Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Better version attached with the late appeal explained more clearly for the judge. This will sound silly, but I think it would be a good idea to e-mail it to the court and UKPC on Sunday.  It's probably me being daft, but Sunday is still March, and as it's late, sending it in March rather than April will make it sound like it was less late than it really is.  if you get my drift. You can still pop in a paper version on Tuesday if you want. E-mail address for the court: [email protected] And for UKPC: [email protected]   [email protected] Defendant WS.pdf
    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. 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 only contracted 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. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
  • 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
      • 160 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

V-E Day: Victory over Egg


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4984 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

this is great, thansk - I oroginally sent my lba etc in october, only to be told to take them to court, so i will issue MCOL when i get paid - im not gonna write to them again as I have 6 years after issuing the lba to calim, apparently.....

 

I'll let you know if/when I win!!

 

PS, this thread is REALY motivational as I they are the last on my list and i have been waiting over 6 months to claim fro them!!! :) :)

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

hehe, hope so mate - could REALLY do with the cash - only 200 quids but im so broke now!!

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone had their accounts closed?

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also has anyone managed to get them to remove a default???

__________________

EGG CC Default Removal: Have reported Egg to Trading Standards, Summery Claim - 2nd Hearing Date 09/10/07. Click here to read posts

Monument CC: received statements, now need to send letters. . . !

BoS Current Account: Settled

Citi Cards: Hhmm seems like I have sued the wrong “entity”. Aaaaahhhhh . . .. oh well back to court I go, and they have settled in full!!!

 

:-D:p:D

This is just advice from me. If you are not sure please seek legal advice. However if what I have said has been helpful, than please add to my reputation by clicking on the scales :D

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Research tools

 

The two questions above are specific illustrations of a general problem -- with several million forum postings from 130,000 members and growing exponentially, flesh and blood cannot possibly keep up. This mountain of data piled up by IT can only realistically be mined using IT tools. To try answer the 2 questions posed I tried the following:

 

click SEARCH

click ADVANCED SEARCH

search "CLOSE OR REMOVE"

select "OTHER INSTALLATIONS, EGG FORUM" only

 

This returned a dozen threads, no doubt there is a diamond buried in there somewhere, the precise answer to a precise question. The price is heavy digging. Always successful data-mining relies on judicious choice of pinpointed keyword, and luck.

 

Shortcut research on winners only

 

Out of 130,000 CAG members, only 6,000 have reported successful reclaims. Granted 6,000 under-reports the true figure, winners remain very much in the minority. To cut down on research aimed at finding workable answers, it is possible to restrict ADVANCED SEARCH by selecting only the winners-only forum http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes-1.html.

 

Alas Egg has been deemed by Mods a backwater and is lumped in with other cards. Double alas, out of 32 Egg winners listed in V-E Day thread, only 3 have requested Moderators to move their threads to the Winners Forum -- namely Maxine989, THFC4EVER, mcuth.

 

I suspect research shortcut was the exact reason Mods opened up winners-only forums. Mods are now seen in avatars regularly banging their heads against the keyboard, as 90% of CAG winners ignored (or failed to notice) Mod requests for winning claimants to PM Mods re relocation of winning threads. The V-E Day thread also requested notification from winners, but in addition monitors the Egg Forum every day for winners. I suspect there would be volunteer monitors in other forums -- if only they were asked.

 

Pondering on the success and failure of communication,

if an audience takes no notice,

actors on stage would look for ways to get through.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Successful Egg claimants have moved on -- there are other things to do apart from wrestling with Shylock. But winners left behind detailed "how to" postings. No other forum has made it this easy -- 34 links to 34 successes all waiting to be clicked open and read.

 

There is however no Room Service delivering answers on a plate, or breakfast in bed.

  • Haha 1

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In response to Egg’s point “You allege that these charges are a penalty. You have put forward no evidence to support this allegation…” the following Terms and Conditions published on the web by 2 Irish banks can be printed and submitted as part of the Court Bundle.

 

 

Nowhere is the anomaly more blatant than in Northern Ireland. There the Ulster Bank (part of RBS-NatWest Group) charges £30. Put one foot across the border into Eire, and the charge falls by 90% to the universal Irish rate of £3, see links below. Are Irish banks ten, twelve times more cost-efficient than UK banks?

