Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • An update! I emailed both Andrzej.Tuleja and James_Goldsmith at Whirlpool dot com. I got a phone call from their executive team a couple of days later, and a replacement part dropped on the mat a week after. She was quite apologetic, however, also reiterated the "90 day warranty" period on customer fitted parts, and did not comment when I mentioned that the CRA also applies as I was a consumer buying from them directly. So I now have a spare door switch if the machine decides to eat another in the future! Cheers all!   Note dx100 that the "Hotpoint CEO" you linked to is not related to the hotpoint appliances, but some kind of marketing app.
    • yep, throw that morality card out the window....9/10 you never owe a DCA ANYTHING!! they are NOT BAILIFFS!!
    • (See the link to DVLA’s INF188/6 document I posted above, page 4 as cited) “I have a new medical condition that I have told the DVLA about on my recent application. Can I drive? As soon as the DVLA receives your correct and complete application for a new licence and as long as you meet all the Section 88 criteria, you may drive. It is important that you are satisfied that the medical condition you have declared on your application does not stop you from driving. If you are unsure, check with your doctor or healthcare professional before you make a decision. You can also look up your condition in the ‘Assessing fitness to drive’ guide, which you can find at www.gov.uk/dvla/fitnesstodrive to see whether you meet the medical standards for driving. As this guide is intended for healthcare professionals, it can be complicated. Your doctor or healthcare professional should be able to help you if necessary." It seems that DVLA think that S.88 does apply for applications disclosing a new medical condition after all. Why might this be so, and what of “qualifying application" and "relevant disability"? S. 92(1) imposes on the driver a requirement to disclose a relevant disability. S.92(3) requires the Secretary of State to refuse such an application disclosing a relevant disability ….. EXCEPT S.92(4) requires the Secretary of State to grant such an application if the relevant disability is “adequately controlled”. Hence my belief S.88 can apply for medical conditions (if the driver meets the medical standard of fitness to drive) as the application remains a qualifying application IF the driver meets the medical standard of fitness to drive, until DVLA (on behalf of the Secretary of State) say it doesn’t, provided the driver believes they meet the (medical) standard. Additionally, at (or before) June 2013 (as noted in my previous post) the medical standard for fitness to drive for conditions involving excessive daytime sleepiness was changed from “completely controlled” to "adequately controlled".  
    • CFO Bill Guan allegedly led a team at the news outlet that was behind a global money laundering scheme.View the full article
    • Anyway, I've asked my Booking.com flat-rent-out-bloke what needs to be done on the Booking.com portal to cancel a reservation. I got a late message "I'll let you know tomorrow".
  • 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

After Car Write-off - Auxillis Car Hire Costs Court Claim- ** RESOLVED - two insurers' solicitors settled out of court. no liability for me.**


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1196 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

what would I do...IMHO....discontinue the claim.

you are the claimant,

 

write to the court and the defedants solicitors, as such.

 

let the co-op and axa his insurance co. battle it out themselves.

the co-op shouldn't use Auxillis as they well know there are 1000's of bad reports about them everywhere inc here on cag.

 

his past misdemeanours and what you think of the insurance industry are immaterial.

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

Well thanks both of you.

I appreciate your advice is well meant, and I do accept that in my original post I included a question  "What should I do?"  which may have given the impression that I was seeking legal advice.

In fact I had already consulted and paid an independent solicitor to look over Principia's contract prior to signing it.

 

The question was in fact aimed primarily at others who may have been unfortunate enough to have had dealings with these crooks, and I apologise for not having made that clear at the outset.

 

Subsequent to that post I received advice from that solicitor. 

 Her advice was unequivocal: co-operate with Principia, Auxillis's solicitors.  

 

I later mentioned to her that I believed, at that time, that the dates of the hire were incorrect.

Her response was what I would describe as a typical solicitor's "mmmm...." which I took to mean "don't mention it."

 

The Co-op are not involved; Auxillis's contract is with me, and I agreed (unwittingly) to their terms of business when I put my signature to those eight pages of microscopic print on my drive, in the rain, in desperate need of, but devoid of transport and with the delivery driver looking at his watch.

 

Agreed: the Co-op should not be doing this. They certainly won't be doing it to as many people as they would otherwise, when enough people search the word "Auxillis" and are lead to this post, and they won't be insuring anything of mine, or any of my family and friends in the future either. 

 

I have often found in the past that advice, albeit well meant, can contradict. This is the perfect example: on the one hand I'm advised not to ambush my own solicitors; on the other I'm advised to challenge them and blow Auxillis's case out of the water by writing to the court and the defendant's solicitor. That would go down well - I don't think...

 

Were I to do that - Principia would, I am sure, immediately drop me as their client, as would 99% of solicitors, inform Auxillis of my actions, and put me in the position of being seen not to be co-operating (and that's putting it mildly,) in direct breach of my contract with them, resulting in Auxillis making a claim against me, for the hire costs.

 

That they would be highly unlikely to recover more than a couple of hundred quid is neither here nor there: I don't want the hassle of going to court, losing - which I would - and then being landed with a CCJ and subsequent enforcement action. Why would I? Why would anyone?

 

Which of course, is why Auxillis get away with it.

