Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Any chance of some advice with filling in the N164 please?    I've sent an EX107 to the Court to request transcript of the Judgment to use in an appeal but the Courts still haven't actioned this and my 21 days expires on Tuesday
    • The lawsuits allege the companies preyed upon "vulnerable" young men like the 18-year-old Uvalde gunman.View the full article
    • Hi, despite saying you would post it up we have not seen the WS or EVRis WS. Please can you post them up.
    • Hi, Sorry its taken me so long to get round to this, i've been pretty busy today. Anyway, just a couple of things based on your observations.   Evri have not seen/read my WS (sent by post and by email) as they would have recognised the claim value is over £1000 as it includes court fees, trial fees, postage costs and interests, and there is a complete breakdown of the different costs and evidence. I'd say theres a 1% chance they read it , but in any case it won't change what they write. They refer to the claim amount that you claimed in your claim form originally, which will likely be in the same as the defence. They use a simple standard copy and paste format for WX and I've never seen it include any amount other than on the claim form but this is immaterial because it makes no difference to whether evri be liable and if so to what value which is the matter in dispute. However, I have a thinking that EVRi staff are under lots of pressure, they seem to be working up to and beyond 7pm even on fridays, and this is quite unusual so they likely save time by just copying and pasting certain lines of their defence to form their WX.   Evri accepts the parcel is lost after it entered their delivery network - again, this is in my WS and is not an issue in dispute. This is just one of their copy paste lines that they always use.   Evri mentions the £25 and £4.82 paid by Packlink - Again, had they read the WS, they would have realised this is not an issue in dispute. They probably haven't read your WS but did you account for this in your claim form?   Furthermore to the eBay Powered By Packlink T&Cs that Evri is referring to, Clauses 3b and c of the T&Cs states:  (b)   Packlink is a package dispatch search engine that acts as an intermediary between its Users and Transport Agencies. Through the Website, Users can check the prices that different Transport Agencies offer for shipments and contract with the Transport Agency that best suits their needs on-line. (c)  Each User shall then enter into its own contract with the chosen Transport Agency. Packlink does not have any control over, and disclaims all liability that may arise in contracts between a User and a Transport Agency This supports the view that once a user (i.e, myself) selects a transport agency (i.e Evri) that best suits the user's needs, the user (i.e, myself) enters into a contract with the chosen transport agency (i.e, myself). Therefore, under the T&Cs, there is a contract between myself and Evri.   This is correct but you have gone into this claim as trying to claim as a third party. I would say that you need to pick which fight you wan't to make. Either you pick the fight that you contracted directly with EVRi therefore you can apply the CRA OR you pick the fight that you are claiming as a third party contract to a contract between packlink and EVRi. Personally, I would go with the argument that you contracted directly with evri because the terms and conditions are pretty clear that the contract is formed with EVRi and so if the judge accepts this you are just applying your CR under CRA 2015, of which there has only been 2 judges I have seen who have failed to accept the argument of the CRA.   Evri cites their pre-existing agreement with Packlink and that I cannot enforce 3rd party rights under the 1999 Act. Evri has not provided a copy of this contract, and furthermore, my point above explains that the T&Cs clearly explains I have entered into a contract when i chose Evri to deliver my parcel.    This is fine, but again I would say that you should focus on claiming under the contract you have with EVRi as you entered into a direct contract with them according to packlink, as this gives less opportunites for the judge to get things wrong, also I think this is a much better legal position because you can apply your CR to it, if you dealt with a third party claim you would likely need to rely on business contract rights.   As explained in my WS, i am the non-gratuitous beneficiary as my payment for Evri's delivery service through Packlink is the sole reason for the principal contract coming into existence. I wouldn't focus this as your argument. I did think about this earlier and I think the sole focus of your claim should be that you contracted with evri and any term within their T&Cs that limits their liability is a breach of CRA. If you try to argue that the payment to packlink is the sole reason for the contract coming in between EVRI and packlink then you are essentially going against yourself since on one hand you are (And should be) arguing that you contracted directly with EVRi, but on the other hand by arguing about funding the contract between packlink and evri you are then saying that the contract is between packlink and evri not you and evri.  I think you should focus your argument that the contract is between you and evri as the packlink T&C's say.   Clearly Evri have not read by WS as the above is all clearly explained in there.   I doubt they have too, but I think their witness statement more than anything is an attempt to sort of confuse things. They reference various parts of the T&Cs within their WS and I've left some more general points on their WS below although I do think  point 3b as you have mentioned is very important because it says "Users can check the prices that different Transport Agencies offer for shipments and contract with the Transport Agency that best suits their needs on-line." which I would argue means that you contract directly with the agency. For points 9 and 10 focus on term 3c of the contract  points 15-18 are the same as points 18-21 of the defence if you look at it (as i said above its just a copy paste exercise) point 21 term 3c again point 23 is interesting - it says they are responsible for organising it but doesnt say anything about a contract  More generally for 24-29 it seems they are essentially saying you agreed to packlinks terms which means you can't have a contract with EVRI. This isnt true, you have simply agreed to the terms that expressly say your contract is formed with the ttransport agency (EVRi). They also reference that packlinks obligations are £25 but again this doesn't limit evris obligations, there is nothing that says that the transport agency isnt liable for more, it just says that packlinks limitation is set. for what its worth point 31 has no applicability because the contract hasn't been produced.   but overall I think its most important to focus on terms 3b and 3c of the contract and apply your rights as a consumer and not as a third party and use the third party as a backup   
    • Ms Vennells gave testimony over three days, watched by those affected by the Post Office scandal.View the full article
  • 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

