Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • i dont think the reason why the defendant lost the case means anything at all in that case. it was a classic judge lottery example.
    • Hello, I will try to outline everything clearly. I am a British citizen and I live in Luxembourg (I think this may be relevant for potential claims). I hired a car from Heathrow in March for a 3-day visit to family in the UK. I was "upgraded" to an EV (Polestar 2). I had a 250-mile journey to my family's address. Upon attempting to charge the vehicle, there was a red error message on the dashboard, saying "Charging error". I attempted to charge at roughly 10 different locations and got the same error message. Sometimes there was also an error message on the charging station screen. The Hertz 0800 assistance/breakdown number provided on the set of keys did not work with non-UK mobiles. I googled and found a bunch of other numbers, none of which were normal geographical ones, and none of which worked from my Luxembourg mobile. It was getting late and I was very short on charge. Also, there was no USB socket in the car, so my phone ran out of battery, so I was unable to look for further help online. It became clear that I would not reach my destination (rural Devon), so I had no choice but to find a roadside hotel in Exeter and then go to the nearest Hertz branch the following day on my remaining 10 miles of charge. Of course, as soon as the Hertz employee in Exeter plugged it into their own charger, the charging worked immediately. I have driven EVs before, I know how to charge them, and it definitely did not work at about 10 different chargers between London and Exeter. I took photos on each occasion. Luckily they had another vehicle available and transferred me onto it. It was an identical Polestar 2 to the original car. 2 minutes down the road, to test it, I went to a charger and it worked immediately. I also charged with zero issues at 2 other chargers before returning the vehicle. I think this shows that it was a charging fault with the first car and not my inability to do it properly. I wrote to Hertz, sending the hotel, dinner, breakfast and hotel parking receipt and asking for a refund of these expenses caused by the charging failure in the original car. They replied saying they "could not issue a refund" and they issued me with a voucher for 50 US dollars to use within the next year. Obviously I have no real proof that the charging didn't work. My guess is they will say that the photos don't prove that I was charging correctly, just that it shows an error message and a picture of a charger plugged into a car, without being able to see the detail. Could you advise whether I have a case to go further? I am not after a refund or compensation, I just want my £200 back that I had to spend on expenses. I think I have two possibilities (or maybe one - see below). It looks like the UK is still part of the European Consumer Centre scheme:  File a complaint with ECC Luxembourg | ECC-Net digital forms ECCWEBFORMS.EU   Would this be a good point to start from? Alternatively, the gov.uk money claims service. But the big caveat is you need a "postal address in the UK". In practice, do I have to have my primary residence in the UK, or can I use e.g. a family member's address, presumably just as an address for service, where they can forward me any relevant mail? Do they check that the claimant genuinely lives in the UK? "Postal address" is not the same as "Residence" - anyone can get a postal address in the UK without living there. But I don't want to cheat the system or have a claim denied because of it. TIA for any help!  
    • Sars request sent on 16th March and also sent a complaint separately to Studio. Have received no response. Both letters were received and signed for.  I was also told by the financial ombudsman that studio were investigating but I've also had no response to that either.  The only thing Studio have sent me is a default notice.  Any ideas of what I can do from here please 
    • Thanks Bank - I shall tweak my draft and repost. And here's today's ridiculous email from the P2G 'Claims Dept' Good Morning,  Thank you for you email. Unfortunately we would be unable to pay the amount advised in your previous email.  When you placed the order, you were asked for the value of your parcel, you stated that the value was £265.00. At this stage the booking advised that you were covered to £20.00 and to enhance this to £260.00 you could pay an extra £13.99 + VAT to fully cover your item for loss or damage during transit, you declined to fully cover your item.  Towards the end of your booking on the confirmation page, you were then offered to take cover again, to which you declined again.  Unfortunately, we would be unable to offer you an enhanced payment on this occasion.  If I can assist further, please do let me know.  Kindest Regards Claims Team and my response Good Afternoon  Do you not understand the court cases of PENCHEV v P2G (225MC852) and SMIRNOVS v P2G (27MC729)? In both cases it was held by the courts that there was no need for additional ‘cover’ or ‘protection’ (or whatever you wish to call it) on top of the standard delivery charge, and P2G were required to pay up in full for both cases, which by then also included court costs and interest. I shall be including copies of both those judgements in the bundle I submit to the court next Wednesday 1 May, unless you settle my claim (£274.10) in full before then. Tick tock…..    
    • IMG_2820-IMG_2820-merged.pdfmerged.pdf Case management was this morning. Here is the Sheriff’s order. Moved case forward to 24/05.   He said there was no signed agreement and after a bit of “erm, erm, yeah but, erm” when he asked them, he allowed time for sol to contact claimant.  what is the next step now? thank you UCM  
  • 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

Head meet brick wall


Pagan98
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6336 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

At the start of November I was the middle car in a 3 car shunt on the M25. Traffic braked sharply, the car in front stopped, I stopped, the car behind didn't.

 

My car was recovered by my insurer Direct Line but I had to make my own way home. Direct Line didn't offer a hire car and the third party's insurer was initially disputing liability, so I hired a car (cheapest I could find and similar spec to mine) for a couple of weeks till I went on holiday. Since then my wife and 12-week old daughter have been giving me a lift to and from the station at 7am and 8pm.