 

As I promised at the outset though - for anyone who falls into the hands of these parasites, I will continue to update as developments occur. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
  • 3 weeks later...

Credit hire is to be avoided.  If the third party Insurers refuse to cover the full costs of the car hire, then you would need to study the terms of the agreement signed for the car hire to understand the consequences.  I believe a car hire debt could be left, if the full hire cost is not paid by the third party Insurers. 

 

Separate thread will be set up for you.

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

Wanted to join in this, seems very similar to the experience my wife is having after an accident in June 2019. Diamond referred her to Auxillis for a "hire car" and all seemed rosy. Now my Wife is apparently taking the other driver and insurance company to court.

 

We've just had to submit financial statements and pay slips to prove she couldn't have afforded to hire a car herself for the 21 days it took for the repair to be completed. Fortunately, the car was no better than ours (Vauxhall Grandland for our C Max, which felt like a downgrade) but it is unnerving and time consuming, especially as we need to find 6 months of statements from over a year ago.

 

Also, apparently the court selected is Northampton (we're in Bournemouth so we'll be asking for that to change if possible!!!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Northampton is central admin centre Court when claims are submitted online. Later in the process, the actual local Court that will feature any hearing is decided between parties.

 

For these motor Insurance claims, the Insurance companies usually settle before any Court hearing. Issuing the Court claim focuses minds on negotiating an agreed settlement. 

  • Like 1

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

Well the 'hearing' such as it would have been, was scheduled for th 29th of September and would have been held over the phone. 

 

But wise old Uncle Bulgaria has it right: at the eleventh hour, the two insurers' solicitors settled out of court.

There is no liability for me. 

 

I originally started this thread two years ago, after I'd received an email from the hire company's solicitors, saying they were acting for me, accompanied by dire warnings not to ignore it and requesting that I register on their website. 

 

We were at the local pub at the time, eating out as a celebration due to our having paid our mortgage off that day.

It completely ruined the evening, caused me many sleepless nights thereafter,

two hundred quid on a solicitor to check out Principia's (Auxillis's solicitors) and recurring nightmares over this last two years, as emails would drop into my inbox randomly, often in the middle of the night or at weekends.

 

I never dealt with the same person twice, every contact with them resulted in confusion.

Even as recently as three weeks ago, I was asked to sign a witness statement, scan it and attach it as an email to them.

 

I did so, and requested confirmation that they'd received it.

Nothing.

 

A week or so later, another email, requesting the same signed statement.

I sent it again, along with a screen shot of the original email.

Still no confirmation.

 

A couple of days later I received a text message, requesting the same thing again.

 

Then finally, two working days before the hearing, I got the email advising me of the hearing. 

 

I received a telephone call from the barrister approximately 22 hours before the time, advising me of the settlement.

 

When I started this thread, it was out of frustration at the thoughtlessness of those who had started similar threads on other forums, but who hadn't completed the story and reassured those who were desperately seeking that reassurance.

 

I promised I would update every few months and would finalise the thread when it was eventually settled.

 

In conclusion, to all those unfortunates who have ended up here as a result of similar frustration, I can offer that reassurance.

 

As long as you co-operate with their solicitors (and keep a record of every email, every telephone conversation,) you will be fine. Of course the people who really need to read this thread are those who are just about to sign that credit hire agreement. Unfortunately it is unlikely they will. 

 

However, if anyone is in that position, here is my advice:

if your insurance company, after an accident that was not your fault, offers you a hire car (and even more so if the fault of the accident is not quite clear cut,) ask them this question:

"IS THIS A CREDIT HIRE AGREEMENT?" If the answer is yes - DECLINE. 

 

Hire a small car on your credit card, keep it for as short a period as possible, then bill the other driver's insurers.

It is doubtful they would quibble, but if they do, threaten them with an action in the small claims court.

If that still doesn't work, take out the summons using moneyclaim online.

You'll get your money, and the court fee. 

 

That finalises the issue, for me.

Thank you to all those who offered advice and I hope this is reassuring to anyone who is going through this hell. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you @jack_rileyfor completing your story and the advice you have given to avoid credit hire.

 

Credit Hire is a part of a game to make money. And if people sign up to hire cars on this basis, they may come to regret it at a later date. 

 

 

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

Think most get settled without going to a hearing.  The Court process requires the parties to try to settle. But it could be close to the Court date.

 

This is a huge industry with plenty of people making money from this process.  

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to Auxillis Car Hire Costs Court Claim- ** RESOLVED - two insurers' solicitors settled out of court. no liability for me.**
  • 4 months later...

How do I unsubscribe/ stop receiving notifications? Today, I've had six notifications by email. Not surprisingly, after two and a half years of hassle with this lot, when I see the word 'Auxillis' in my email inbox, my heart sinks.

 

Please - stop sending notifications, or unsubscribe me. I never want to see or hear their name again.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

scroll up to the top on the right right 

green following box

hit that untick your name

 

i'm going to make all the recent hi-jacking post into a thread for arj too

 

DX

 

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to After Car Write-off - Auxillis Car Hire Costs Court Claim- ** RESOLVED - two insurers' solicitors settled out of court. no liability for me.**
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...