Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi, the vehicle went to Audi Chingford on Thursday 13th May. I did state beforehand that I only wanted a diagnostic. The technician out of courtesy opened the drain letting huge deposits of water escape the seals. Video evidence was provided via AUDI cam. The link for the audi cam has been forwarded to BMW and Motonovo. I spoke to branch manager explained the situation and he stated he would sent me an email outlining the issue. Audi state this is not really an issue and more of a design flaw. However, the seals still have water ingress. I purchased the vehicle with £0 deposit on a 60 months HP plan for £520.00. The vehicle total was £21000. I did not go for any extended warranty. I live almost 70 miles away from the aftersales centre in Peterborough. I have previously uploaded the document I forwarded to BMW however it was in word format. I have had to buy a new tyre almost three days after purchasing vehicle. BMW still have not compensated me for the v62 cost as they said they would. 
    • I would suggest that you stop trying to rely on legal theory – as you understand it. Firstly, because we are dealing with practical/pragmatic situations and at a low value level where these arguments tend not to work. Secondly, because you clearly have misunderstood the assessment of quantum where there are breaches of obligations. The formula that you have cited above is the method of loss calculation in torts. In contract it is entirely different. The law of obligations generally attempts to remedy the breach. This means that in tort, damages seek to put you into the position you would have been in had the breach not occurred. In other words it returns you to your starting position – point zero. Contract damages attend put you into the position that you would have been had the breach not occurred but this is not your starting position, contract damages assume that the agreement in dispute had actually been carried out. This puts you into your final position. You sold an item for £XXX. Your expectation was that you your item would be correctly delivered and that you would be the beneficiary of £XXX. Your expectation loss is the amount that you sold the item for and that is all you are entitled to recover. If you want, you can try to sue for the larger sum – and we will help you. But if they ask for evidence of the value of the item as it was sold then I can almost guarantee that either you will be obliged to settle for the lesser sum – or else a judge will give you judgement but for the lesser sum. This will put you to the position that you would have been had there been no breach of contract. I understand from you now that when you dispatch the item you declared the retail cost to you and not your expected benefit of £XXX. To claim for the retail value in the circumstances would offend the rules relating to betterment. If you want to do it then we will help you – but don't be surprised if you take a tumble.  
    • I was caught speeding 3 times in the same week, on the same road. All times were 8-12mph higher than the limit. I was offered the course for the first offense and I now need to accept the other 2 offenses. I just want to be ready for what might come. Will I get the £100 fine and 3 points for each of them or do I face something more severe?  These are my only offenses in 8 years of driving.
    • I'll get my letter drafted this evening. Its an item I sold, which I'm also concerned about, as whilst I don't have my original purchase receipt (the best I have is my credit card statement showing a purchase from Car Audio Centre), I do unfortunately have the eBay listing where I sold it for much less. But as I said before this is now a question of compensation: true compensation would seek to put me back into the position I was in before the loss ie: that title would remain with me until my buyer has accepted this, and so compensation should be that which would be needed to replace the lost item. But in the world of instant electronic payment, it could be argued that as I had already been paid, the title to the goods had already transferred, and I was required to refund the buyer after the loss. And so, despite my declared value being the retail price - that which is needed to return me to my pre-sales position, the compensatory value should be the value I sold it for, which being a second-hand item from a private seller is lower. I still believe that I should be claiming for the item's full value, rather than how much I sold it for, as this is the same for insurance: we don't insure the value we paid, but rather the value of the item to put us back into the position we would be in if we ever needed to claim. Its for the loss adjuster to argue the toss
    • amusing that 'bad economic judgement on behalf of prior party ISN'T a major reason to wingers to move to deform yet immigration is, where record levels of such has been driven by the right wings terrible brexit and the later incompetent dog whistle 'proposals largely driven to whistle to the right wingnuts Just seems to confirm the are clueless numpties 'wetting their own shoes   Has farage bought a property in Clacton yet?   yet concern for the NHS is listed as a major issue even by those saying they are moving to deform  
  • 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

Lowells Claim Form - old Talk Talk debt and an Eon Debt *** Claim Discontinued***


sillygirl1
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1462 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

To be quite honest I would like to keep it as simple ss possible, a CPR was sent but no reply.

 

I aim to get this in by Sunday as I have a lot on over the next few weeks.

 

If yoy can add anything I would aporeciate it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The only thing I would add is Do not Submit the Above .......nothing simple or quick in defending a court claim...and if you really dont have the time to deal with it then possibly best to submit the admitance form and take the CCJ.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

100s in the following link.

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/129-legal-successes/

 

Well yes given the the length of time you have been a Cagger I am amazed that you could realistically think the above was appropriate.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

we don't no longer nurse maid no if that's what you mean

1.siteteam membership is very limited compared with your earlier times

2. you need to understand WHY you are using a defence not just copy and paste a templated response.

 

 

 

 

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

Changes for the better ...our defences now work :wink:  but you have to put a titzy little effort in too.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

already pointed out most of those are immaterial esp SB as the claimform stop that clock...

