Announcements
-
-
Tweets
-
Posts
-
Hi again all, below is another email they sent me, I just don't want to get in trouble or things to get worse with this crowd but I am taking your advice here. Anyway advice would be appreciated. I am contacting you again after having tried to contact you both by email on 03/04/2024 and 10/04/2024, and by telephone on 10/04/2024 and 17/04/2024 to discuss the matter in relation to the regularization of the SOLIDWORKS case against xxx our company. This is an urgent legal matter. Please contact me at your earliest convenience - +44 2921 920 296. If we do not recieve a response before 24/04/2024, we will assume that you are not willing to settle this dispute amicably. The case will then be referred back to our client with whom, ultimately, the final decision lies on the enforcement of their intellectual property rights. Yours sincerel y, Rhys -
If you do get a letter of Claim and or Pre Action Protocol pack 15. Where there has been non-compliance with a pre-action protocol or this Practice Direction, the court may order that (a) the parties are relieved of the obligation to comply or further comply with the pre-action protocol or this Practice Direction; (b) the proceedings are stayed while particular steps are taken to comply with the pre-action protocol or this Practice Direction; (c) sanctions are to be applied. 16. The court will consider the effect of any non-compliance when deciding whether to impose any sanctions which may include— (a) an order that the party at fault pays the costs of the proceedings, or part of the costs of the other party or parties; (b) an order that the party at fault pay those costs on an indemnity basis; (c) if the party at fault is a claimant who has been awarded a sum of money, an order depriving that party of interest on that sum for a specified period, and/or awarding interest at a lower rate than would otherwise have been awarded; (d) if the party at fault is a defendant, and the claimant has been awarded a sum of money, an order awarding interest on that sum for a specified period at a higher rate, (not exceeding 10% above base rate), than the rate which would otherwise have been awarded. https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct . -
Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article -
Thanks all! My wife was driving at the time (took our daughter to get new school uniform) and I wasn't there so I'm not sure what the signage was actually like, but yes, Parkopedia says 2:30, so it's barely over that. I will check it out with her when she gets home later, I haven't even told her about this yet as she'll probably be quite upset. So - likely my best response at this stage is to just wait it out until a Letter Before Claim arrives? -
check mcol does it state DQ N180 sent to you? if it does then: https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/347310-legal-n180-directions-questionnaire-small-claims-track/#comment-5088148 3 copies yes to mediation (unless you filed our Statute Barred Defence OR this is a claim for a Private Parking Ticket) 1 wit you Suitability for determination without a hearing? no (that the issues are so complex they need to be argued orally') the rest is obv 1 to the court 1 to their sols (omit phone/sig/email) if no sols send to claimant 1 for your file dx
-
-
Our picks
-
If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,
If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.-
- 1 reply
-
-
Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld
ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,
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
-
-
A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report
WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,
Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299-
- 161 replies
-
-
Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available
BankFodder posted a post in a topic,
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
-
-
style="text-align: center;">
Thread Locked
because no one has posted on it for the last 6040 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
-
Recently Browsing 0 Caggers
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Have we helped you ...?
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS
Recommended Posts