Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Defendant courier insists no 'implied contract' for failing to deliver parcels


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1274 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

Hello to Forum members reading this post.  I'm seeking for help about a form of words used on MCOL in connection with a claim against a national courier - the comments on the MCOL web page say:

Claim History

A bar was put in place for "Defendant's name" on 26/10/2020

"Defendant's name" filed a defence on 26/10/2020 at 16:05:37

DQ sent to "Defendant's name" on 27/10/2020

 

What does "A bar was put in place for "Defendant name"

 

I hope you can help and I'd be extremely grateful.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Andyorch I hope you're well and keeping safe. In answer to your question, no - I have not received the DQ yet.  On the MCOL page, it specifically mentions that the DQ has been sent to the Defendant and there is no mention of the Claimant which I find concerning. I have tried to call the Court but the queue was at number 40 with over an hour waiting time. Thank you once again Andorch!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Forum Members - I am seeking help with a case I have started against a national courier who systematically confiscated several parcels which were on-line purchases from high-street retailers.  I argued that since the courier intentionally collected the parcels from the retailers, then sent me text and e-mail updates advising of the imminent delivery of the parcels, there was an 'implied contract' which was breached each time a parcel was not delivered.  In their defence received yesterday, the courier argue that there was no such 'implied contract'.  Of the 11 parcels involved, they have only managed to track two which they confirm are assumed lost.

 

(i) I have kept a comprehensive record of the chronology of events;

(ii) there is copious e-mail correspondence which corroborate my chronology including complaints which I filed;

(iii) the courier failed to respond to a 'Subject Access Request';

(iv) the courier failed to respond to the 'Letter before Action'.

 

My damages comprise time lost from taking time off to wait for the parcels in 2019 (the value of the parcels was refunded by the retailers). But for the fact that the courier promised specific delivery time slot, I would have not taken time off work to wait for the parcels and wold have saved myself leave days.  This was compounded by the fact that the courier's conduct was 'systematic' and apparently 'malicious' for what ever reason.

 

I would welcome comments, ideas, steer and any other notions which might guide me please.  Attached are my 'Particulars of Claim' and the recently received defence.

I look forward to hearing from you.

With thanks & best wishes. Maketa

 

Attached file:

 

img20201031_15563304.pdf

Edited by Maketa79
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you BankFodder for reading and responding to my post. 

(i) I'm sorry I did not mention the courier's name because I suspected there is a need to anonymise the case.

(ii) With regards to the 'story' I have, hopefully concisely set the scene in the Particulars of Claim, that is the gist of the matter.  The defence provided by the courier puts their case from their side. 

(iii) I try to seek help as a last resort in view of how busy people are I tend to fear that I might be a bother.

Perhaps you might help me by pointing out where I might have missed a 'trick' please. I would be most grateful for your help.

Edited by Maketa79
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you BankFodder for the feedback and learning; here is the chronology which encapsulates the 'story'.  All parcels listed below were never delivered (for no apparent reason - the reason stated on the messages I received was that 'customer has no knowledge of purchases' ) by the courier who I'm cautious not to name in case there are legal implications for me personally. This matter is now in the Court system. I would be grateful if you could please confirm that you have seen the defence.

Chronology

Retailer

Date goods ordered

Date goods collected from retailer & promised for delivery by xxxxxx

Comments / Breach of contract

Holland & Barrett

23/09/2019

27/09/2019

Parcels not delivered – returned to H&B

Debenhams

27/09/19

07/10/2019

Parcels not delivered - returned to Debenhams

Holland & Barrett (re-order)

01/10/2019

07/10/2019

Parcels not delivered – returned to H&B

Debenhams

29/09/2019

01/10/2019

Parcel not delivered - returned to Debenhams

Debenhams

29/09/2019

01/10/2019

Parcel not delivered - returned to Debenhams

Debenhams (re-order)

01/10/2019

07/10/2019

Parcel not delivered - returned to Debenhams

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...