 

My car was deemed a total loss by Direct Line and they offered a settlement significantly less than I was expecting from checking Auto Trader (£3k). They took the Glass's Guide price (£2.6k) and subtracted £300 for existing damage, which is far too much for the damage that preceded the accident. I disputed the valuation, providing my reasoning but Direct Line issued a final response saying they wouldn't increase their offer, even though they haven't responded to any of my points. Now they refuse to be drawn, hiding behind the Financial Ombudsman Service (which I've heard is pretty toothless).

 

I have rejected Direct Line's offer (didn't cash their cheque) and am pursuing Norwich Union (the third party's insurer) directly, asking them to return me to the situation I was in before the accident. I've told them I'm willing to accept a replacement vehicle + expenses or my estimate of value + expenses but they are ignoring my letters.

 

How do I pursue this via the Small Claims Court? I am particularly concerned about making the argument that my car is worth more than Direct Line offered and what laws I need to quote relating to the loss. Alternatively should I go to one of these no win-no fee outfits, and if so can anyone recommend one?

 

Generally feeling like my head has been rather too familiar with a brick wall and wondering why I paid Direct Line for 'comprehensive' motor insurance!

 

TIA

Link to post
Share on other sites

The situation is that the contract that you have with your insurer allows them to write off the vehicle and give you the trade value for it.

 

However, in the case where a third party is to blame, then their insurance company (in this case Norwich Union) is totally irrelevant to you. You have no contract with or claim against NU - you are pursuing the wrong target. You need to pursue the driver of the vehicle and let him (her?) wrangle with NU.

 

You are absolutely entitled to be put back into the same position as you were before the accident at the other driver's cost. He/she should be providing you with a settlement to purchase an equivalent vehicle and also repay your out-of-pocket expenses.

 

Pushed to the limit this not only includes the car hire, but 40p/mile for the lifts you are getting to/from the station.

 

If the other driver will not settle (or passes you to NU and they will not settle) in a reasonable time for your reasonable claim then go to the SCC and issue a summons against the driver for the full amount

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In the outcome of most shunt claims, it is usually the driver who shunts is deemed to be at fault as Insurers look at it that you were driving too close to the car in front and not paying attention to the road and traffic conditions in front.

 

As you claimed off your own Insurer (direct line) then they dont have to offer you a hire car if one was not listed on your policy schedule (I work in Insurance sales and so many ppl say they wont need one then end up in a similair situation to yourself)

Regarding the £300 for existing damage, you can contest this but unless your a bodywork repairer then how would youknow what was a fair estimate for any existing damage? Its like asking an electrician to wire in a socket saying it will only take 10 mins.Unless you know the trade then how do you know it will take 10 mins? :???: .

 

If you want to pursue the 3rd party (NU) then thats what your legal services should provide assistance for. (Again, listed on your schedule if you opted for it).

 

Sounds like Direct Line may not budge but its worth a shot. If not then try the SCC

In Insurance, thinking "It wont happen to me" could mean you dont have the cover you want at a time when you want it! - Dont always reject a Courtesy Car or Legal because you find the cost too much! Whats more valuable? YOU or the Policy Premium?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please add to my reputation if my reply was informative to you. (click the scales);) Replies offered by me are not linked to anyone, and is from my own personal experience.:grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

As you claimed off your own Insurer (direct line) then they dont have to offer you a hire car if one was not listed on your policy schedule

 

I agree that they don't have to but in a fairly straightforward no-fault accident it would have been good customer service. As it is, I'll have to pursue the 3rd party myself.

 

Regarding the £300 for existing damage, you can contest this but unless your a bodywork repairer then how would youknow what was a fair estimate for any existing damage?

 

Because I already had a cheaper quote to get the dent repaired. They've even deducted money for polishing to remove light scratching - I'm half inclined to offer to t-cut the wreckage!!

 

If you want to pursue the 3rd party (NU) then thats what your legal services should provide assistance for. (Again, listed on your schedule if you opted for it).

I didn't. However, I believe I do have cover via my house insurance so will be contacting them tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the other driver will not settle (or passes you to NU and they will not settle) in a reasonable time for your reasonable claim then go to the SCC and issue a summons against the driver for the full amount

 

Do I need to quote any law (law of tort rings a faint bell - google here I come) or is it enough to say that the other party has caused me a loss through their action and quantify/substantiate that loss?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pagan,

 

dont write off DL and the Ombusman. It costs the insurer £300 each time a case is reffered to the Ombusman never mind costs for people to liase and problemsolve.

 

im most cases (ive seen) the ombusman rules to the clamant also.

 

if you push 9 time out of ten the insurer will cave.

 

tyger

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't. However, I believe I do have cover via my house insurance so will be contacting them tomorrow.

 

 

Home Insurance very rarely covers motor claims. Home insurance usually has family legal for the homeowners, as Motor claims are a totally different kettle of fish, they dont touch them. plus Home Insurance with or without legal is not compulsory - car insurance is.

Let us know how you get on though. :)

In Insurance, thinking "It wont happen to me" could mean you dont have the cover you want at a time when you want it! - Dont always reject a Courtesy Car or Legal because you find the cost too much! Whats more valuable? YOU or the Policy Premium?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please add to my reputation if my reply was informative to you. (click the scales);) Replies offered by me are not linked to anyone, and is from my own personal experience.:grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...