Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good morning all, No further communication with P2G so now submitting my small claims action. Would be grateful for any feedback on my description of claim before I submit later. The defendant in this case is Parcel2Go Limited The claimant sent a parcel using Parcel2Go Ltd as a broker and Evri as the shipper containing two handmade bespoke wedding trays to a customer with tracking number P2Gxxxxxxxx. The parcel was never delivered although the defendant stated that three attempts had been made to deliver the parcel.  The claimants customer waited in for four days to receive the delivery but no delivery was attempted. There was no communication with the claimants customer.  Despite many web chats and emails the parcel was not delivered and on the Parcel2Go website it stated that the customer had refused delivery. This was not true as no delivery had been attempted.  I was informed that the parcel was being returned to me but after waiting three weeks was informed by Evri that the parcel was lost. I was offered compensation of £20 + shipping fee which I refused and after sending Parcel2Go a Letter of claim this was increased to £75 which I also refused. It is clear that the defendant is responsible for the loss of the parcel as they did not act with reasonable care and skill when handling the claimants parcel, contrary to section 49 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015. The claimant therefore seeks £370 in respect to the value of goods plus court costs. I thought it might be better to use the CRA rather than the Supply of Goods and Services Act as we are sole traders - is this correct?
    • No new development, I'm afraid. The last update I received was a letter from the court, advising that the case had been transferred to Croydon County Court.
    • Read how your orgnisation can make opportunities and employment more accessible for disadvantaged young people.View the full article
    • Hi, I am aware there’s been few threads about this already but just wanted to confirm information on my case. I was with Village gym last year(2023) on initial 6 month usual contract they do, I lost my job and due to that I couldn’t afford to pay for gym nor I had any motivation to go to gym at that time so they sent me arc phone message in September 2023 that I owed them £140 so I paid them back on instalments in 2 months time.  Then I started receiving new years deals in December 2023 and I decided to give them a call but they never mentioned anything about 6 month contract or anything, only that it would be monthly rolling contract and I paid them for 2 months and then I realised both months they charged me £59 instead of £38 they offered me on the phone when I mentioned that I am still student, even though before I was paying £43 a month in mid 2023. I spoke to gym entrance lady and she said I should give a call to gym on the phone number so I did and whoever answered said they’ll pass my info to manager and he will give me a call back in 24 hours, of course no one called me back so I called again and they said same thing. And of course once again no one got in touch with me so I got tired of them charging me more than they should and decided to cancel my direct debit and stopped going there as I got new job with rotation shifts which is not good for me as I cannot visit gym after I finish at 10pm every second week.  And now in April I received arc message saying this :  Also they have my old flat address where I used to live. What is the  best thing to do for me please? Thank you!
    • Richard Holden refusing ro answer Jon Craig's questions in a Sky pool interview and his spad argiung about the questions. As Jon said, not his finest hour.  
  • 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

'best' company to take on first


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6618 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

Ok, so I am really scraping around for the costs I'm going to need for this. Even though I'm certain of getting my money back there is always the chance of somehting changing before my own case(s) come up, or somehting else going wrong.

 

So my plan is to go for the most likely claim first and then if successful use the money to fund all the rest. I am owed between 4 and 5 grand each from -

Natwest

Natwest Mortages

Mint

Egg

MBNA

 

I can't find a lot of cases going on with any of these, except Natwest where the only successful claims have mainly been smaller amounts.

 

Any suggestions?

If you found this post useful please click on the scales above.

 

Egg - £400 - Prelim sent. On hold.

Mint - On the list Est £800

GE Capital - On the list (3 accounts!) Est £4000

 

MBNA - £545 Prelim sent 13/11/2006

LBA sent 1/12/2006

£350 partial payment received 18/12/2006.

Full settlement received 20/1/07

 

NatWest - Est £4000 not incl interest

Data Protection Act Sent 10/1/07

Statements received 24/1/07

Prelim sent 3/2/07

Full Settlement received 22/2/07

 

The contents of this post are the sole opinions of The Cornflake and not necessarily the opinions of any other members of this group. They do not constitute sound legal or financial advice and if in doubt you are advised to seek advice from a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, I would look at your charges and when they have occured.

 

Remember you can only claim back 6 years, generally. So choose your bank with the oldest charges on first and work it that way....

 

Hope this helps... and makes sense.

If you find this post useful, please click the Scales of 'Justice' in the top right corner. Thanks ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They all go back to at least 2002. Natwest go back to 1996 and in the last 6 months their charges add up to £1200 as do most of the others.

 

Basically, as I can only go back 6 years, and if I want to stay in small claims I'm limited to 5k anyway, it doesn't make much odds. The main thing is that the first one I claim goes well.

I know they all should do but my situation means I'm pushing it to get the money to do the claims in the first place so I'm going to be fretting until I start getting something back.

If you found this post useful please click on the scales above.

 

Egg - £400 - Prelim sent. On hold.

Mint - On the list Est £800

GE Capital - On the list (3 accounts!) Est £4000

 

MBNA - £545 Prelim sent 13/11/2006

LBA sent 1/12/2006

£350 partial payment received 18/12/2006.

