Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Ok thanks for that, well spotted and all duly noted. Yes they did eventually submit those docs to me after a second letter advising them I was contacting the ICO to make a formal complaint for failing to comply with an earlier SAR that they brushed off as an "administrative error" or something. When I sent the letter telling them I was in contact with the information commissioner to lodge the complaint, the original PCN etc quickly followed along with their excuse!
    • its not about the migrants .. Barrister Helena Kennedy warns that the Conservatives will use their victory over Rwanda to dismantle the law that protects our human rights here in the UK.   Angela Rayner made fun of Rishi Sunak’s height in a fiery exchange at Prime Minister’s Questions, which prompted Joe Murphy to ask: just how low will Labour go? .. well .. not as low as sunak 
    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
  • 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

Claimform raised against Hermes & Packlink as joint defendants - Lost Parcel ** Packlink Settled**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 976 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

Please can you set out the events which occurred in a bullet pointed chronology. Not too much narrative please.

You say that you have already started a claim. Please could you post up the claim form.

You say that you have named pack link as a defendant. How did you do that? I rather believe that they are based in Spain so did you find a UK address for them?

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for this very clear explanation.

You don't tell us what the item was and also you don't tell us what the value was. Please can you do this.
Also, you haven't told us the basis upon which they have rejected your claim for the full value

It's no problem about posting the claim form here. We have nothing to hide and nor do you but if you want to redact it for your personal ID details then you should do so. However, will be helpful to have a copy of the claim form posted in PDF format.

Well done on finding a bridge address for Packlink – I had looked but I wasn't aware of it. However, I see that they are to be struck off…
 

Quote

image.png

 

And I also see that the owner of the company is a French citizen apparently domiciled in Spain – out of the jurisdiction.

 

Quote

image.png

I can imagine that they don't have any assets UK.

However, it will be very interesting to see what happens. Presumably the acknowledgement of service only comes from Hermes and you have heard nothing from Packlink. Of course if they don't acknowledge service or follow defence then you could apply for a judgement against them. This may be difficult because I can imagine that MoneyClaim isn't set up to deal with that kind of unusual occurrence.
It will help enormously if you can post the claim form please. Also maybe you can post up the acknowledgement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but we need to see the entire claim form in PDF. Scanned. I'm particularly interested to see the description of the parties.

Also, I notice that you said that you would provide further details of your claim. This was unnecessary – and probably you shouldn't have done it. Have you sent them something now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

When does the 14 day deadline submission of an AOS or a defence expire? Will the system allow you to go in and apply for judgement against your first defendant?

You still haven't told us what it was you were sending. Is there a reason for that? Were you sending something so intimate that you'd rather not let anybody know?

I think it would be huge fun if you are able to obtain a judgement against Packlink because that would put you in an extremely powerful position in respect of claiming your third party rights in respect of Hermes.
Also, the message from Packlink interesting because it shows that all of the couriers are operating the same system and that even if you had opted for a different courier service – DHL, the so-called compensation cover would not have been sufficient to address your losses.

If it does go to mediation then this will be an important point to make. I don't know if you have seen the other thread on this sub- forum deals with a lost bottle of perfume. Find it and have a look at it – and have a look at the account of the mediation process that that cagger went through and also the suggestions I made afterwards about arguments that should be used to judge. These arguments can also be used in the mediation

However, once again, I really have difficulty believing that this will go even as far as mediation for this kind of very small claim
 

 

I'm just reading through your last post again. Are you telling us that the message you have posted above was there acknowledgement?

Have they not posted a proper acknowledgement of service through the MoneyClaim system?

Have you checked with MoneyClaim to see if you are allowed to apply for judgement yet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, first of all if you have the option to request judgement – then you should go ahead and do it and not waste time. Do it now!

 

Secondly, I think that I been confusing your case with somebody else. I thought that this was a case for a claim of £70. That's why I referred to it as a "very small claim".

I do go back and refer to the post that I made. However, for this kind of value can be certain that they will probably want to go to the distance and to take you to court – despite the colossal risks to them if they lose on the issue of insurance.

It is most important to get the judgement against Hermes because as you have seen, Packlink is trying to go into liquidation in UK and they are based in Spain and so enforcement will be pretty well impossible. Get the judgement anyway – but it is the judgement against Hermes that you want.

However if you get the judgement against Packlink, then I think it may be difficult for Hermes to escape liability on the basis that you have rights as a contracting third party

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 14 day deadline runs from the date of deemed service. In respect of suing a business, this means that they are deemed to have been served with the papers two days after they were issued. So if you say on day three after the date that you clicked the claim off then that probably is your 14 day trigger

 

In fact I now see that this is the first time that you have disclosed the value of the item although I can see now that you did tell us it was a laptop in your first post.

