Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Oh I see! thats confusing, for some reason the terms and conditions that Evri posted in that threads witness statement are slightly different than the t&cs on packlinks website. Their one says enter into a contract with the transport agency, but the website one says enter into a contract with paclink. via website: (c) Each User will enter into a contract with Packlink for the delivery of its Goods through the chosen Transport Agency. via evri witness statement in that thread: (c) Each User shall then enter into its own contract with the chosen Transport Agency. Packlink does not have any control over, and disclaims all liability that may arise in contracts between a User and a Transport Agency I read your post at #251, so I should use the second one (and changing the screenshot in the court bundle), since I am saying I have a contract with Evri? Is that correct EDIT: Oh I understand the rest of your conversation. you're saying if I was to do this i would have to fully adjust my ws to use the consumer rights act instead of rights of third parties. In that case should I just edit the terms and stick with the third parties plan?. And potentially if needed just bring up the CRA in the hearing, as you guys did in that thread  
    • First, those are the wrong terms,  read posts 240-250 of the thread ive linked to Second donough v stevenson should be more expanded. You should make refernece to the three fold duty of care test as well. Use below as guidance: The Defendant failed its duty of care to the Claimant. As found in Donoghue v Stevenson negligence is distinct and separate to any breach of contract. Furthermore, as held in the same case there need not be a contract between the Claimant and the Defendant for a duty to be established, which in the case of the Claimant on this occasion is the Defendant’s duty of care to the Claimant’s parcel whilst it is in their possession. By losing the Claimant’s parcel the Defendant has acted negligently and breached this duty of care. As such the Claimant avers that even if it is found that the Defendant not be liable in other ways, by means of breach of contract, should the court find there is no contract between Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant would still have rise to a claim on the grounds of the Defendant’s negligence and breach of duty of care to his parcel whilst it was in the Defendant’s possession, as there need not be a contract to give rise to a claim for breach of duty of care.  The court’s attention is further drawn to Caparo Industries plc v Dickman (1990), 2 AC 605 in which a three fold test was used to determine if a duty of care existed. The test required that: (i) Harm must be a reasonably foreseeable result of the defendant’s conduct; (ii) A relationship of proximity must exist and (iii) It must be fair, just and reasonable to impose liability.  
    • Thank you. here's the changes I made 1) removed indexed statement of truth 2) added donough v Stevenson in paragraph 40, just under the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 paragraph about reasonable care and skill. i'm assuming this is a good place for it? 3) reworded paragraph 16 (now paragraph 12), and moved the t&cs paragraphs below it then. unless I understood you wrong it seems to fit well. or did you want me to remove the t&cs paragraphs entirely? attached is the updated draft, and thanks again for the help. WS and court bundle-1 fourth draft redacted.pdf
  • 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
      • 162 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

Barclays make a hash of new account for my Mum and won't give her a cheque book, any ideas why as I'm flummoxed!??!


Max1968
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2134 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

My 82 year old mum hasn't been too well recently and her local Nat West Branch has closed down and the new one is a nightmare for parking and she doesn't walk too well.

 

She also got caught out by a phone holiday spoof to the tune of a few hundred quid and became paranoid about the company knowing her account details so we decided that maybe a change to a new bank was a good option.

 

Barclays is my and my sisters bank as well and as difficult as it is to talk about if something happens to mum before it happens to me we theorised that if we are all at the same bank things would be easier to deal with, but it has all become a bit of a disaster!!

 

We had a meeting with an advisor who looked into it and after doing her bit on computer stated that mum qualified for a basic account which would not include an overdraft or the option to loan.

 

To be fair mum has plenty of money in her account and gets very good pension and investment returns so the need for an overdraft or loan is highly unlikely as her balance stays pretty much the same each month and it's far higher than my balance is!!!

 

The one thing the advisor forgot to mention though was that mum wouldn't get a cheque book and I wouldn't have know that anyway being a Barclays Current Account holder since I was in my teens!!