Should we trust Sunak or the next PM to fix the Country's problems? (title revised 24/10/22)


Recommended Posts

and more on Wragg, who has been allowed to resign the Tory whip, rather than be fired with a loss of all (taxpayer funded) benefits

(and thats just resign from the Tory party and his preferential seats on committees NOT as a taxpayer funded MP)

WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK

Tory who admitted giving colleagues’ numbers to scammer poses for photo with security detail pinned up behind him

‘Honeytrap’ MP William Wragg accidentally reveals WiFi password during photoshoot

 

Incompetence aside, Seems basic justice that he should be sacked with loss of all benefits and prosecuted.

He quite deliberately gave MPs contact details to a clearly criminal and/or foreign power actor,

and he knew and has briefed what he should have done. NO excuses.

Edited by tobyjugg2

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eat your heart out @theoldrouge

WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK

Pact involves cutting security waiting times but also increasing numbers sent back

The package of bills agreed promises to cut times for security and asylum procedures and increase returns to reduce unwanted immigration from the Middle East and Africa, a high priority on the EU’s agenda.

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the Brexit-ish are again delaying  implementing their 'grate deal' 'protecting the UKs borders' that they pressed through with the wholehearted support of MPs like smugg - who is now one of the main moaners saying this inflation raising and business destroying 'great deal'  shouldn't be implemented.

Of course 3 of the benefits of NOT implementing the Brexitish grate deal as the Brexitish negotiated are:

 

1. Less UK businesses will collapse

2. UK inflation NOT increased by 0.6% (hence fiddling the figures to us scraping NOT being in a Brexit generated recession)

3. The problems will be dumped in labours lap after the GE

 

"Analysis by specialist credit insurance firm Allianz Trade said the removal of tariffs on the goods would reduce inflation by 0.6 percentage points, and cut import costs by close to 7 billion pounds ($8.8 billion) in nominal terms."

 

WWW.REUTERS.COM

 

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-economy-grows-by-01-february-2024-04-12/

 

WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM

According to reports, Britain faces a £2 billion post-Brexit bill on European food imports from the end of the month.

 

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh - and dont forget - under WTO RULES - NOT applying tariffs has to apply to EVERYONE who doesn't have an alternate 'deal' - and most of which existing deals will undoubtedly be cancelled if its to the other parties benefit unless the UK unilaterally drop them

The UK doesn't apply tariffs as the Brexitish are incompetent - but other countries can - What a bonus for foreigners eh Brexitish?

- all as obvious and stated years ago in the other thread.

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Slots for elephant hunters in Botswana coming up isn't there?

Only circa $45,000 dollars cost per safari - much cheaper than Rwanda eh?

 

I see the ANDERSON family is still trying up his cost .. and charge the tories

 

WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK

The Conservative party have launched an investigation into the Tory councillor after her husband and Ashfield MP for Reform posted the...

 

 

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone clarify the difference  between 'National Conservatism' and 'National Socialism'?

as they both seem to clearly promote racial hate and dictators among many other similarities .. its long been the case - its even the name coming out from hiding now

 

2024-04-16T113240Z_1569888363_RC2N77AQFW

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

You cant fault her loyalty, I mean, the extremes shes gone to to ensure Johnson the corrupt incompetent liar doesn't stand out alone and head, shoulders and buttocks above all others as the worst PM in UK history.