 

not due till next Friday by 4pm

so plenty of time to search for the holding/no paperwork defences we use for mobile/telecom debt claimform from lowells.

and the resent util one here already and merge the the two into one defence as many points are the same.

best search to use is the custom google search box

down on the left after hitting the top cag squares logo in the red banner.

 

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

This is taken from one of the Lowell threads and amended

 

Particulars of claim for reference only

 

1) The Claim comprises the following Agreements the Defendant entered into:

a.  Talk Talk Telecom Group plc with ref xxxxx current balance £120.87

b.  E.on Energy Solutions Ltd with ref of xxxx and current balance of £1141.65

 

2)The Agreements were terminated as payments were not maintained and subsequently assigned to the Claimant.

 

And the Claimant claims:

 

a) total of thensaid sums being £1262.52

b) interest pursuant to s69 County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue being £101.00

c) Costs

 

Defence

 

1.The  Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature.The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

The claimant has placed two unrelated bills from two different companies and therefore their claim is misleading.

 

2. 1a Is denied.The first unsubstantiated claim is for a closed mobile phone/broadband account. It was closed due to Talk Talk’s well publicised data breaches.  The defendant was assured they could leave with no penalty, yet a penalty was applied and a further data breach occurred when this was passed to debt collectors.The defendant has repeatedly requested documentation on this and has not been supplied with any proof the claimants  are due relief as stated in their poorly particularised claim

 

3. 1b is denied. The claimant further claims the amount of xxx in respect to a long disputed alleged debt with eon energy suppliers.  The defendant had been incorrectly placed on a very high tariff with the company in 2012 despite being a low energy user and had continually had problems with back billing and estimated readings.  The defendant made a part payment to eon in 2013 to attempt a resolution but eon failed to keep their agreement.  They removed a faulty meter and destroyed it before checking  it and again refused to clear charges on the account relating to a period when the defendant was not living at the property in question.  The defendant changed suppliers in early 2014.

 

The defendant moved in 2015 and had received no annual statement or requests from EON until June 2019 when the claimant was/s assigned the alleged debt.

 

3.Furthermore, the claimant has given no details as to the breakdown of their claim what dates it relates to ,so I am  unable to defend specifically until the claimant can particularise and quantify its pleadings.

 

4. The claimant openly admits that they do not have access to the agreement nor was the Assignor required to retain a copy.Therefore their claim is unsubstantiated. Pursuant to the civil procedure rules Practice Direction 16 (7.3) Where a claim is based upon a  written agreement:-

 

(1) a copy of the contract or documents constituting the agreement should be attached to or served with the particulars of claim and the original(s)  should be available at  the hearing.

 

With the court’s permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to:-

 

a) show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement/s;

b) show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed ;

c) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;

 

5. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the monies are owed.

 

6. It is therefore denied that the defendant is indebted to the claimant as alleged or at all.

 

 

Can I have sime advice in the above, I know it doesnt have to be in til Fridaybut I am manically busy this week and want it done by tomorrow night.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have made a few changes and the above will suffice as an initial defence.

 


Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Brief update.  A while ago received notification that defence had been submitted and now have received a Directions Questionairre asking for mediation.

 

Lowells remain happy to discuss any aspect should I wish to contact them.

 

ie Lowells wish to get me to pay up before mediation.

 

I gather it is just a waiting game now?

Edited by sillygirl1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean the n180 from the fleecers not your blank one from the court

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

On 05/10/2019 at 10:23, dx100uk said:

You mean the n180 from the fleecers not your blank one from the court

Yes... they are playing games.

 

If I dont get a blank one what should I do?

 

 

Edited by sillygirl1
Link to post
Share on other sites

its here on cag 

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

Should now be stayed. 

ring northants bulk tomorrow and check

wont show on mcolthat its stayed.

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

  • 3 months later...

Update, Lowell’s have to enter a better defence and show all assignments, agreements and copies of notices of assignment by mid Feb.  
 

10 days after that I have to do amended defence.  Got a draft one ready I pinched from here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

defence or WS?

 

whats happened in the last 3mts tell us properly..

 

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

I sent the defence to the courts and Lowells, had a notice of allocation which I said no to mediation and the court o be Croydon, that was just before Xmas then this notice arrived Friday.

 

Nothing from Lowells.

 

If I get their docs I have to do a defence.

Edited by sillygirl1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You have already filled your defence.

and lowells a claimant doesn't defend anything..

 

what does the n157 really say?

read it carefully..

 

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

Firstly it is a N24 General Form of Judgment or Order

 

It is ordered that

 

1. Claimant shall by xxx file and serve further and better particulars exhibiting any agreements, assignments and notices of assignment relied upon.

 

2 Defendant shall within 14 days of service of Claimants amended particulars of Claim file and serve an amended Defence responding in full to the amended particulars of claim.

Edited by sillygirl1
Link to post
Share on other sites

aha so you've a smart judge then there wanting not to waste court time on a Lowell speculative claim and robopoc

 

so as soon as you get their new particulars and exhibits

scan the lot up to one multipage pdf

and we'll deal with your amended defence.

 

I see this could be fun.

 

 

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...