I received a pack which included a letter from Overdales, going over the defence I'd filed, as well as letters of Lowells and reprints of letters from Capital One. But I have no idea if this pack is in response to the CCA request or the CPR ! I would have expected two separate responses ... although I do know they are both the same company. Looking over the pack today, and looking through old emails .. I find some discrepancies in the Capital One default letters (notice of default and Claim of default). They are both dated *before* an email I have stating that a default can be avoided. The one single page of agreement sent (so not the full agreement) has a 16 digit number at the top in small print, next to 'Capital One' which corresponds to a number called 'PURN' printed at the top of each of the 10 pages of ins and outs of the account (they're not official statements, but a list of monthly goings) yet no mention anywhere on either of the account number. I cant really scan them at the moment - I can later tomorrow, but that will be after the mediation call I'm sure. I guess I may be on my own for this mediation ... I am not certain the CCA request has been satisfied .. or if the CPR has been . And then I appear to have evidence that the Default notices provided are fabricated ? Yet, I do have (elsewhere ... not at home) Default letters from Capital One I can check ..
    • Atsushi Katsuki tells the BBC the firm sees the sober generation as both a risk and an opportunity.View the full article
  • 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

Small claims advice against DPD "Self-employed" franchise driver


cupid07
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2352 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

Hi everyone, I need some advice on behalf of a friend.

 

He started working as a self-employed DPD franchise driver last year.

It means you get the title as self-employed but essentially you drive their van,

you wear their uniform,

they tell you what hours to work

& theres little say on your part in this.

 

During the course of his working day, he got into an accident.

The insurance companies stated that they could find nobody to be at fault for the collision and any damages were paid for.

I believe the other guy who was involved in the crash had quite a high excess and as such is looking to claim this back

- by taking DPD to court.

 

This is where things get complicated.

The claimant wants to sue DPD to recover costs.

 

As such,

the case is being heard in the claimants local county court because DPD are a business.

DPD have told my friend he is to travel some 300 miles to this court and represent himself.

 

My friend has had nothing from any court come through summoning him to court.

We believe DPD have all the paperwork.

We think DPD is trying to make him go to court on behalf of them to deal with this claim.

 

DPD do have solicitors working on this case - we have yet to establish if they will be present on the court date.

 

My question is,

if the case is against DPD the company,

does my friend need to go?

 

when essentially he was a self employed franchise worker and not an "actual worker".

 

Has anyone got any advice for a situation like this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this problem has some very interesting implications.

 

Your friend is apparently an independent contractor and that means that in theory he/she is liable for any torts – negligence, in this case – which are perpetrated while he is carrying out his duties as a delivery driver.

 

If your friend was employed, then any negligence committed while in the course of his duties – working for DPD – would almost automatically be the liability of DPD.

 

I suppose that the claimant here is suing DPD – maybe because he doesn't realise that the driver is meant to be self-employed, or else he has decided that DPD is the better-loss-bearer – has deeper pockets – and is therefore the more useful party to sue.

 

What concerns me is that DPD may attempt to defend this claim on the basis that they are not liable and that it is your friend who should have been sued. If I was advising DPD, this is what I would tell them to do. Unfortunately you don't have any of the papers – but if it happened that this is DPD's position, and if it happened that the judge agreed and dismissed the claim then the next logical step for the claimant would be to start another action directly against your friend.

 

I think your friend urgently needs to get all the papers so that he can find out exactly what is being said.

 

This means he needs to get a copy of the claim form and needs to get a copy of DPD's defence. This may be tough to do because as far as I know there is no obligation on anyone to show him the documents.

 

If he does find himself in a position where the finger is pointed at him, then in addition to him saying that he did not cause the accident – in other words, the accident was not caused by his negligence, he would probably be advised also to claim that his self-employed status was a sham and that in fact he was "employed".

 

Of course this would run shivers up the backs of DPD because if this happened, DPD would be liable to pay all of the Social Security, holiday pay, minimum hours – everything else that comes with full employment.

