Jump to content


Recommended Posts

The second respondent finally acknowledged the courts. He claimed the lock up was empty when he fell through it and I had moved items into the lock up after the incident to claim. Completely preposterous.

He also claimed I shouldn't have had property in the lockup in the first place as it's only meant for vehicles. I explained I had stored my vehicle trailer in the lockup as it's not only for vehicles. I have a large 4x4 which wouldn't fit in the lock up both width and height. The lockups were built around the 50s and 60's when vehicles were a lot smaller. I had moved some property from my large garden workshop into the lockup as I needed room to work from home due to covid.

The Sheriff extended the deadline until next week in order for the first respondent to reply who has so far kept quiet.

I think I know what his game is. The second respondent folded his gardening company in February this year. I think he's trying to take the hit so he can say his company has been liquidated so he has no assets and avoid paying. But it was his fathers company that was working that day. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any contractor carrying out work would normally be required to have insurance. So if they cause a loss to a third party, the Insurance company step into cover any liability. So once you have proven liability for a sum with Court judgement, the contractors Insurers will pay out.

 

 

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, unclebulgaria67 said:

Any contractor carrying out work would normally be required to have insurance. So if they cause a loss to a third party, the Insurance company step into cover any liability.

 

Did they have Insurance ?

 

 

 

The second respondent did at the time but his insurance refuses to pay as asbestos contamination is exempt. The first respondent who was the main contractor has kept very quiet which makes me suspect he's trying to pass the buck on to the second respondent as he knows his company was liquidated in February. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

But those asbestos restrictions apply to work they are doing and do not limit a claim from a third party.

 

From what I understand the work they were doing would not have required a survey to check for asbestos. The exclusion in the Insurance document is to avoid claims  for riskswhich should have been knowable before work commenced.  If work on the garages was to be completed, because of when they were built, asbestos is pretty likely to be found.

 

If the work did not relate to anything which would have disturbed asbestos, then the exclusion does not apply. The contractor fell through the garage roof, so it was simply an accident and the Insurers are liable for the relevant sum.

 

AXA are technically wrong as they cannot restrict liability in this way.

 

Someone more senior at AXA with better Insurance knowledge should be able to correct this.

 

 

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, unclebulgaria67 said:

But those asbestos restrictions apply to work they are doing and do not limit a claim from a third party.

 

From what I understand the work they were doing would not have required a survey to check for asbestos. The exclusion in the Insurance document is to avoid claims  for riskswhich should have been knowable before work commenced.  If work on the garages was to be completed, because of when they were built, asbestos is pretty likely to be found.

 

If the work did not relate to anything which would have disturbed asbestos, then the exclusion does not apply. The contractor fell through the garage roof, so it was simply an accident and the Insurers are liable for the relevant sum.

 

AXA are technically wrong as they cannot restrict liability in this way.

 

Someone more senior at AXA with better Insurance knowledge should be able to correct this.

 

 

 

To be honest mate I'm fed up dealing with Axa. They don't acknowledge emails so I have to call them. The respondent hasn't made any attempt to settle the claim with Axa. He's let me do it all so hopefully if I get a positive result from the court he can deal with it.

 

I shouldn't have been dealing with Axa at all. He should have and with hindsight I should have taken him to court a lot sooner but tried my best avoid court action. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Point I am making is. You sue the contractor and win. The contractor contacts AXA and they pay your claim.

 

This is how it should work.

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

A wee update on matters.

 

The Sheriff set a date for early November to meet with the second respondent (son) and try and come to an agreement. I was getting frustrated as this has been dragging on for almost a year.

 

However he did suggest I make an application for a decision against the first respondent (father) as he hasn't acknowledge the court in any way. Even after the deadline being extended by 17 days in order for him to respond.

 

Success! I just received a decree from the Sheriff granting me the full damages I asked for and over £300 for expenses towards the first respondent. So I might not need to meet the son in November if the father pays what he owes.

 

I expect an appeal against the decision by the father even though he hasn't made any response to the courts. So I need to wait 28 days then I can take action if he doesn't pay. 

 

Bear in mind I'm in Scotland.

 

 

Edited by Argyll
Link to post
Share on other sites

not your problem. why dont you enforce the decree by sequestration etc via sheriff officers?

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

The decree isn't actionable for 28 days. I'm concerned he may move assets to others names during this period. 

Edited by dx100uk
unnecessary previous post quote removed
Link to post
Share on other sites

as far as i know, just like English laws he cant, under scottish laws there are far more ways to secure payment. the sheriff officers assigned by the court have numerous powers. 

have a read on the scots court website above enforcement 

 

just type please no need to keep hitting quote

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

why are you watching YT videos....:crazy:

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

  • 3 weeks later...

His 28 days to appeal expire today. As I understand it I now have to send him a letter with the decree attached asking for payment. Are there any template letters I can use? Bear in mind again I'm in Scotland. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched YT videos as no one responded on here at the time.

 

The YT video was from a sheriff office, not any Tom, Dick and Harry. 

Edited by Argyll
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I've been in contact with my local sheriff officers to execute the decree but I'm not confident in their reply. 

 

Good morning

 

Usually the first step after obtaining a court decree is to serve a charge for payment.

 

Essentially, this is a formal written notice demanding that the sum must be paid within fourteen days, failing which; the debtor is open to further action. The further action we can take is dependent on the information you have on them.

 

For example, if you know where they are employed we can proceed with an earnings arrestment (only if they are a PAYE employee) or similarly if you are aware of any banking information we can serve a bank arrestment.

 

A bank arrestment involves lodging a schedule with the named bank and anything above £529.90 in credit would be arrested. However, it’s important to note that the arrestment doesn’t capture funds deposited into the account afterwards, only at the time of serving the arrestment and unfortunately a lot of the times we are at the mercy of the bank implementing the arrestment the same day.

 

Also, if the debtor owns articles out with a dwelling house (usually a car) we can seek to attach the articles with a view to selling it at auction to repay the debt. However, we must follow the specific processes for attachment and auction which have fairly restrictive timing and notice requirements for us to follow. To a large extent that precludes assets being removed immediately

 

– any attached assets have to be reported to the Court and only following confirmation that the report has been recorded can we then start arranging an auction. The process of Attachment and Auction is not particularly effective as it currently stands – and that is without me getting into the difficulties and costs associated with auctioning assets.

 

Charge for Payment :- £103.24

Earnings Arrestment :-£78.50

Bank Arrestment :- £105.94

 

I hope this helps but please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any further queries.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...