Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Can I just suggest one thing   Ask them how the subframe broke and say you would like them to explain how changing a cv joint affects the sub frame   I'm not an expert but I've changed cv joints in the past and never needed to touch the subframe on a car   The axle itself might pass through the subframe but removing the cv joint usually just entails cracking the old one off with a split bar   I can't help but wonder if they've braced it against the subframe and that's why it's broken 
    • it wouldn't have gone to a (your?) local county court as you didn't reply to the claimform. northants bulk would have dealt with it as it was a default judgement.    
    • Thank you so much for the reply. I have tried to call the court (Torbay & Newton Abbot) but they are short staffed so cant answer ;-( Does the discharge mean it has been thrown out?   On the report is is just marked as the court date 10th December 2020 and under that Discharged. Thank you!
    • I need to repair the lead flashing on my side of a firewall on the roof of a Victorian terrace. It will involve hacking off the cement on my side, installing new lead and reapplying cement. Do I have to notify my neighbour under the party wall act before getting this work done? I was under the impression minor work was not notifiable. I would consider this minor work. From the party wall act:   "Some works on a party wall may be so minor that service of notice under the Act would be generally regarded as not necessary. Things like:  drilling into a party wall to fix plugs and screws for ordinary wall units or shelving  cutting into a party wall to add or replace recessed electric wiring and sockets  removing old plaster and replastering may all be too minor to require a notice under the Act."   The neighbour has got wind of what I am doing and has asked for written grantees that I will cover the cost of any impact on his side and is threatening to invoke the party wall act if I don't I don't want to write him a blank cheque as his side of the firewall is probably is as bad a condition as my side.
    • They will NOW debit   Sorry I need to relax before I type out responses. and reread them. Tried to edit the post but cannot
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Principal Agent (Vicarious Liability)


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 965 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

This is regarding a tripartite agreement between a Principal, Agent and Third party.

 

The Principal is only liable for the tort (and/or failure) of the Agent if the Principal is undisclosed.

 

The Principal is NOT liable if he had been disclosed prior to the agreement.

 

However, can the Third Party sue a prior disclosed Principal on the grounds that he was negligent in choosing the Agent in the first place?

 

Also, can the prior disclosed Principal be sued because he had significant control over the Agent?

 

Thanks a lot and I would greatly appreciate any case law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is rather vague and generally beyond our area of experience. However, I'm a bit surprised that an agreement can exclude liability for negligence in the way you suggest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Assuming the outcome is important you'd be better off asking a solicitor. I don't think anyone who helps here regularly is a lawyer.

 

 

There is at least one regular respondent on CAG who has stated in the past that they are a solicitor, and their posts have given me no reason to disbelieve them.

 

 

Another regular (and / or, frequent) respondent (mostly on insurance threads) has described themselves as a "lawyer". They haven't gone further and given details (qualifications or job title), so they might be a solicitor, a barrister, a para-legal or legal executive ; but again, the quality and content of their contributions has given me no reason to doubt them.

 

 

Whether either would engage with such a context devoid question as the OP's question (and if they might conclude from the OP's postings that the OP will just argue the toss with any answer they don't like or that doesn't completely accord with the OP's pre-formed expectations) is another matter, though.

 

 

So, there are people on CAG who:

a) regularly help, and

b) I don't doubt are lawyers, so I must disagree with you there, Ethel Street.

 

 

Would they contribute on this thread?. There I'd agree with you, ES.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the information Bazza. I did say "I don't think..." there are any lawyers which I'd hope indicated it was just my perception, not a statement of fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
This is rather vague and generally beyond our area of experience. However, I'm a bit surprised that an agreement can exclude liability for negligence in the way you suggest.

 

Thanks

This is what I suspect; The Principal was negligent in his selection process hence he is liable for his agent

You helped me organise my thinking

Once again, thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...