Announcements
-
-
Tweets
-
Posts
-
By BankFodder · Posted
Please will you upload the defence in a PDF format document -
Afternoon All - after 3 weeks of silence, this morning I received an email from HMCTS advising that P2G have rejected my claim. Decide whether to proceed Parcel2Go.com has rejected your claim. You need to decide whether to proceed with the claim. You need to respond before 4pm on 25 June 2024. Your claim won’t continue if you don’t respond by then. This is their ‘defence’ Their defence Why they disagree with the claim When choosing a service on the Defendants website, the Claimant chose to book their order with Evri and selected to take out £20 parcel protection which comes with the service. On the first page of the booking process, the Claimant entered the value of £265 for the contents and was offered parcel protection for loss or damages against their goods for £13.99 + VAT. The Claimant selected no, which then produced a pop up which explained 'We strongly recommend that you protect the full value of your item(s).' however, the Claimant still did not take this protection out and instead continued with the booking process. At the end of the booking process, the Claimant was offered this again which was refused and the Claimant continued with the booking by accepting the terms and conditions which re-iterates the information provided in the booking process. The parcel was sent, however, seems to be delayed in transit. The parcel finally started to track again, however, when delivered the parcel was empty with no contents. As such, the claim was re-opened and attempted to be settled for the £20 protection taken out in the booking process. This was refused by the Claimant as they felt they should be paid the full amount of the value entered when booking. Unfortunately, due to the refusal of the parcel protection in the booking process the Defendant is not liable to settle the claim to the value and only to the parcel protection taken out. The Defendant shall rely on the Terms and Conditions of carriage in particular section 9. The Defendant understands that the contents have not be handled with due care and attention, which is not being disputed, however, they are disputing the amount they are liable to. They have requested mediation, I’m sure not least to drag the case out even longer, but I can see no benefit to me in this and so shall reject it. As ever, I’d welcome your thoughts guys. g59 -
I doubt HMCTS holds any data on whether arrests by AEAs required police assistance. They couldn't or wouldn't provide data on how many of warrants issued were successfully executed - just the number issued! In my experience, arrest warrants whether with or without bail are [surprisingly] carried out with little or no fuss. I think it's about how you treat people - a little respect and courtesy goes a long way. If you treat people badly they will react the same way. Occasions when police are called to assist are not common and, having undertaken or managed many thousands of these over the years, I can only recall a handful of occasions when police assistance was necessary. On one occasion, many years ago, I arrested and transported a man from Hampshire to Bristol prison on a committal warrant. It was just me and he was no problem. I didn't know the Bristol area (pre Sat Nav) and he was kind enough to provide directions - seems he knew the prison. One young chap on another committal warrant jumped out of his back window and I had to chase him across several garden fences. When he gave up (we were both knackered) I agreed to drive by his girlfriend's house to say farewell for a while. I gave them a few moments and he was fine. The most difficult are breach warrants but mainly in locating the defendant as they don't want to go back to prison - can't blame them. These were always dealt with by the police until the Access to Justice Act transferred responsibility from them to the magistrates' courts. The fact was the police did not actively pursue them and generally only executed them when they arrested someone for something else and found they had a breach warrant outstanding. Hence the transfer of responsibility. -
thats down to mcol making that option available for you to select, you cant force it. typically if there are known processing delays at northants bulk it will be atleast 14 days later if not more. -
Thanks Noting the day to apply for default judgement if necessary
-
-
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.-
- 1 reply
-
-
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
-
-
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-
- 161 replies
-
-
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
-
-
-
Recommended Topics
-
style="text-align: center;">
Thread Locked
because no one has posted on it for the last 2042 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
-
Recently Browsing 0 Caggers
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Have we helped you ...?
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS
Recommended Posts