Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • occysrazor
      Evri lost my Ebay parcel £844 - court claim issued

      By occysrazor · Posted

      Yes, in the main your understanding of my case is right. Linked below to the post with the final WS sent to the court and to Evri.   
    • honeybee13
      Carparksecurities Northgate, Halifax, Former Dews Car PArk HX1 1XJ

      By honeybee13 · Posted

      Hello, welcome to CAG. As you say, appealing this ticket doesn't help as these people hardly ever accept appeals. They don't care how difficult someone's life is, they just want the money. The forum guys should be along later with thoughts for you on how to deal with this. Best, HB
    • Nongki
      Adidas/DWF Claimform - Supposed Non-Return of Refunded Items.

      By Nongki · Posted

      I have received an email in the last 10 minutes 4) The Claimant's witness is currently out of the office on annual leave and this was not relayed to DWF Law until after the event which has caused a further unfortunate delay. 5) The Court has directed parties to file and serve any evidence upon which they intend to rely not later than 14- days before the hearing i.e. by 4pm on 6 June 2024. Regrettably, the Claimant will have insufficient time to finalise their witness evidence and supporting exhibits as directed. We therefore respectfully apply to extend the time for filing/serving evidence so that the evidence upon which the parties intend to rely by filed and served not later than 7-days before the hearing i.e. by 4pm on 13 June 2024  It also includes a "Notice of Hearing" stating that the application hearing will take place on 13th June at 10.00am.  Confused as to whether I need to attend this ?
    • MotherofDragons76
      Carparksecurities Northgate, Halifax, Former Dews Car PArk HX1 1XJ

      By MotherofDragons76 · Posted

      I've received this notice to keeper. I work for the NHS and was delayed due to patient care. I park here regular and and have never had any issues. I've looked at the evidence on the portal and other than showing that i entered at 12.59.33 and departed at 17:14:14 it doesn't state how long i overstayed for. I paid for 4 hours parking over the phone which i wont have done till i got parked but as its over the phone i have no receipt or record but it is not possible for me to have been in excess of 15mins from the photos alone but I'm unsure having read other threads whether grace periods are 10 or 15 minutes. I havent appealed yet but and was about to but in appealing i'm showing i'm the driver which i gather is something you state we must never do. I don't like confrontation but £60 seems extortionate. Hope you can help. 🤞 1 Date of the infringement 30th May 2024 2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 30th May 2024 [scan up BOTH SIDES as ONE PDF- follow the upload guide] please LEAVE IN LOCATION AND ALL DATES/TIMES/£'s 3 Date received 5th June 2024 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] No reference to schedule 4 just says"...we the creditor reserve the right to recover unpaid parking charges from the registered keeper in accordance with POFA 2012." 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up NA 7 Who is the parking company? Carpark securities 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Northgate, Halifax Former Dews Car Park HX1 1XJ For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. IAS There are two official bodies, the BPA and the IAS. If you are unsure, please check HERE   Notice to Keeper.pdf
    • lookinforinfo
      VCS SpyCar PCN now Claim Form - No Stopping - Bristol Airport

      By lookinforinfo · Posted

      It never seems to amaze me how the chuckleheads think that No Stopping can ever offer a contract when it is prohibitory. In any case you did not accept the contract by entering the land, you entered the land to get to the airport for goodness sake. In most car parks there is a Consideration period that allows motorists to decide whether they want to stay in the car park . Here on a road, there is no consideration period and whether the motorist finds the terms agreeable or not even assuming that they are able to understand that they are being hoodwinked into believing they are being offered a  contract they cannot turn back. They have a plane to catch and even if they did turn back because they didn't accept the  No Stopping term of   the so called contract they would still have had to stop to turn around. Plus there is a question of Frustration of Contract. You had to stop at a pedestrian crossing .    

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Need advice about an injury-at-work case that is going south

DraxDomax
 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1885 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

DraxDomax

DraxDomax

Posted
Posted (edited)

My partner is a carer. She has been sent to work for a lady who wasn't equipped with the correct device to keep her upright. She fell on my partner and my partner suffered a back injury leading to incontinence, pain and time off work.

 

We took the case with xxx LLP, who wrote a letter to the employer and got a response, offering 4000 pounds as final settlement.

xxx advised us to reject that offer, saying, over the phone, that we can always fall back on the 4000, but they believe we can get much more.

