Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello I am a resident of a communal block of flats owned by a Housing Association and since Tuesday 14th May 2024 Matthews and Tannert had put up scaffolding for a job on the roof last week, which was up for the best part of nine days. They had removed the scaffolding on Thursday 23rd May 2024 but my Sky box is still not working because of the satellite dish outside, and I was wondering whether the scaffolders had touched the dish while it was there and as a result had probably knocked the dish and probably made the dish go out of signal or whatever. I needed someone to check this out as well as to see my Sky box to see what could be the problem, and hopefully sort this out. I have had my Sky Digibox for many years and I have got recordings saved on them that I have had a long time - it would break my heart if I had lost them forever.       I contacted Sky but I almost made the mistake of accepting an offer where I would have to pay £31.50 and wait a whole month without television in my front room for it. I am in debt at the moment and I don't want all this on top of everything else - thankfully I have since cancelled it two weeks later when I told the person on the phone that it is the dish which is at fault as well as the fact that I live in a communal Housing Association property, and so that is one of very few weights off my mind. I emailed the Housing Association's Repairs department and they said that they will contact an electrical company to come out and see to the dish outside. I received a telephone call on Friday 24th May from the man to say that he will arrive on Wednesday 29th May 2024 to do the job. He arrived at around 9.40 am on Wednesday as promised; he went into my flat and had a look at the Sky box and saw the blue screen on my front room TV set, indicating no signal. He also looked outside as to where the dish was.  The main problem was that the ladders that he had with him were not enough to reach the dish outside as the dish was towards the top of the building - obviously the Health and Safety aspect of the job didn't allow him to do this. He then mentioned that whether he could do the job as a result of getting onto the roof and doing it like that as the dish is closer to the top. He said that he needed the key to enter the loft part of the building in order to reach this, and he needed to contact the Housing Officer at the Housing Association who had key to this, but lo and behold, he came on the Wednesday to do the job, and guess what? Wednesday was the Housing Officer's day off and so therefore he was unable to contact him for the key so that he could do the job! I just couldn't believe it myself. I am personally annoyed because this has not been sorted, and the man who came to do this is also annoyed because he came all the way to Nottingham from Peterborough, and he said to me that he won't get paid if he cannot do the job, so you see, we are both angry about this for different reasons. We are both in the same boat with regards to frustration, and we both want to see a conclusion to this, once and for all. Sometimes I wish that I didn't live in a flat which is in a communal building and I am thinking of getting a transfer to a one bedroom flat that isn't in that sort of place. I pay around £85 a month in a Direct Debit to Sky to receive their TV services which I cannot use at the moment, and I don't have much money in my bank account as it is due to one thing and another. I also pay nearly £14 a month to TV Licensing so that I can legally watch TV in my front room. I pay for Sky hence the fact that I want the Sky service in my front room and not Freeview. Also, as the General Election is coming up in five weeks' time, I want the satellite TV to be working properly so that I can catch up with what is on the news channels, and I feel rather "cut off" from that at the moment, and I want it working in time for Thursday 4th July 2024 for ovbious reasons . I have Freeview in my bedroom, but that is not the point  - I don't want to be limited to my bedroom every time I want to watch TV. I have tried putting the Freeview in te front room but it doesn't seem compatable for the same uses that I usually have Sky for.  Sunday 9th June 2024 is Day 27 of the satellite TV not working in my flat, and I feel that something needs to be done about this. You can take this message as a complaint if you like, but nevertheless, I want this message to be acknowledged and also something to be done about what has happened. I have enough on my plate with regards to health problems and depression without things like this making things worse. I would appreciate it if something was done.  I don't like naming and shaming but it is Matthews and Tannert's fault that I am in this situation in the first place, and sometimes I wish that I could sue them. In a nutshell, I have had more than enough after being without TV in the my front room for nearly four weeks. Also, at a time like this, I am missing so much of interest on TV what with the General Election comning up in just a few weeks.
    • There's no facility for a settlement "out of court" as such. But matters that are started under the "Single Justice" (SJ) Procedure can often be concluded without the defendant appearing. The SJ procedure, as the name suggests, involves a single magistrate, sitting in an office with a legal advisor, dealing with matters "on papers" only. Nobody else can attend. The SJ deals with straightforward guilty pleas. Anything where the SJ believes the defendant should appear, or which should be dealt with by the "ordinary" court are adjourned o a hearing in the normal magistrates'  court .As well as this, all defendants have the right to a hearing in the normal court if they wish. Nobody is forced to have their case heard under he SJP.  In particular, as far as traffic matters go, a SJ will not disqualify a driver and if a ban is to be considered, the case will be passed over to the normal court. Because, following your SD, you will be pleading Not Guilty (and offering the "deal"), your case would usually be heard in the normal court, meaning a personal appearance. To be honest, performing your SD at the court is a more straightforward way of doing things. It avoids any possible hitches involved in serving he SD on the court. But of course, as I said, most courts have backlogs which mean an SD may not be quickly accommodated. If you do end up doing your SD before a solicitor, check with them the protocol for serving it on the court. Do let us know what the solicitor says about Wednesday.    
    • Welcome to posting on CAG cabot, people will be along soon to help you try to sort this out. Please complete this:  
    • Quotes of the day penny mordaunt came out swinging with her broadsword, and promptly decapitated sunak while Nigel Farage, representing Reform UK, made contentious claims about immigration policies, which were swiftly fact-checked during the debate.   Good question though raised at labour about the 2 child benefit cap, which I broadly agree with, but the tory 'trap' assumes tory thinking - rather than child centric thinking. There should be no incentives to have kids as a financial way of life paid for by everyone else ... ... BUT the kids should not be made to suffer for the decisions of their parents Free school meals would feed the kids, improve their ability to learn, and incentivise them to go to school. As an added benefit ... it would invest in our nations future.   How far this should go is a matter for costing, social intent and future path of the nation, but not feeding our nations kids is an abomination. There should be at least one free school meal per day for every child who attends school. Full Stop. Its the cheapest and most effective investment in our future we could make.
    • Hey people, I've been browsing this amazing forum for the past year and recieved a letter today which has made me require some help. Received a claim form from Cabot in the Civil National Business Centre in regards to an Aqua Credit Card taken out in 2018. I failed to make payments due to financial hardship and have not taken out any credit or uses any forms of credit since. Received a lot of letters from Cabot and their solicitors Mortimer Clarke which I've ignored    By an agreement between New Day Ltd RE Aqua& the Defendant on or around 26/03/2018 ('ths Agreement) New Day Ltd RE Aqua agreed to issue Defendant with a credit card. The Defendant failed to make the minimum payments due. The Agreement was terminated following the service of a default notice. The Agreement was assigned to the named Claimant. Cabot Credit Management Group Limited, acting as servicing agent of the named Claimant through its Appointed Representative (Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited), has arranged for these proceedings to be issued in the name of the Claimant. The named Claimant may be entitled to claim interest under the Agreement but does not seek such interest and instead claims interest under Section 69(1) of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8% p.a.from03/03/2023 until date of issue only, or alternatively such interest as the Court thinks fit THE NAMED CLAIMANT THEREFORE CLAIMS 1. 3800.82 2. INTEREST OF 379.84 3. Costs How would I go about this and what could happen? I don't remember much details about the card either.
  • 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