 

I think it will be useful to give us the full details of the accident – and frankly rather than starting to do Chinese whispers which is always unsatisfactory – especially on a forum, I think that you should get your friend to start taking a bit of responsibility and come onto the forum, begin his/her own thread and lay space out the story.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, on paper although the "tools" utilised during the accident i.e the van are the property of DPD, and are under the insurance of the DPD company.

 

Also under negligence and the integration test

- the work is not an accessory to the business but a vital part of their business model.

 

Under the control test,

my friend has no control over the hours worked.

So on paper yes but in theory they fulfill the conditions of employee.

 

I agree they are going after DPD as its likely easier to enforce and of course, deeper pockets

- and also easier as its then listed at the claimants local court instead.

 

I will request he gets copy of the claim forms and what the defence is.

Unfortunately he does not have a computer so I am helping him as best I can.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good advice above from Bankfodder, please ask your friend to heed it carefully.

 

In order for your friend to be allowed to give oral evidence at the hearing he will need to file a witness statement, and in all likelihood, DPD's solicitors will be in the throws of preparing this on his behalf, which for the reasons set out above, is not a desirable state of affairs.

 

If he is non-cooperative in making a witness statement, a witness summons could be requested, which is effectively an official request by the Court to attend the trial. There can be consequences for ignoring a witness summons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought to back up whether he would be considered an employee. Check out the guidance on IR35. Unless the contract has specific terms then it could be for TAX and NI purposes that he is considered an employee. It's not a definitive thing but it would add credence to his argument that he is employed.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Could you just clarify for us as you mention 'self-employed DPD franchise driver' was this via DPD's 'Owner Driver Franchise'.

 

The reason I ask is if you look at this DPD link: https://drivers.dpd.co.uk/

 

Go down the webpage to 'Read all about becoming an Owner Driver Franchise' (please note when you click on it automatically downloads a PDF) seems similar to what you describe in post#1 but we would need you to clarify this.

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Many thanks for all the replies, apologies for the lateness as christmas has been hectic.

 

He has been sent a witness statement, so the solicitors can prepare a defense, but has yet to fill it in. Is he advised to NOT fill it in? If he fills it in, is this going down the route of him being an employee? or is this going down the route of him being solely responsible for any costs/damages?

 

@stu007 - yes that is the same scheme.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DPD are asking your friend to be a witness in this matter.

 

Is the witness statement loaded with questions for your friend to provide answers to? If it is, he must not fill it in. If he is to be a witness then his witness statement must be in his own words and based on facts which he has personal knowledge of.

 

DPD are vicariously liable for the claim, the relationship between your friend and DPD is employer and employee relationship.

 

You have already said that insurance company has found no-one to be at fault, therefore your friend is not liable for the claim.

 

Your friend is not a party to the proceedings, therefore he is not privy to the same and not entitled to a copy of the court documents.

 

If your friend does act as a witness, he must keep in mind that he is a witness for the court, as all witnesses are.

 

If he is served a witness summons, he must attend the trial otherwise he will be in contempt of court and can face a prison sentence or a fine or both!

 

Haunter

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many assumptions there:

a) is DPD vicariously liable?. Was the driver an employee of DPD, or a franchise owner?.

 

b) Just because the insurers "found no-one to be at fault", doesn't mean that a court will find the same ..... the insurers may have decided "50/50" rather than "100/0" or "0/100", but the court can

 

i) decide blame, allocating it to any party,

 

ii) adjust for blame in other proportions, by adjusting e.g. for contributory negligence.

 

c) See a), we don't know for sure if the driver is a party to the proceedings, or is likely to be joined to the proceedings.

 

d) I agree that if he is served a witness summons by the court he must attend, but we don't know if he has been served a witness summons, or merely asked to provide a statement!.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't made any assumptions, my post is based on the facts posted by cupid07.

 

The claim has been made against DPD and not the driver (the friend), the friend is being asked to fill out a witness statement.

 

A person does not have to be 'employed' as in PAYE on the payroll of a company for that company to be vicariously liable for any wrongful act of its employee,

 

a main contractor can be held vicariously liable for any wrongful act of his sub-contractor,

see the legal policy underlying the principle vicarious liability and the substantive case law on the point.