 

Since then, my partner has been to Royal Berkshire Hospital, where the doctor said he doesn't see any injury and any pain she might have is a result of earlier injury. Her incontinence might be an infection (totally rubbish).

 

Now it feels like the case might fall through, as the doctors do not want to confirm her injury and we see the 4000 pounds as a better-than-nothing solution.

However, when we WROTE to xxx, they said the offer is off the table and we can't fall back to those 4000 pounds.

 

1. She will be seeing a doctor from xxx privately to assess her but I reckon a judge might be more interested in an NHS doctor rather than a doctor from an interested party?

 

2. What can we do in regards to xxx making us think we could get at least 4000 pounds and now they are implying we can come out empty handed?

 

3. Any other advice regarding the situation in general will be appreciated

 

I will just add that the reason my partner was injured is that she grabbed the falling lady and saved her from rolling down the stairs.

And that my partner is truly injured. It took her 2 weeks to admit that she's incontinent because of the shame.

Edited by honeybee13
Name of law firm removed
Link to post
Share on other sites
Emmzzi

Emmzzi

Posted
Posted (edited)

what does your contract with xxx say? Are you able to withdraw from it and what happens if you do?

Edited by honeybee13
Law firm name removed

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Emmzzi

Emmzzi

Posted
Posted

ok. So, currently no medical evidence

 

 

What training did she get?

 

 

What risk assessment was in place?

 

 

Did she get sick pay?

 

 

Is she back at work?

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ganymede

Ganymede

Posted
Posted
My partner is a carer. She has been sent to work for a lady who wasn't equipped with the correct device to keep her upright. She fell on my partner and my partner suffered a back injury leading to incontinence, pain and time off work.

 

We took the case with xxx LLP, who wrote a letter to the employer and got a response, offering 4000 pounds as final settlement.

xxx advised us to reject that offer, saying, over the phone, that we can always fall back on the 4000, but they believe we can get much more.

 

Since then, my partner has been to Royal Berkshire Hospital, where the doctor said he doesn't see any injury and any pain she might have is a result of earlier injury. Her incontinence might be an infection (totally rubbish).

 

Now it feels like the case might fall through, as the doctors do not want to confirm her injury and we see the 4000 pounds as a better-than-nothing solution.

However, when we WROTE to xxx, they said the offer is off the table and we can't fall back to those 4000 pounds.

 

1. She will be seeing a doctor from xxx privately to assess her but I reckon a judge might be more interested in an NHS doctor rather than a doctor from an interested party?

 

2. What can we do in regards to xxx making us think we could get at least 4000 pounds and now they are implying we can come out empty handed?

 

3. Any other advice regarding the situation in general will be appreciated

 

I will just add that the reason my partner was injured is that she grabbed the falling lady and saved her from rolling down the stairs.

And that my partner is truly injured. It took her 2 weeks to admit that she's incontinent because of the shame.

 

 

1) The Court will place more weight on a medico-legal report from a medical expert instructed by your solicitor.

 

2) Was the off made by way of "Part 36"? As for the advice given, we'd need to see the advice you got from your solicitor.

 

3) Call your solicitor and ask them everything you've asked here. They're you're solicitors and I imagine you're paying them at least 25% of your settlement so use the qualified legal professionals you're paying for.

Link to post
Share on other sites
DraxDomax

DraxDomax

Posted
  • Author
Posted

1. She's a senior carer with all the qualifications and certificates. She is trained to operate all moving and handling equipment

 

2. She has actually proactively assessed the risk and informed: the care company, occupation therapist, the head nurse and the family - in writing, that the woman is not equipped to walk on her own in the current setting. She has a written statement from other carers who said they will not work for that lady because she's at risk of collapsing any moment.

I believe there may be some form of agreement from the official people (OT, care company...) that the equipment is not suitable but I am not sure of this documentation.

 

3. She did not receive statutory sick pay. As a matter of fact, the care company were very quick to deduct 200 pounds for uniform, which we got back by threatening with ACAS

 

4. She is only able to do light work such as baby-sitting. And she does that 2 days per week.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Emmzzi

Emmzzi

Posted
Posted

2. She has actually proactively assessed the risk and informed: the care company, occupation therapist, the head nurse and the family - in writing, that the woman is not equipped to walk on her own in the current setting. She has a written statement from other carers who said they will not work for that lady because she's at risk of collapsing any moment.