- presumably paving the path to his imminent return with the new slogan 'could be worse, could be Truss'

 

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

and another one

 

MP Mark Menzies loses Tory whip as party investigates claims he misused funds

"According to a source close to Mr Menzies, the MP had met a man on an online dating website and gone to the man’s flat, before subsequently going with another man to a second address where he continued drinking. He was sick at one point and several people at the address demanded £5,000, claiming it was for cleaning up and other expenses."

The sum, which rose to £6,500, was eventually paid by his office manager from her personal bank account and subsequently reimbursed from funds raised from donors

 

Never mind losing whip - how about criminal charges

 

WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK

The Fylde MP is alleged to have used campaign funds to pay off ‘bad people’ and cover medical expenses

 

ALSO According to the The Times, £14,000 given by donors for use on Tory campaign activities was transferred to Mr Menzies’ personal bank accounts and used for private medical expenses.

The MP, who is one of Rishi Sunak’s trade envoys, is also said to have called his 78-year-old former campaign manager at 3.15am one day in December, claiming he was locked in a flat and needed £5,000 as a matter of “life and death”.

 

Hes supposed to use funding from Taxpayers and doners for a life of service, not funding a life of drink and debauchery

Hope his parliamentary expenses are also investigated.

 

In fact, perhaps Mr Bates next role in life should be as an independent investigator of Parliamentary expenses?

Edited by tobyjugg2

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another one. Apparently this has been hushed up for about three months. They're working through their majority quite fast with all the sackings. Not that they've done anything about Menzies yet but he sounds like a blackmail risk.

Here's the original article.

 

 

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep - lost whip as headline says

BUT apparently after Times article on various apparent misuses of funds was scheduled .. These actions of his uncovered by the Times were last year

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or simply hoping they would evade/fade away from public awareness with no headlines?

 

When is a labour MP referring Jenrick to police for either breaking lockdown and lying about it and/or lying about his main residence/election registration fraud

Same with satans little helper Cummings - among a number of other tory shysters

 

.. Tory MPs without whip turning into quite a large party isnt it

Edited by tobyjugg2

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how popular that would be now that time has passed.

I think a lot of people would be interested in trying to get back money from contracts supplying faulty PPE when they see people who had no experience in supplying it buying mansions. It's a mystery to me why Lady Moan is the only one being pursued.

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Torys seem to think its worth while - cheap muckspreading while they get away with ACTUALLY doing it?

More the aspect of ensuring that when these tactics are used without justification - make sure your people aren't doing it more and worse or their crap spread on the waters ...

- mind you, the Tories would have to maybe even ease off on their using taxpayer and donor money to fund their preferred lifestyles wouldn't they? Maybe even do the jobs they are paid for?

 

Edited by tobyjugg2

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

and starmer is at last calling for police investigations into blatant Tory corruption and misuse of funds

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

Labour leader says police ‘should be involved’ after Tory MP was alleged to have misused campaign funds to pay off ‘bad people’

 

 

and didnt I read just yesterday some Tory saying that taxpayers would not be bailing out mismanagement by private companies - specifically water companies - yet today:

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

Exclusive: Under Whitehall blueprint for water company some lenders could lose up to 40% of their money

 

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Given Starmer's previous job he should know whether it's a police matter or not.

It's, err, interesting that Tory HO are happy to set Greater Manchester Police on Angela Rayner for £2-3k which has already been investigated but not think it's worth calling them in to investigate Menzies.

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly some good news for young people in the UK and Europe, plus universities and employers either side of the Channel.

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

European Commission to seek approval from leaders to start talks with UK on visa-free exchanges for 18- to 30-year-olds

 

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

wont Truss, patel and the right b-ilk be utterly opposed to any co-operating with their 'mortal enemy'?

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks that way :-)

 

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

ah - here it is - .. Yesterday

UK finance minister: Thames Water must sort out its own issues

"I make no comment on Thames because they need to sort out their own issues," Hunt told reporters during a visit to Washington when asked what a government-led administration process for Thames Water could do for investors' confidence in Britain.
"What we're never going to do for people who invest in the UK, is say that the state is going to insure you against bad decisions made by management or shareholders. That's what markets are about."
 
WWW.REUTERS.COM

 

 

 

So was the chancellor not informed of this massive encompassing plan ..  or was he lying/misleading

Today:

Thames Water nationalisation plan could move bulk of £15bn debt to state

 

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

Exclusive: Under Whitehall blueprint for water company some lenders could lose up to 40% of their money

 

Edited by tobyjugg2

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...