Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Biden has just made Trump the old and out-of-touch candidate Now the felon republican candidate for moral turpitude, 78, will have to change his tactics   Criminal acts and abuse of position meaningless rambling sinful consorting with porn actress(es)   As Biden departs, Trump set to face questions over his age and acuity | US elections 2024 | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM With a younger rival to emerge, the focus is likely to turn to ex-president, 78, and his often rambling, confused speeches   Biden has just made Trump the old and out-of-touch candidate INEWS.CO.UK Now the Republican candidate, 78, will have to change his tactics      
    • Hi all my wife has today been accused of shoplifting a few weeks ago at John Lewis. Police called today and said an allegation has been made after viewing cctv. My wife has been invited in for interview to clear things up (there words) I asked how her how they knew how to find her, she admitted she had been caught before in Waitrose in 2018 and banned from them and JL. I can’t begin to tell you how shocked I am but I need to support her and don’t know where to turn. She has confessed to me that she has stolen the odd thing over the past year from JL and is now worried that they will look back and charge here for stealing all the items. The police say the allegation is for two small items of clothing. My wife of 40yrs  I know like the back of my hand has been through hell and has lost all her family over the past few years, she has serious health issues and is on strong medication. I can only put this down to this being a big factor. I really need to know what to do to help her, if she admits,  will it be dealt with on the spot or will courts be involved. Should she seek immediate legal advice or see the solicitor at the police station(that’s what they have offered) Any advice would be greatly appreciated, thanks for reading and I hope it’s easy to understand 
    • Thank you. BTW, who paid Arval's administration fee? Arval - who seem to be total idiots - refer to what was received as a "parking fine" or "penalty charge notice" when it is neither, it is an invoice from a private company.
    • Hi guys, Bought BMW a couple of weeks ago. Advertised as FSH (I have a copy of the advert) Got home, set the Idrive up, alass, no service history, only pre delivery inspection. Car is a 2019 with 77,000 miles. When viewing, I was also told it has just had a full service. Been chasing the garage and been fobbed off last week. We will send it you, blah, blah.   Sent hem a shirty text today saying if they do not sort it, I would go to Trading Standards. They just called saying they will take the car back. Thing is, I really like it and I want to keep it. Would would be the best outcome here, do I ask for money back? Or is the only real option taking the car back? It will pain me as ive paid insurance, tax, had it coded as it was playing up a little, filled oil and AdBlue. Its not much, but its just perfect for me.   Thanks in advance all.
  • 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
      • 162 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

VCS SpyCar PCN now Claim Form - No Stopping - Bristol Airport


Recommended Posts

Great work Nick & LFI - methinks a cracker of a Witness Statement is coming this weekend to blow Simple Simon's case out of the water.

We could do with some help from you.

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

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all for your help.  Here's the 1st draft of my WS including evidence.  

I have deliberately not given any details of who was driving at the time.  

Will share VCS's WS and evidence in second post due to file size 

Annoying and embarrassing but I can't find the court order paper to share.  In the middle of house reno and I think it might have got binned. I know the heating is on the 5th July and it's for 1hr in person to give oral evidence.  I'll share if I find it. 

Defendant's Witness Statement _Redacted.pdf

 

VCS's WS and evidence 

Claimant Witness Statement and Evidence_Redacted.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.

We'll try to help over the weekend.

If the hearing is on 05/07 then it's 90% sure that the deadline for filing your WS is 21/06.

  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you.

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

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

See what you think of the attached.

I have to do some proofreading of an English grammar book for an Italian publisher this weekend - for money! - so I'm afraid corrections and suggestions will come in dribs & drabs.  I've totally knackered the layout, the numbering and the order of your Exhibits but there will be several versions done so don't worry about that ATM.

Your arguments are superb.

What is less superb is the way you jump from one to the other and back again, so I haven't changed your words, but I have moved the paragraphs around and given each section a heading.

New bits are shown in red.

Crossed out crossed out in black is something you've quoted from the government Code of Practice, but that has since been withdrawn so unfortunately that argument has to go.

Your paras 7 & 8 don't harm your case but to me are waffle and can go.  Keeping the arguments clear & concise will always impress a judge.

IMPORTANT - did you ever send Simple Simon a CPR request?

 

Defendant's WS - version 2.pdf

Edited by FTMDave
Extra info added
  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you.

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

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

OK, I've found some time, new version here.

Bit in blue that seems to me to be superfluous - but you decide.

Crossed out bit where the law has changed.

Added bits in red.

Only one bit rewritten for clarity in magenta.

Here are the two exhibits I mention.

That's enough playing with colours by me 🤣

 

17_extracted_IPC Code of PracticeV9 V4.pdf Transcript - Excel v Wilkinson.pdf

Defendant's WS - version 3.pdf

Edited by FTMDave
Typo
  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you.

