Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks jk2054 - email now sent to OCMC requesting an in person hearing.
    • You can easily argue your case with no sign on the nearest parking sign
    • Same issue got a fine yesterday for parking in suspended bay which was ending at 6:30 yesterday, next thing I see a fine 15 minutes before it. The sign was obstructed 
    • Hi all, an update on the case as the deadline for filing the WS is tomorrow i.e., 14 days before the hearing date: 7th June. Evri have emailed their WS today to the court and to myself. Attached pdf of their WS - I have redacted personal information and left any redactions/highlights by Evri. In the main: The WS is signed by George Wood. Evri have stated the claim value that I am seeking to recover is £931.79 including £70 court fees, and am putting me to strict proof as to the value of the claim. Evri's have accepted that the parcel is lost but there is no contract between Evri and myself, and that the contract is with myself and Packlink They have provided a copy of the eBay Powered By Packlink Terms and Conditions (T&Cs) to support their argument the contractual relationship is between myself and Packlink, highlighting clause 3a, e, g of these T&Cs. They further highlight clause 14 of the T&Cs which states that Packlink's liability is limited to £25 unless enhanced compensation has been chosen. They have contacted Packlink who informed them that I had been in contact with Packlink and raised a claim with Packlink and the claim had been paid accordingly i.e., £25 in line with the T&Cs and the compensated postage costs of £4.82. They believe this is clear evidence that my contract is with Packlink and should therefore cease the claim against Evri. Evri also cite Clause 23 of the pre-exiting commercial agreement between the Defendant and Packlink, which states:  ‘Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 A person who is not a party to this Agreement shall have no rights under the Contracts (Right of Third Parties) Act 1999 to rely upon or enforce any term of this Agreement provided that this does not affect any right or remedy of the third party which exists or is available apart from that Act.’ This means that the Claimant cannot enforce third party rights under the Contract (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 and instead should cease this claim and raise a dispute with the correct party.   Having read Evri's WS and considered the main points above, I have made these observations: Evri have not seen/read my WS (sent by post and by email) as they would have recognised the claim value is over £1000 as it includes court fees, trial fees, postage costs and interests, and there is a complete breakdown of the different costs and evidence. Evri accepts the parcel is lost after it entered their delivery network - again, this is in my WS and is not an issue in dispute. Evri mentions the £25 and £4.82 paid by Packlink - Again, had they read the WS, they would have realised this is not an issue in dispute. Furthermore to the eBay Powered By Packlink T&Cs that Evri is referring to, Clauses 3b and c of the T&Cs states:  (b)   Packlink is a package dispatch search engine that acts as an intermediary between its Users and Transport Agencies. Through the Website, Users can check the prices that different Transport Agencies offer for shipments and contract with the Transport Agency that best suits their needs on-line. (c)  Each User shall then enter into its own contract with the chosen Transport Agency. Packlink does not have any control over, and disclaims all liability that may arise in contracts between a User and a Transport Agency   This supports the view that once a user (i.e, myself) selects a transport agency (i.e Evri) that best suits the user's needs, the user (i.e, myself) enters into a contract with the chosen transport agency (i.e, myself). Therefore, under the T&Cs, there is a contract between myself and Evri. Evri cites their pre-existing agreement with Packlink and that I cannot enforce 3rd party rights under the 1999 Act. Evri has not provided a copy of this contract, and furthermore, my point above explains that the T&Cs clearly explains I have entered into a contract when i chose Evri to deliver my parcel.  As explained in my WS, i am the non-gratuitous beneficiary as my payment for Evri's delivery service through Packlink is the sole reason for the principal contract coming into existence. Clearly Evri have not read by WS as the above is all clearly explained in there.   I am going to respond to Evri's email by stating that I have already sent my WS to them by post/email and attach the email that sent on the weekend to them containing my WS. However, before i do that, If there is anything additional I should further add to the email, please do let me know. Thanks. Evri Witness Statement Redacted v1 compressed.pdf
    • Thank you. I will get on to the SAR request. I am not sure now who the DCA are - I have a feeling it might be the ACI group but will try to pull back the letter they wrote from her to see and update with that once I have it. She queried it initially with 118 118 when she received the default notice I think. Thanks again - your help and support is much appreciated and I will talk to her about stopping her payments at the weekend.
  • 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

H.Samuel - Designed Engagement Ring - Main Gemstone Coming Loose - Paid by CC


Recommended Posts

Looking for some help and advice please.