 

This was only brought to our attention over a week later when I rang Barclays to ask because mum mentioned she hadn't received one, which we obviously thought was the norm, but was told that she couldn't get a cheque book for a basic account.

 

We then went back for a meeting because this was baffling.

It then became clear that mum had been declined a current account (hence the basic) but the reason for why she has been declined is unclear and apparently the advisors do not get told the reason so obviously the customer cannot argue against it.

 

The advisor to be fair did apologise profusely for not explaining clearly and for forgetting to mention the cheque book and said the reason could be something to do with a credit score.

 

I've however checked mums credit score on Experian and it was 999.

She has no debts, mortgage paid off years ago, no loans taken out for years if ever as far as I know, plenty of cash in the account and has never had an issue getting credit cards, of which she pays off in full...… Could this be the problem?!

 

The annoyance is that mum relies on her cheque book and is in a muddle and is having to either get me to send cheques for her or she has to withdraw large amounts of cash.

 

The bank suggested waiting a couple of months and when they have seen how the account is managed and that Barclaycards have been paid off etc then they can reapply for a current account.

 

If it is still declined then the only option is to go back to Nat West who have already said she can have a current account with cheque book like she did before, but it will obviously be a pain switching once again and I suspect all of the Direct Debit companies will be baffled as to what is happening!!

 

Barclays have also made a mess up with statements as well with mum not receiving one statement in the two months since the account opened so I am chasing up that as well

 

mum called Barclays Head Office last week and the guy on the phone couldn't understand why she hadn't been given a cheque book so we will wait and see if he gets any joy, although I would say probably not!!!

 

So any ideas as to why this happens?

Especially as I as an 18 years old got a current account without an issue and with probably no job at the time albeit 35 odd years ago!!

 

It seems bizarre especially as they hide the reason.

I am wondering in part if it's because she is a retired widow so upon first check they may not have known what monthly income she would be receiving but they would have seen from the account surely?

 

Help massively appreciated.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

The use of cheques is declining as more and more people switch to using credit/debit cards and online transactions. Banks incur considerable costs in processing cheques, and would probably like to do away with them altogether. That said, I'm surprised that your mother was only offered a basic account. Perhaps worth pinning down the branch manager and demanding an explanation ?

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Mr P.

Yep I only send the odd one these days myself but older people still use them and mum prefers to use them for things like her freezer man, gardener, paper bill etc.

 

Ironically only one of them now brings a card reader with them so they are a bit behind the times as well. To be honest with all the potential s.c.a.m.s. about I am relieved mum doesn't use the Internet and Internet Banking.

 

The older people will inherit the earth though when the internet and mobile phones blow up as they still use cash, paper and pencil!!!

 

It's getting to speak to the manager that will be the issue as it's all machines now, although I might call Head Office themselves although they probably won't speak to me as I am not the "account holder".

 

That annoys me as well, to talk about mums account I need Power of Attorney (which we have for future possibilities) but I don't want to do that now as it takes some of mums independence away. They need something a little lighter so you can talk about things like statements or cheque books!!!!!!

 

Can your credit history be "too good" ie if you haven't been in debt you have no history of paying it off?!

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's getting to speak to the manager that will be the issue as it's all machines now, although I might call Head Office themselves although they probably won't speak to me as I am not the "account holder". That annoys me as well, to talk about mums account I need Power of Attorney (which we have for future possibilities) but I don't want to do that now as it takes some of mums independence away. They need something a little lighter so you can talk about things like statements or cheque books!!!!!!

 

If you get your mother to set up what they call a "third party mandate", you will be able to discuss the account with (almost) anyone at the bank. I had one set up on my mother's accounts which also gave me the authority to sign her cheques amongst other things. Your mother would probably need to go into the local branch to set it up and sign the paperwork, but it does not mean giving up her independence as she can revoke the mandate at any time.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably down to no line of running credit on her file

 

Co-op do a cheque book account still

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...