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

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks so much FTMDave.  This is so much better  :-)

I'm still tempted to leave the blue section in is as if I lose it will at least save me a little bit of money.  But I get your point that it's pretty superfluous.  

Thinking I'll get this in the post on Monday unless you think it's worth delaying?   

Link to post
Share on other sites

Between yourself and Dave you have produced a very good WS. However if you were to do a harder hitting WS it may be that VCS would be more likely to cancel prior to a hearing.

The Contract .

VCS [Jake Burgess?] are trying to conflate parking in a car park to driving along a road in order to defend the indefensible.

It is well known that "NO Stopping " cannot form a contract as it is prohibitory. VCS know that well as they lose time and again in Court when claiming it is contractual. By mixing up parking with driving they hope to deflect from the fact trying to claim that No Stopping is contractual is tantamount to perjury. No wonder mr Burgess doesn't want to appear in Court.

Conflation also disguises the fact that while parking in a car park for a period of time can be interpreted as the acceptance of the contract that is not the case while driving down a road. The Defendant was going to the airport so it is ludicrous to suggest that driving by a No Stopping  sign is tacitly accepting  the  contract -especially as no contract is even being offered. And even if a motorist did not wish to be bound by the so called contract what could they do? Forfeit their flight and still have to stop their car to turn around? Put like that the whole scenario posed by Mr Burgess that the Defendant accepted the contract by driving past the sign is absolutely absurd and indefensible. I certainly would not want to appear in Court defending that statement either.

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

I will do the contract itself later.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Danny - point taken about the blue paragraphs.  Including them doesn't harm your case in any way.  It makes no odds.  It's just that over the years we've had judges often remarking on how concise & clear Caggers' WSs have been compared to the Encyclopaedia Britannica-length rubbish that the PPCs send, so I always have a slight preference to cut out anything necessary.

Don't send off the WS straight away .. you have plenty of time ... and let's just say that LFI is the Contract King so give him a couple of days to look through it with a fine-tooth comb.

  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you.

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

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Contract itself

The airport is actually owned by the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan. There should be an authority from them for Bristol airport group  to sign on their behalf. Without it the contract is invalid.

The contract has so many  clauses redacted that it is questionable as to its fairness with regard to the Defendants ability to receive a fair trial. In the case of WH Holding Ltd, West Ham United Football Club Ltd -v- E20 Stadium LLP [2018], 

In reaching its decision, the Court gave a clear warning to parties involved in litigation:

‘given the difficulties and suspicions to which extensive redaction inevitably gives rise, parties who decide to adopt such an appropriate in disclosure must take enhanced care to ensure that such redactions are accurately made, and must be prepared to suffer costs consequences if they are not’.

The contract is also invalid as the signatories are required to have their signatures co-signed by independent witnesses. There is obviously a question of the date of the signatures not being signed until 16 days after the start of the contract.

There is a question too about the photographs. They are supposed to be contemporaneous not taken several months before when the signage may have been different or have moved or damaged since then.

The Defendant respectfully asks the Court therefore to treat the contract as invalid or void. With no contract there can be no breach. Indeed even were the contract regarded as valid there would be no breach It is hard to understand why this case was brought to Court as there appears to be no reasonable cause to apply to the DVLA.............

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Danny83 said:

Thinking I'll get this in the post on Monday unless you think it's worth delaying?   

The problem with sending it too early is that Jake might try to write something called a Supplemental Witness Statement to undermine yours.  It would be better to send yours right on the court's deadline.

The problem is that we don't know when that is.  In 90% of cases it's 14 days before the court's deadline, so 21/06.  However, in the odd case the judge decides differently.

 

  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you.

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

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

New version after LFI's superb analysis of the contract.

Sorry, but you need to redo the numbering of the paras and of the exhibits in the right order after all the damage I've caused!

Defendant's WS - version 4.pdf

  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you.

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

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a big improvement Dave and I do agree that it s best to leave it till the last moment to prevent VCS from countering your WS. [usually using doubtful logic that can't be easily argued against in a Court atmosphere]

However my first post [no. 32] about the contract is the one that really exposes Jake's flummery and calls into  question jost how close he comes to committing perjury. And that is what hopefully VCS will not want questioned by a Judge. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Dave and LFI for your time and guidance.  You've been superstars.  My WS is so much better.  

I'll keep you posted on how it goes.

  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Make sure the WS is sent 14 days before the hearing.

You can e-mail the court theirs.  In the subject line put the case number, the names of the parties and "Witness Statement".  Obviously click on "Return Receipt".

Send Simple Simon his by 2nd class post - all VCS are worth - and get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.

We could do with some help from you.

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

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

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...