I suppose I should have guessed that it was high-value – but I'm afraid that it passed me by. But it certainly makes a difference and you need to be forthcoming with all information – even if we don't ask for it – but especially if we ask for it

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's partly my fault. I had missed the fact that you had actually said it was a laptop at the outset. Sorry. I actually corrected the post which you have now quoted.

However, this high value is going to make a big difference.

Have you applied for the judgement yet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you fill in" that the defendant has not filed an admission or defence".

In the second part, you simply click off defendant number one.

That should be it

 

Let us know once you have applied for the judgement. Of course it will take a short while to process it – maybe about a week. You will have to keep on looking at the MoneyClaim site to see if the judgement has been granted. Don't forget that if they happen to put in a defence before the judgement has been granted, then your application will be refused and the defence will be allowed to continue

 

By the way, have we checked that you did declare that it was a laptop and that you declared the correct value?

Did you apply for the judgement yet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

But you sold this through eBay – and I thought that the details of any item sold through eBay and sent by means of Packlink were automatically communicated.??

When does the 14 days expire?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Deemed service on a company is two days after issue. Deemed service on a litigant in person is five days after issue – unless something has changed.

I've already said that proposing to send further particulars is generally speaking unnecessary and only complicates matters as you are finding out. However as you have indicated that you are sending further particulars, send them further particulars and simply state in the body of the particulars that you have nothing to add to the particulars of claim contained in the original claim form at this moment. Send that straightaway so that when you apply for judgement you can click the box and say that yes you have done that.

It might not have been fatal not to have informed them that it was a laptop – but it is better that you did and the important thing is that they had been told of the item and of the value at the time that you entered into the delivery contract.
I think that you will find that laptops are one of their prohibited items – along with almost everything else in the world

 

It seems to me that you could probably apply for judgement on 30 October. However it's a good idea to keep on checking regularly to see if it is permitted before then. As soon as it allows you, do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.  I suppose that takes the OP onto about 3 November???

Anyway, keep on checking the County Court website

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Has Hermes file and acknowledgment?

 

Also, Ho t=do you know that this Packlink address is the packlink with whom you dealt with to courier the parcel?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So looking back you don't have this particular Packlink address on any documents or website that you have been dealing with to suggest that you had a contract with them – is this correct?

Let me say that I'm quite certain that this is the same Packlink – but unfortunately with limited liability companies, it is very easy to fragment the organisation into different identities and which legally are separate from each other so that if you see the wrong one, you end up going down a dead-end.

I would certainly apply for judgement against this company. It won't do you any harm – but maybe you had better hold back from any enforcement proceeding because that will simply incur costs.

Keep on checking on money claim to see if by some miracle you will be able to apply for judgement against Hermes when the date comes.

Let us know once you get the judgement against Packlink. Keep on doing some research to see if you can tie this address into the company with which you contracted.

Also, this Packlink address is probably just a business address – purely administrative and is unlikely to hold any assets at all belonging to Packlink.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • BankFodder changed the title to PackLink & Hermes- County Court claim

I'm terribly sorry but with the best will in the world, the defence you have posted is scarcely legible.

Please can you scan the actual document in PDF format.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All you have to do is to redact your personal details and then post it up here. Nobody else has any problem at all and it's very straightforward.

We try our best to help you and we simply ask you to present us with the documents in the way that everybody else does.

Please will you simply redact your personal details and posted up here in PDF.

 

Multipage single file PDF – which means that one PDF file contains all the pages in the right order right way round so they can simply be clicked to the next one and the next one and to the next one. Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please can you scan it up

 

I'm trying to remember the details of this case. You sued Packlink as well – did you enter a judgement against them

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, when you can.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but the way that you presented these documents is not acceptable. To begin with they are scarcely legible – and you should present the documents in a clear and intelligible way – in the way that you would like them to be presented to you if you were putting in effort helping somebody else for free.

We need them scanned in PDF format

Multipage single file

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Thanks for this.

What they mean by "a bar" in place for Packlink?

 

I've just scanned through and I realise that this is a problem where a claim was actually brought against Packlink after you found an address in UK and you obtained a default judgement.

This looks as if they are offering to settle the judgement!

Amazing results if it happens. Please let's know – that a tentative "well done" to you👍

 

I've just looked around the Internet and I see that "a bar" being put in place for a defendant can indicate that the defendant may be applying for set-aside and you are prevented from executing any warrant for enforcing the judgement.

And at the same time, it seems that they may now have contacted you with a view to settling the matter. @Andyorch

 

I wonder if they will simply settle in full or they will try to make some compromise

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well be careful of my clarification – I'm just guessing based on what I've been reading on the Internet

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Very well done. Congratulations and thanks for the update.

I had no idea that packlink had a presence in UK. It would be very helpful if you could put up their full address here  even though you may have put it up earlier on in the thead.

 

What message did they send you?

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm very pleased for you. Please will you start a new thread and tell your story there.

The more separate stories we have, the more the word will get round and the more people be encouraged.

@omegatbt15

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...