Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have just read the smaller print on their signs. It says that you can pay at the end of your parking session. given that you have ten minutes grace period the 35 seconds could easily have been taken up with walking back to your car, switching on the engine and then driving out. Even in my younger days when I used to regularly exceed speed limits, I doubt I could have done that in 35 seconds even when I  had a TR5.
    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
  • 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

John Lewis trying to blame me for TV fault **SETTLED**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1013 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

Thanks for your reply.
 

I just spoke to my partner at work and he has started to prepare for the small claim already, having had to take a company to court over a faulty mattress, he has been through the procedure before. 
 

I will let you know how we get on 👍🏻 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest that you post up your draft particulars of claim here before you click it.

So start preparing your claim – you can save your work as you go and once we have checked the POC, you can send it off

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BankFodder said:

So thank you so familiar with it all so that you understand what the procedure is that you are embarking upon so that you know in advance rather than having to fill your way step-by-step

Bankfodder's dictation errors !!

 

It should say:-  "So make sure you're familiar with it all so that you understand what the procedure is that you are embarking upon so that you know in advance rather than having to feel your way step-by-step."

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 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. Here is the brief description of the claim for Money Claims:

 

I purchased a Sony Bravia TV from a John Lewis store in Southampton on 15.09.19 for £775 with a five year guarantee. On 09.01.21 the product failed to power up and was collected by a John Lewis representative for repair.

 

On its return, the TV was found to have a small amount of damage to its screen which when turned on renders the product unfit for use. John Lewis failed to take reasonable care of the item while it was under their control.

 

I have adhered to pre-action protocol before issuing this claim, having attempted to resolve the matter over the phone and by email with John Lewis customer care.  A letter of claim was issued by email and recorded delivery on 10.02.21, with John Lewis refusing to accept responsibility and full reimbursement on 15.02.2021.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a bit wordy.

How about this:

Quote

Reference number X X X.
The claimant seeks £775 – the replacement value for a Sony Bravia TV model number X X which the defendant undertook to repair but then returned to the claimant in a damaged condition and which has rendered the TV unusable.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

thats a witness statement not a POC.

 

BF's example is fine

 

you do not have to go into any enth detail till later

  • Thanks 1

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

Just use the draft which I suggested. 

 

Do not tick that you will send anything else. 

This is all you need at this juncture 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had a quick look at the particulars of claim that you have suggested in an attachment.

I would confirm what my site team colleague has said – this is not a particulars of claim.
Apart from anything else, it wanders off the plot, talks about your personal upset, and speculates. A particulars of claim should simply be factual and in the best examples, it simply outlines a very basic cause of action without giving many hints to the defendant as to the points they should raise in their defence.

When you give too much information in your particulars of claim you are effectively providing clues – cues – as to what they should be saying in the defence.

A very short particulars of claim such as you have filed gives pretty well no information – no help to the defence to formulate their defence – and it is highly likely that they will produce a reasonable details defence so that you will understand much better what points they are making and what you need to respond to.

The particulars of claim you have suggested on even a witness statement because your witness statement would mainly want to address the points which have been made in the defence in order to rebut them – and then go on to add some extra relevant information which should be factual.

So let's wait and see how they defend and then we will work on the next part.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Is it an in-house solicitor or is it an external firm? If it's a firm then what's the name?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Extraordinary that John Lewis are prepared to go to these lengths to defeat you. They will end up paying far more than it's worth.

I think one of their very weak points is that they themselves are referred to the plug say they were obviously aware of it – just as you were – and it beggars belief that they would then allow the television to be placed facedown on top of the plug of which they were aware.

Was the plug secured at all or was it just dangling around on the end of its cord?

Link to post
Share on other sites

We are also in disbelief it is going to court - but as we are 100 percent sure we aren’t at fault I’m not backing down. The plug wasn’t secured or wrapped - which would have been the same throughout transit by the looks of the video.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Acknowledgment of service does not necessarily mean they wish to go to court...simply stops you getting a default judgment and allows them further time to possibly resolve the matter..IE Mediation....assuming they submit their defence on time.

 

Andy 

  • Thanks 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 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

I think the your position is that if it had been packed reasonably for transportation, then the plug would not be loose. I think the fact that the plan was loose is extremely significant. I think that you are right to point to the fact that it was probably loose during its entire voyage to your home. It's clear from the video when they open the side door that the TV was rocking around and wasn't properly secured. I can imagine that the loose cable with the plug was probably hung over the top of the television – and unfortunately it was hung on the screen side and was then crushed between the TV and whatever else was next to it as the van made its journey.

I think your chances of success if this goes to court a very high. If it goes to mediation then they will try to knock you down – but obviously you will keep us updated as to developments. If they put in a defence then obviously we would like to see that.

In the meantime, I suggest that you go to the deliveries sub- forum and read up on some of the Hermes stories. Hermes regularly go to mediation and then settle in full. We've had a number of people now who have written excellent blow by blow account of the mediation journey – and I think that you will find that very helpful.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Yes please. In pdf format

Link to post
Share on other sites

It states very little other than the same story told by the repair team - although  now there was apparently a plug on the table and my partner asked for help carrying the tv.
 

I have noticed the sign off sheet actually appears to read ‘unchecked’ and no visible damage. To be honest you can hardly see the damage and would only really be visible upon the tv being switched on and checked with power. I’m guessing they did this as they fixed the power issue although it’s unclear at what point during the transport of the tv to our home the damage occurred.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you mind telling me where you are in the country? Are you near Southampton?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where are you in the country? I guess you are in the Portsmouth/Plymouth/Southampton area.

It's curious isn't it?… The repair was apparently carried out by some outfit called Service Power and the delivery was carried out by some unknown courier company called Les Preston.

However, the Collection and Return Visual Checks report which is referred to at paragraph 3.3 of the defence was not signed by Service Power but was signed by Les Preston – apparently acting as a TV engineer.

In fact looking at the Internet, it seems that this person is not a courier at all. They are TV engineers based in Southampton.

It seems that Sonny Hughes who signed off the statement of truth for the defendants, doesn't really understand the story or who did what.

Of course they all saying that it left the engineers workshops in working condition. I'm sure it did.

On the other hand, if I'm right about Les Preston, then they are not couriers. They are not experienced or experts in delivery. They are actually the engineering company. Had it been a proper firm of couriers then I'm sure that they would have insisted that the TV was properly packaged. As you seen from the video, it was not properly packaged. Standing free and rocking around and not only that the plastic cover and either come off or it had to be put on before it was taken out of the van.

Somewhere in this thread, there is already some correspondence from them saying that they pointed out the plug to you as they were bringing in. Would you mind identifying whether is please and reproducing it here.

It's clear that if they were aware of the plug and they indicated it to you, then it beggars belief that they then allowed the TV to be placed on the plug.

All the evidence suggests that the TV was put into the van, it was loose and rocking around. It was incorrectly package for this kind of journey – and then the guest is that the mains lead was draped over the TV with the plug on the screen side and as the TV was rocking around against other items inside the van, the plug was banging against the screen or maybe was even crushed for a while against the screen – between the screen and some other item in the van and this caused the damage. It was not properly noticed because by the time it was taken out of the van, the blue protective plastic – which was only a thin plastic bag – had been pulled over the screen.

Soon you will get a DQ and will be at this point that you will have to decide whether or not to invest more money and to go forward to a hearing. Let us know when you get it

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...