 

http://www.ulsterbank.co.uk/content/ni/personal/current_accounts/downloads/Guide_to_Personal_Current _Account_Fees_Interest.pd f

 

Ulster Bank

 

"If you exceed your arranged overdraft facility or if you go overdrawn without prior arrangement... £30"

 

 

http://www.accbank.ie/content/accbank/cms.nsf/Files/CurrentAcFeesChargesJan2006/$file/Current%20Ac%20Fees%20&%20Charges.pdf

 

ACC Bank

 

“REFERRED CHARGES…Cheque, direct debit or standing order presented which if paid would place your account in an unathorised position – Euro 4.44

 

 

http://www.aib.ie/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=RO IPersonalPortal/AIBContent_C/pp_article&c=AIBContent_C &cid=1136826345174&channe l=P004

 

Allied Irish Banks

 

3. Late Payment Charge

Should payments not be made in accordance with the Conditions of Use an administration charge of EUR 3.81 will be debited from the cards account.

 

4. Over Limit Charge

Should the account be operated in excess of the Credit Limit, an administration charge of EUR 2.54 may be debited from the cards account.

 

5. Returned Payment Charge

Should any payment either by cheque or direct debit be returned unpaid an administration charge of EUR 4.44 will be debited to the card account.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Claimants 42 - Egg 0

Well done Mike, the 42nd winner.
A laser-targeted Eggmail, then a 2-day result -- a record I think.

 

For those who wonder why long letters do not work, Eggployees probably fall asleep reading them.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is obvious that Egg and other institutions methodically carry out a policy of stalling until claimants lose the will to live, a strategy of bluff and brinkmanship camouflaging a determination never to appear before a judge.

 

 

However there has been great disparity in the time required for Victory over Egg -- some won in days, others in 6 months, this difference possibly down to a difference of tone and pinpointed directness in the letters sent by claimants.

 

 

If past V-E winners see this, would they care to respond here, posting approximately how many days each took from start to finish, deducting any inactive period voluntarily chosen by the claimant. This count of days will then be keyed into the Roll of Honour as a guide to quick success. I too can discover the answers by researching threads, but there is only one of me, but 42 winners!

 

 

Justice delayed is justice denied.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

from http://www.tombrennan.co.uk/

 

Brennan v National Westminster Bank

(Updated 03 May 2007)

 

The hearing of the current application will continue on 21st May 2007, at 10:30am in

the Mayor's and City of London County Court. The application has been listed for the

whole day, and it is unlikely that a decision will be given on that day. The judge has

indicated that a reserved judgement is likely to be given, which means that a decision

is likely to follow later in that week.

 

However, the exact timing of when the judgment will be given is entirely a matter for

the judge, and will also be dependent on the Court's diary.

 

There has been an increasing level of media interest in my upcoming case against

Natwest, which is intended to test the lawfulness of the charges imposed by Natwest

for breaches of the overdraft facility of my current account.

 

This simple website is intended to give a summary of the case and to set out some of

the issues involved. It is also intended to answer the majority of questions that people

may have regarding myself and this case. It is hoped that by giving such information

on this site, there will be fewer media inquiries forwarded to me, and an increased

level of factual accuracy in any reports on this case. A summary of the case can be

seen on the Case Summary page.

 

It should be noted that the adjourned hearing, due to take place on 21st May 2007,

will not determine the lawfulness of Natwest's charges; that will be determined at the

full trial at a later date, should the case proceed. The hearing on the 21st May is an

application to determine the law involved in this case, and whether the case should go

to trial.

 

If the case is allowed to proceed on 21st May 2007, then I intend to place my own

legal papers on the Legal Papers page. These papers will include my Particulars of

Claim and my Witness Statements.

 

I will post further information about the case on this site once the application has been

heard on Monday 21st May 2007.

 

Further information on how to reclaim your bank charges can be found on the BBC

News Website and the Consumer Action Group forums:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6170209.stm

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-action-group-against/

 

 

counter.php?var=1222508394

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Just thought I would say what a goodthread this is mate. thank you - it's because of you I re-tried Egg and got a settlement without court.

 

Thanks again fella, I owe you a beer! :)

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...