Full settlement received 20/1/07

 

NatWest - Est £4000 not incl interest

Data Protection Act Sent 10/1/07

Statements received 24/1/07

Prelim sent 3/2/07

Full Settlement received 22/2/07

 

The contents of this post are the sole opinions of The Cornflake and not necessarily the opinions of any other members of this group. They do not constitute sound legal or financial advice and if in doubt you are advised to seek advice from a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well now, Halifax were taken for an amount of about 12k I think - way above the small claim limit - and they of course STILL paid up.

 

Also, I think that we've all had lots of letters by now claiming that the T&C's are legal and the charges are a fair reflection of costs etc...

 

This, I believe is a deliberate deception, and therefore as you were deceived from knowing the truth about their debt to you, then they have excluded themselves from the statute of limitations.

 

It's up to you, but if I had 'my time' again, then I would definitly pursue that angle.

If you feel that we have helped you, or you would like to help keep this web site running so that others can continue to get their money back, please click the donate button at the top of the forum.

Advice & opinions of Dave, The Bank Action Group and The Consumer Action Group are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability.

Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you have any doubts.

 

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

 

 

Add me as your friend on FaceBook - I need all the friends I can get :-(

 

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=577405151

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm

 

That's interesting. I hadn't thought of that angle before. Using the denial to remove the limitiation. However, the banks are only legally obliged to keep information for 6 years, and I doubt they'd admit it if they did have info going back further.

If you found this post useful please click on the scales above.

 

Egg - £400 - Prelim sent. On hold.

Mint - On the list Est £800

GE Capital - On the list (3 accounts!) Est £4000

 

MBNA - £545 Prelim sent 13/11/2006

LBA sent 1/12/2006

£350 partial payment received 18/12/2006.

Full settlement received 20/1/07

 

NatWest - Est £4000 not incl interest

Data Protection Act Sent 10/1/07

Statements received 24/1/07

Prelim sent 3/2/07

Full Settlement received 22/2/07

 

The contents of this post are the sole opinions of The Cornflake and not necessarily the opinions of any other members of this group. They do not constitute sound legal or financial advice and if in doubt you are advised to seek advice from a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Also, I think that we've all had lots of letters by now claiming that the T&C's are legal and the charges are a fair reflection of costs etc...

 

This, I believe is a deliberate deception, and therefore as you were deceived from knowing the truth about their debt to you, then they have excluded themselves from the statute of limitations.

 

It's up to you, but if I had 'my time' again, then I would definitly pursue that angle.

Just read this and it could be that NW are paying up without much argument is to keep withion the Statute of Limitations.

It seems strange that just refund the money with no prior or post refund correspondence

Brian

Claim against Nationwide

6 years charges £1973

prelim letter 10 April

Charges refunded 15 April

Link to post
Share on other sites

You may find Bookworm's case interesting (see Natwest forum). Sent a cheque for full settlement asking to sign a NDA. On refusal, they basically said no, this is settlement in full but we don't admit liability. If they had any conviction that they were correct they wouldn't have done this. It's like they really don't want to go to court in this case, but then others they file what looks like a well thought out defence.

 

I'm gonna grow it back you know! 3 years now with nothing on my chin to stroke! (Please forgive my crap humour - I have drunk far too much coffee.

If you found this post useful please click on the scales above.

 

Egg - £400 - Prelim sent. On hold.

Mint - On the list Est £800

GE Capital - On the list (3 accounts!) Est £4000

 

MBNA - £545 Prelim sent 13/11/2006

LBA sent 1/12/2006

£350 partial payment received 18/12/2006.

Full settlement received 20/1/07

 

NatWest - Est £4000 not incl interest

Data Protection Act Sent 10/1/07

Statements received 24/1/07

Prelim sent 3/2/07

Full Settlement received 22/2/07

 

The contents of this post are the sole opinions of The Cornflake and not necessarily the opinions of any other members of this group. They do not constitute sound legal or financial advice and if in doubt you are advised to seek advice from a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well now, Halifax were taken for an amount of about 12k I think - way above the small claim limit - and they of course STILL paid up.

 

Also, I think that we've all had lots of letters by now claiming that the T&C's are legal and the charges are a fair reflection of costs etc...

 

This, I believe is a deliberate deception, and therefore as you were deceived from knowing the truth about their debt to you, then they have excluded themselves from the statute of limitations.

 

It's up to you, but if I had 'my time' again, then I would definitly pursue that angle.

 

Dave, surely this is a profound point you've made here or am I missing something? If they are saying their Terms & Conditions are fair - are you saying they are deceiving everyone as they know they have charged us more than is fair? thus excluding themselves from the Statute Of Limitation? If so, this could be the very foundation to everyones claim - put me right if I am out of sync.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 09 March 2019.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

If you found this post useful please click on the scales above.

 

Egg - £400 - Prelim sent. On hold.

Mint - On the list Est £800

GE Capital - On the list (3 accounts!) Est £4000

 

MBNA - £545 Prelim sent 13/11/2006

LBA sent 1/12/2006

£350 partial payment received 18/12/2006.

Full settlement received 20/1/07

 

NatWest - Est £4000 not incl interest

Data Protection Act Sent 10/1/07

Statements received 24/1/07

Prelim sent 3/2/07

Full Settlement received 22/2/07

 

The contents of this post are the sole opinions of The Cornflake and not necessarily the opinions of any other members of this group. They do not constitute sound legal or financial advice and if in doubt you are advised to seek advice from a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6618 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...