Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
  • 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

EVRi damaged guitar i live in Scotland but claim raised in England *** Settled at mediation***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1150 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

Hi Rubix,

 

Thanks for the update and well done for sticking to your timescale.

 

Keep us posted ............

  • 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

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all, that is my claim now submitted. 

 

I'd prepared it on the 18th November so that it was ready to click off on day 15, so that is the date marked on the claim for claiming interest up until, as it wouldn't let me edit this unfortunately.

 

Not too much of an issue as far as I'm concerned for claiming the interest back, just concerned it confuses my particulars.

 

Do you think I ought to contact money claims to explain this slight detail? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@BankFodder I've just seen an email saying I have a message from you on this post, but for some reason it's not showing me the message on this post or given me a notification for it on here.

 

If I had seen your message on this thread or received a notification, I would have responded to it so I do apologise for any confusion caused. 

 

My particulars of claim are provided above, further up the thread with the letter before action

 

Many thanks. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No, probably don't worry about it – but maybe you could simply post up exactly what you put here so we can just doublecheck

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I will attach a screenshot of the submitted page and also copy in the text below. 

 

The claimant used the courier service

provided by the defendant courier company

to send an electric guitar to a third party.

Reference number XXXXXXXXXX. The

defendant company has admitted that they

have damaged the item and refuse to

compensate the claimant.

 

 

The value of the item sent was £263.00.

The delivery fee was £16.88.

 

 

The claimant claims full reimbursement of

£279.88 (item value plus delivery fee plus

insurance cost) plus interest pursuant to

section 69, County Courts Act 1984.

The claimant claims interest under section 69

of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of

8% a year from 09/09/2020 to 18/11/2020 on

£279.88 and also interest at the same

rate up to the date of judgment or earlier

payment at a daily rate of £0.06.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay it's fine. Don't worry

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hello, just an update. 

 

I've this week received a letter "Notice of proposed allocation to the small claims track." 

 

The defendant (Hermes) has filed a defence, copy of which is enclosed. 

 

I have to complete the small claims directions questionnaire (form N180) and file it with the court office. 

 

This letter advises the option of my case being referred to the small claims mediation service; I assume I am advised to agree to this? 

 

Having read through the successful outcomes of other Hermes cases on here, they all seem to have gone to mediation, so do I agree to this at this stage? 

 

Thanks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the second part of the Hermes test. It is at this point that you will have to decide to commit a further fee towards fighting Hermes in order to get your money back.

If you decide to go ahead then complete the forms, remit the fee – and yes, on current form probably agree to mediation.

Make sure you have read up the various threads which give a resume of other people's mediation experiences. There are some extremely good descriptions – very helpful.

Please note that if it does go to mediation then you will come under pressure to give some ground and unfortunately even the mediator is likely to say that you have some kind of obligation to reach compromise.

This is wrong. You have no particular obligation – but it is up to you. I think we've had one or two cases now where Hermes have offered a settlement at mediation which has been turned down and then Hermes instead of backing down have then decided to go on to a hearing – and we are waiting for this to happen.

 

I'm not sure what marked those particular cases out has been once that Hermes would want to move to a hearing – so I don't know whether yours is likely to follow the same path. However, our advice to you would be to stand your ground. I understand that you even bought their so-called insurance.

Please could you remind me of the basis on which they have declined responsibility
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

But it was correctly declared and they accepted an insurance premium for it?
 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I think you are a very safe ground. However, don't forget that these opinions are given informally and you have to make your own decision.

Hermes will say that there was a contract which excluded particular items because of their fragility – and musical instruments were included.

You will say that in fact the contract was a composite of the entire dealings between you and that included the fact that the item was properly declared, that insurance cover for it was offered and you accepted.
In any event, I can imagine that the prohibited items list was not as clearly expressed as the insurance cover proposal was.
That's because Hermes make money out of the insurance cover. The prohibited items list is rather more tucked away and of course it is so extensive it's difficult to go through.

Your argument will tend to be, as I said, that the contract was a composite which was an assembly of all the various parts of the transaction and that included the declaration of the identity of the item and the insurance. The insurance particularly indicated that although it was on their prohibited items list, that for an additional payment, Hermes were prepared to take it on and assume the risk.

Another way of expressing this is that there were two contracts, a main contract – the contract of carriage/delivery and then a collateral contract – being the contract of insurance. Hermes was happy to take the money for both contracts and they are not able now to escape either of them.

I hope this is not too convoluted we can answer any questions that you think of once the case has been allocated and a mediation date has been set.

However, part of your strategy will be to emphasise to the mediator – and to Hermes, that if they want this to go to court then you are very happy because Hermes will lose then you will make sure that in addition to getting your money, that the judgement is circulated throughout social media.

Hermes has a lot to lose if this goes to a hearing and you win.

 

Also I think one can easily make the point that if Hermes really wanted to exclude certain items, it would be very easy for them to do this simply by having a database which would automatically flag up items which were declared and refused to proceed with the delivery contract.

My own view is that Hermes is happy to take the money wherever it can – on the basis that they will move heaven and earth to avoid liability when things go wrong

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please have a look at this thread which has some similarities to your own case

 

and in particular, have a look at the rather wordy assessment of the potential arguments for the forthcoming mediation

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi just a quick question; 

 

On the directions questionnaire it asks which county court hearing centre I would "prefer" the small claims hearing take place and why; I assume I can put my local sheriff court to where I live in Scotland, since it is asking me my preference? 

 

It also asks why; how much detail should I provide as to my reason? 

 

Many thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't request a hearing in Scotland because you issued the claim through MCOL under English Jurisdiction.So you either attend the defendants local court....or request a remote hearing or inform the court that you will not be inattendance and will rely on CPR 27.9

 

 

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part27#27.9

 

  • Thanks 2

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Yes, of course we wish you lots of luck.

Please keep is completely updated – but also if you get any questions or anything you're not sure of and let us know.

Make sure that you got a good set of notes – bullet pointed – not too much narrative but simply the points involved that you are making and the points involved in their defence.

Stand your ground

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hello, had a bit of a setback...

 

I was unable to take my mediation phone call on the set day and time.. My baby was very poorly, my husband answered the call and asked if could reschedule but they just said they'll try but it may not be possible. I haven't heard anything back as yet. 

 

I did try ringing them on their contact number before our set appointment, but the wait length time was impossible to get through to speak to anyone, while looking after a very unwell baby. 

 

So, again I'll keep you posted on developments, thanks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect they must have an address or an email address. I think you should write to them and explain the situation but also say that you felt that they were most unsympathetic and that they should realise that people with responsibilities for babies and also in times of Covid may not have the flexibility of a delivery company.

Tell them that you consider they have a responsibility to reschedule.
In fact I would suggest that you try to find the main number of the mediation service and make a complaint to the customer services.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As suggested by @BankFodder I sent an email and have now received a new mediation date (whether there is any correlation between my sending an email and then getting a new date is unknown). 

This is what they put in their contact emails. 

 



1. For mediation to be successful, you would need to be willing to negotiate on the amount of the claim and have a degree of flexibility


2. You confirm that you have enough information about the claim to allow you to enter into negotiations and that you do not require any further evidence from the other party before you can mediate


3. You confirm that you are available for the entire timeslot on the date stated above.


Mediation is only available to you if you can answer YES to all statements above.

If you cannot answer YES to all statements, mediation is NOT suitable for your case.

Please contact us if you cannot agree to all 3 statements on [email protected].
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...