I believe there may be some form of agreement from the official people (OT, care company...) that the equipment is not suitable but I am not sure of this documentation.

 

 

Your difficuty is that despite being fully trained, and having undertaken the risk assessment herself, she has then proceeded to do the work. This puts her on very shaky ground.

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites
DraxDomax

DraxDomax

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I see your point. I hope our legal help can get this covered somehow.

 

Speaking of that legal help, any way to get some traction regarding their earlier verbal promise that we can get those 4000 guaranteed, or more?

Link to post
Share on other sites
honeybee13

honeybee13

Posted
Posted
I see your point. I hope our legal help can get this covered somehow.

 

Speaking of that legal help, any way to get some traction regarding their earlier verbal promise that we can get those 4000 guaranteed, or more?

 

 

It was a verbal promise, did you record it?

 

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ganymede

Ganymede

Posted
Posted
I see your point. I hope our legal help can get this covered somehow.

 

Speaking of that legal help, any way to get some traction regarding their earlier verbal promise that we can get those 4000 guaranteed, or more?

 

I very much doubt it was a "promise."

 

Did you not get anything in writing from your solicitor?

Link to post
Share on other sites
DraxDomax

DraxDomax

Posted
  • Author
Posted

ok maybe they didn't say "we promise" but, while my partner isn't seasoned in legal practice, I believe that she understood correctly some form of explicit verbal assurance that the "4000" offer is live, not off the table.

 

We got a lot in writing but not that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Emmzzi

Emmzzi

Posted
Posted

I can't see a strong case; so I woud probably go along with the solicitor's doctor, and see if they can make a case. I wouldn't count on much coming from it, though.

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites
sangie5952

sangie5952

Posted
Posted
It was prob a offer to settle as cheaper than cost of defending or involving insurance.

They prob feel they are not at fault but was cheapest way out.

Now, after refusing offer, they have likely informed insurance company and insurance company will fight it now.

 

I would agree. They may come back at a later stage, but the offer could go up - or down. There is never any way of predicting this.

 

On the issue of the NHS doctor - all medical opinion would receive equal weight in a court, assuming it came from someone qualified to deliver it. But what you would not be able to do, if the solicitor now got their own medical advice, would be to hide the opinion of the NHS medical practitioners. That would always form part of the evidence; and, in fact, depending on circumstances, the opposing side may already have copies, as litigation requires disclosure of such things.

 

But on a very basic point, an offer is an offer. Not a guarantee. And the lawyers advice is advice - you make the decision. The chances of demonstrating that this is the fault of the lawyer is negligible- and that is assuming that you had evidence, and that it was ironclad. I'd lay bets that it wasn't the latter, as lawyers seldom speak in certainties. They'll have said something conditional in the conversation - you just won't have heard it that way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
DraxDomax

DraxDomax

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi again, there's some progress: The other doctor that the lawyers told her to visit actually agrees that the injury is significant for a claim.

The lawyers still said it's still not favourable, if we have a 50/50 distribution about this.

 

The lawyers have given us some advice that I find weird and I think only you could help me understand (lawyers did not elaborate for us).

Basically, they said that we should now make a "interim claim" of 1000 pounds from the insurer. This means we claim 1000 pounds now but reserve the right to claim more once we get more evidence.

 

My question is (I am trying to understand the motives of each party): why would an insurer agree to an interim claim? If the the insured party is in the right, then the insurer is not motivated to accept any claim. If the insurer feels the claim has a chance, they would look to settle.

But why would anyone agree to pay some money now, without settling the claim finally?

 

Perhaps paying an interim claim makes the insured party appear more favourably at the court?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ganymede

Ganymede

Posted
Posted

Can you just confirm if liability for the accident is admitted by the other side's insurer?

 

The interim payment request could for for a couple of reasons. Either the Claimant needs further medical investigations or examinations etc and the money is to tide them over for now.

 

Or it's a tactic from the solicitors to get more costs if the interim payment is contested or paid late.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ganymede

Ganymede

Posted
Posted
yes, the insurer admitted liability.

I will re-check with the solicitors about their costs. I am pretty sure we agreed on a fixed percentage (25%) of the total settlement.

 

 

No, I meant the costs they get from the other side. Not the costs from their client.

 

It's not an unusual course of action to be honest. Pretty standard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BankFodder

BankFodder

Posted
Posted

This should open the topic

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...