My fiancé purchased an engagement ring from H Samuel on the 8th May 2023. He opted for their design service as I love rainbow moonstones and diamonds, and he wanted it to be unique. He collected the ring on 20th June 2023, the cost was £1626.00

Shortly after, he proposed and I began wearing the ring. Within a matter of weeks, I noticed the main stone had fallen out. I was devastated. We took it back to the H Samuel store and was told that they would send it back to the people who made the ring, for their advice. If they felt it was damaged by me, we would need to pay for the repair. I was horrified as I had only worn it for a few weeks and had done nothing, that could be considered damaging it! I pointed out that this was an engagement ring and they had known this all along. An engagement ring needs to be robust as it is meant to be worn all the time.

They took the ring from me and sent it away. They had it for over a month and then came back to me to say they would repair it free of charge on this occasion. When I collected the ring, they had replaced the original moonstone with one which was completely different. It really didn't look very attractive at all. A plain white stone with no colour and resembled a lump of plastic. I was so upset. 

I told them I was unhappy with the look of the stone and it wasn't what we had wanted when we had the ring designed. They took it back and after another month, contacted me to say I could collect it. They had replaced the stone and the ring looked a lot better.

I began wearing it again, but after a few weeks I noticed the stone was loose again. I had to take the ring off because i was frightened of losing the stone again and have not been able to wear it since.

 

I contacted H Samuel again, but this time requested a refund. The ring is clearly not fit for purpose as it can not be worn for more than a few weeks without the stone coming loose or falling out.

The manager said that it was my fault as I had damaged the ring and they were unable to do anything else. There was no damage to the ring and this seemed to me to be just a way of avoiding doing anything.

I took the ring to an independent jeweller who told me that the design was flawed and they agreed the ring wasn't fit for purpose as an engagement ring. The jeweller put that in writing for me and also confirmed that there was no sign of any damage that could account for the stone coming loose.

I sent an email to the manager of H Samuels, attached the email from the jeweller and several pictures of the ring, showing that the stone had come lose again. I requested a refund as I has given them ample opportunity to fix the ring but it was not fit for purpose and could not be worn with confidence.

He responded by saying they wanted to take the ring back to assess it. I replied that they had already had it twice and I do not believe they could do an impartial report on their own work. I suggested that if they were not prepared to accept the word of the jeweller I had already seen, we could agree upon another independent jeweller and have another report done, which we would agree to abide by the findings.

He completely ignored this suggestion and has not given me a refund.

 

Getting engaged should have been one of the most special times of our live, but H Samuel have completely ruined it. We have both been through so much hurt and upset over this and just want our money back, so we can buy a ring that I can actually wear. I seem to be going around in circles here and it is clear, they don't care and do not intend to help.

I am just looking for advice on what to do next please?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

send a letter of claim. giving 14 days before you launch a court claim for the whole sum on day 15.

your claim will be under your consumer rights as not fit for purpose and following the one repair they are allowed to do outside of 30days since purchase, it's still unfit for purpose.

though i would delay this until you are familiar with all the court claim process and understand that you must start your claim regardless on day 15..dont bluff.

dx 

  • Like 1

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

then that put you in quite a strong position

as under section 75 of the consumer credit act the card provider is equally liable.

try that first

 

  • Like 2

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

Get in touch with the credit card company as they're equally liable under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act.

Let them know that you wish to make a claim for a full refund under Section 75 bla bla bla.

Explain the response you've had from the retailer and provide the independent report you've had in their claim.

