Announcements
-
-
Tweets
-
-
Posts
-
Okay....I was just making sure there was only one claim number. So in reality their application for SJ takes precedent over the main claim and process.. you deal with the application as a priority (Defendant 1) There is no need to amend the initial defence as you can rectify/add that within your opposing statement. Your statement should be based on their statement that supported their application in which you refute and state your arguments. I must say that its a very risky option by the claimant to single out only one of the defendants on a joint claim and undermines the main claim should that proceed. Although should they be successful then the main claim will fall away.... A satisfied judgment obtained against one defendant will ordinarily bar a claim against other defendants with joint, or joint and several, liability. A claimant is entitled to recover all of its losses from any one of multiple defendants where their liability is joint, or joint and several (but not where the liability is merely several. You must file and serve your statement/evidence in response not less than 7 days pre hearing. https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part24 . -
You were right to ignore all the earlier bilge they sent you, but a LBC is a formal notice of intention to start court proceedings, so you need to reply now. If you show you'd be huge trouble for them in court it may persuade them to go after an easier target instead. As dx says, snotty letter time. -
Ho! Ho! Ho! To be fair to Simon, there is one sort-of prominent-ish mention of VCS on the signs - as opposed to six for Excel! Normally a defence should be as generic as possible, but I'm musing if this once it would be worth part of the defence stating that the Defendant could not have entered into a contract with the Claimant VCS as the car park is managed by a completely different company. This might cause a light to come on Simple Simon's skull and push him towards discontinuance.
-
no one claim JCF v guarantors defendant 1 and 2- trial 5 march one claim JCF v guarantor defendent 1-applied for summary judgement as defence laid out poorly same claimant but against two companies (the guarantors of) same loan agreements and everything, defences are the same -
Right with you ...so was it one claim with defendants 1 and 2 or two separate claims in each name ?
-
-
Our picks
-
Post in Bailiffs in at BBC obtain 7 years interest on overpayment of TV licence
Its WAR posted a post in a topic,
I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
-
-
Post in Court Claim Against Hermes - item sent via Packlink was lost/tampered with **WON at mediation full amount **
jj58 posted a post in a topic,
Hi @BankFodder
Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them.
In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
Picked By
BankFodder, -
-
***Hermes and mediation hints ***
BankFodder posted a topic in Postal and Delivery Services,
Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003-
- 1 reply
Picked By
BankFodder, -
-
Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help
waz70 posted a topic in NatWest Bank,
Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786-
- 31 replies
Picked By
waz70, -
-
CEL PCN Claimform - White Cross Business Park***Claim Discontinued*** now going for GDPR Breach claim
-
Recently Browsing 0 Caggers
No registered users viewing this page.
-
Have we helped you ...?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now