 

upid07, your friend will not be held liable for the claim if he makes a witness statement, as long as his witness statement is based on the truth of what happened, how the accident occurred.

 

Haunter

Link to post
Share on other sites

DPD are asking your friend to be a witness in this matter.

 

Is the witness statement loaded with questions for your friend to provide answers to? If it is, he must not fill it in. If he is to be a witness then his witness statement must be in his own words and based on facts which he has personal knowledge of.

 

DPD are vicariously liable for the claim, the relationship between your friend and DPD is employer and employee relationship.

 

You have already said that insurance company has found no-one to be at fault, therefore your friend is not liable for the claim.

 

Your friend is not a party to the proceedings, therefore he is not privy to the same and not entitled to a copy of the court documents.

 

If your friend does act as a witness, he must keep in mind that he is a witness for the court, as all witnesses are.

 

If he is served a witness summons, he must attend the trial otherwise he will be in contempt of court and can face a prison sentence or a fine or both!

 

Haunter

 

Yes it was questions on the witness statement,

that were framed in their words

- no blank space to write freely but already pre-filled questions.

 

To clarify, this is just a solicitors witness statement - not a witness summons from the court.

 

He has asked several times now,

if he goes to court on the day if he will be represented by these solicitors

- they have failed to provide any response/dodged the question.

 

He was also told that he will not be reimbursed as a witness for any travel costs or loss of work for the day

(he works elsewhere now so would need time off from another employer).

 

Given this, I think I will advise he doesn't fill it in and instead they can file through the courts for a summons

- at least this way, he will be able to claim some travel costs if he goes to court?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your friend should inform the solicitors that he is not filling out that witness statement as it is loaded with questions designed to procure the particular answer/response that they want him to say to the court, and that he is aware of cases where the witness and the solicitor who drafted such witness statements have ended up in a lot of trouble, including witnesses who have been given prison sentences in relation to such witness statements.

 

As they are not willing to cover his reasonable expenses he should refuse the witness statement.

 

Also, even if your friend does act as a witness, whether voluntarily or by witness summons, he will not be represented by the solicitors or anyone else, he will simply be a witness to the facts of the case before the court.

 

Haunter

Link to post
Share on other sites

They wanted him to answer the questions verbally,

fill it in on behalf of him and have him sign it!

 

Unfortunately they've been unreasonable with helping him get there (since its near 300 miles away, and a 4 hour drive) and tried to force the witness statement the way they have.

They will have to apply for a summons now.

Many thanks for your help.

 

EDIT to add: I've noticed from the correspondence that these solicitors are the solicitors of the insurance company and not DPD.

 

The court claim is between the claimant and DPD, so where do the insurers come into this?

 

They claim liability is in dispute?

 

Between DPD and the insurance company/my friend?

Link to post
Share on other sites

if its not under the directions of the court to fill it in then you tell him to ignore it.

they are trying to box him in

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

if its not under the directions of the court to fill it in then you tell him to ignore it.

they are trying to box him in

 

Perhaps.

 

The policyholder on the Insurance would be DPD and they would cover drivers working for DPD providing the drivers met qualifying conditions e.g age, points on licence.

 

Before a witness statement is refused, suggest the driver checks their terms of self employment/contract regarding any Insurance/accident requirements placed on them. It might say that refusal to assist with the Insurance company or DPD, in defending any third party claims, might lead to the driver being required to reimburse the costs of the claim.

 

More research required before any decision is made whether to provide a witness statement and if there is such a requirement by contract placed on drivers, then it is a case of deciding how to provide the statement. If the form supplied by the Solicitors is not acceptable, then just draft a simple statement.

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

Your friend is not obligated to answer the leading questions posed by the solicitors.

 

 

DPD are most likely using the same insurance company and their solicitors, and they are most likely relying upon the insurance company's investigation into the accident and its findings.

 

 

The claimant appears to be contesting the findings of the insurance company and he is holding DPD liable for the accident.

 

 

Haunter

Link to post
Share on other sites

accident....:ohwell::ohwell::focus:

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was trying to make a joke...

its a collision now is it not...

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...