Won ADR judgement against footasylum. - Can this be enforced by a court? ***Paid in full after Letter of Claim ***


jk2054
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 318 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

First of all it is a decision and not judgement.

Second of all, when you sue you will need to sue in respect of the original transaction of which you have told us nothing so far. However you will need to rehearse the facts of the original transaction very briefly in your letter of claim. And then go on to refer to the ADR decision and the fact that they have breached that as well.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks - I've made some very brief edits as suggested as well as including references to what actually happened.

 

For clarity - they claim to have delivered 4 orders all on the same day at the same time and I received 0 of them (I have CCTV that shows this)

Please do let me know if you think there is anything else I should add/remove/change.

FA POC 2.pdf

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you today?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you are suing them to enforce the ADR decision.

You are suing them because under s29 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (legislation.gov.uk) the goods remain at the seller's risk until they are delivered into the physical possession of the consumer.  That means that you are entitled to a full refund for any goods you have paid for that are never delivered to you.

You are basically making the same case that you must have made to the ADR service for them to find in your favour...

[You can mention the ADR decision in support of your case, but the legal substance of any court claim you make is based on the law as outlined above, not on the ADR decision itself]

 

Edited by Manxman in exile
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree.

As far as I'm aware, I'm not asking the court to make a decision.

I'm asking the court to enforce a decision.

The legally binding decision has already been decided, the court are just enforcing it.

 

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you today?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid you are wrong. You don't understand the court process.

Stand by for a further reply tomorrow

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok im just going off what ADR said.

 

They told me the decision was made and the court is simply used to enforce it.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you today?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, jk2054 said:

I don't agree.

As far as I'm aware, I'm not asking the court to make a decision. I'm asking the court to enforce a decision. The legally binding decision has already been decided, the court are just enforcing it.