Be best to do this before doing any court action (it also gives you time to read up on the court processes) because if you were to make a claim you would claim against both the retailer and the credit card company.



 

  • Like 2

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 OTHER

 

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

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • lolerz changed the title to H.Samuel - Designed Engagement Ring - Main Gemstone Coming Loose - Paid by CC

but please comeback and let us know the outcome 

too many people vanish and never resolve their threads.

dx

 

  • Like 1

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

FOR IF AND ONLY IT GETS TO A COURT CLAIM

I've actually watched two small claims for basically an indentical situation (part of my familiarisation visit months ago). 

You need to have an expert or independent jewllers report that states that the fault is with the ring manufacutiring and not becuase you damaged it.

Otherwise if they raise the argument that it was damaged after use, if theres no report from either of you then going off what I saw from 2 seperate district judges  both were told to go away and get it and come back.

Make sure you have one is the one thing I'd say otherwise I assume you'd get teh same

  • 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

12 hours ago, Tillylola said:

I took the ring to an independent jeweller who told me that the design was flawed and they agreed the ring wasn't fit for purpose as an engagement ring. The jeweller put that in writing for me and also confirmed that there was no sign of any damage that could account for the stone coming loose.

thats perfect all you will ever need.

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

That's what we thought, but the store manager is inferring that, as the jeweller we used was not a member of the NJA, no one would give what he said, any credence.

The Jeweller we used is in fact, a long established, well respected company, with 2 store and rather than just being a retailer, they craft the most exquisite jewellery inhouse! 

I wish my Fiancé would have bought from them rather than H Samuel!

Do you think we do need to get another report from and NJA accredited Jeweller ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

you do not need a sep accredited jewellers report..how stupid.

stop believing things someone says face to face that they would never put in writing.

the judge would eat them for breakfast if they did,

dx

 

  • Like 1

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

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Homer67 said:

No, do the section 75 chargeback to your credit card provider.

I am  unfamiliar with dealing with anything like this and quite a bit of confusing information on the internet. Never even used a forum before!

Can you tell me how best to do the Section 75 ? Do I do it through my bank or directly through Mastercard?

Also, hard copy recorded delivery or online?

Does it matter that because of all the time this ring has been going back and forward from me to H Samuel, it has been nearly 12 months since we purchased it ?

Also, last thing ( I think) Is there a difference between a section 75 claim and a chargeback claim?

 

Edited by Tillylola
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tillylola said:

 

Can you tell me how best to do the Section 75 ? Do I do it through my bank or directly through Mastercard?

 

Through your bank

1 minute ago, Tillylola said:

Also, hard copy recorded delivery or online?

What hard copy or online sorry?

1 minute ago, Tillylola said:

Also, last thing ( I think) Is there a difference between a section 75 claim and a chargeback claim?

Yes, chargeback has a 120 day limit though so you may be out of time.

Chargeback is where your bank gets the funds from the merchant

S75 is where your bank refunds you then decides to go after merchant or not

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

If i did it through the bank, they seem to have an online form.

I wondered if this is the best way or to do a letter, add supporting documents and send them through the post, recorded delivery  ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

use the webform

if it allows you to attach your evidential documents then do so but do that later

depending upon who your bank is.... - but i suspect you will be referred to Mastercard.

who is your bank?

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

just type no need to keep hitting quote.

Natwest dont usually mess around.

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

Thanks Dx. Still finding my way around this forum thing. Cant tell you how grateful I am for all the help.

Just submitted the 75 to Natwest. Fingers crossed.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Load of old tosh.

Think they're getting confused with a chargeback, there is NO time limit on a Section 75 claim.

It was definitely a CREDIT card, not a DEBIT card, right?

  • 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 OTHER

 

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

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Formal Complaint to NatWest then.

They've failed to meet their statutory obligations in regards to Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

It might also be worth calling NatWest and stressing that it needs to be raised as a Section 75 claim and not a chargeback.

 

  • Like 2

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 OTHER

 

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

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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...