 

Courts enforce the law - they don't enforce ADR decisions except incidentally insofar as those decisions align with the law.

If the retailer won't cough up you will be suing them because they have breached s29 of the legislation I linked to above, not because they haven't complied with some ADR decision.

So you don't need to look it up:

"29 Passing of risk

(1) A sales contract is to be treated as including the following provisions as terms.

(2) The goods remain at the trader’s risk until they come into the physical possession of—

(a) the consumer, or

(b) a person identified by the consumer to take possession of the goods"

What this means is that the goods remain the responsibility of the seller until they have been delivered into your "physical possession".  If they are never delivered to you, you are entitled to a full refund.  That's what will form the basis of any legal claim you make, and I don't think it will do any harm to make that clear in your letter before claim.  It makes it look like you know what you are talking about, which always helps...

At the same time it can't do any harm to remind the retailer that they have already lost the ADR decision - but I don't think that is the main plank of your case.

Was the legal position not covered when you prepared your ADR complaint?

Anyway, see what @BankFodder suggests tomorrow regarding the content of your letter before claim

[NB - I was in the middle of editing my post #28 when you replied to the unedited version with your post #29]

Edited by Manxman in exile
Link to post
Share on other sites

FIND-AND-UPDATE.COMPANY-INFORMATION.SERVICE.GOV.UK

Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual return, officers, charges...

 

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

9 hours ago, Manxman in exile said:

Courts enforce the law 

Sorry but this is not correct

 

9 hours ago, jk2054 said:

The legally binding decision has already been decided, the court are just enforcing it.

 

Neither is this

 

9 hours ago, jk2054 said:

ok im just going off what ADR said.

They told me the decision was made and the court is simply used to enforce it.

Where did they say this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly, the courts do not enforce anything. They simply make a judgement on the state of the law in relation to a particular dispute/the obligations of the parties to the dispute and that judgement is sufficient to authorise enforcement process – if enforcement becomes necessary.
In fact even that may not be strictly true. It may be better to say that they make a judgement as to the state of the parties in relation to each other in the light of the current applicable law.

Secondly, the OP has badly misunderstood the status of the ADR service that they have used – and everyone else in this thread seems to have gone along with that.
The ADR service has not been approved by "government" as has been claimed by the OP in the sense that it has been set up and regulated by government and that its decisions are binding. The ADR service is simply "smiled upon" by various organisations – but it has no official status in our legal system.
The courts will not directly approve the decisions of the ADR service – although I am quite sure that the ADR decision will carry a lot of weight when a judge makes their decision.
The ADR decision is only binding on the parties to the dispute to the extent that they enter into a contract to respect the decision and so the obligations of the company are contractual – nothing more than that.

You might as well buy something from a car dealer – the car dealer's obligations to you are contractual. It's no different.

When you take this dispute to the courts, the existence of the ADR contract – the fact that the company has apparently entered into the ADR contract – can be presented to the court as evidence of a binding obligation – but you will also need to allege and then prove the facts of the initial dispute which gave rise to the ADR.
A judge may decide to give direct effect to the ADR decision – but probably not without understanding what the entire dispute was about. It is impossible that the ADR service could usurp the position of the court.

Therefore your letter of claim should refer to the initial dispute in the first instance and then to the ADR process and the contract obligation that arose from that.
You have told us that the ADR decision does not award interest. I have already responded that by ignoring their contractual obligation under the ADR agreement, they have effectively vitiated any benefit of going to an ADR process and the question of interest is at large once the matter goes to court and you obtain a judgement.
There is a risk that if you simply try to get a decision based on the ADR decision, that the judge might feel that contractually there was no entitlement to interest.
For that reason, you should certainly be litigating on the basis of the initial dispute.

Once again, you seem to be reluctant to let us know what has happened. This is unhelpful to us, to you – and in particular to anybody else who is similarly affected and comes to this forum for information.
The only party that you are helping by withholding information are in fact the company that you are up against – so Bravo.

You really should tell us more. We aren't asking you to show us your willy.



 

Link to post
Share on other sites

it remains for all users.

 

d

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Update (in case anyone finds in similar situation)

 

After a LOC was sent, they called and made payment immediately and paid interest on the amount.

  • Like 1

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you today?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds like a great result – even interest! We wouldn't have expected that.

Well done, and we have just received a donation from you saying thank you for that as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Won ADR judgement against footasylum. - Can this be enforced by a court? **RESOLVED AFTER LOC SENT**

well done

 

dx

 

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

  • AndyOrch changed the title to Won ADR judgement against footasylum. - Can this be enforced by a court? ***Paid in full after Letter of Claim ***
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...