Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Better version attached with the late appeal explained more clearly for the judge. This will sound silly, but I think it would be a good idea to e-mail it to the court and UKPC on Sunday.  It's probably me being daft, but Sunday is still March, and as it's late, sending it in March rather than April will make it sound like it was less late than it really is.  if you get my drift. You can still pop in a paper version on Tuesday if you want. E-mail address for the court: [email protected] And for UKPC: [email protected]   [email protected] Defendant WS.pdf
    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
  • 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
      • 160 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

Micheyboo vs HSBC ****WON****


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6156 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

  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Mich this is what i did but it depends on your circumstances

the way look at it though would have never seen the money again

but i did + the 40% on a settlement offer I made to MSC.

 

so to me it was like full payment Plus 40% bonus

 

 

Hi NB

 

In the Exact Same position right now the DCA is Is Metropolitan collection services Ltd.

 

I believe they are the in house DCA for HSBC I personally have have gone to MCS and offerd them 60% of the current value of the outstanding amount which they have accepted and I am happy for DG to settle it at the reduced negotiated rate.

 

Mine was for a Managed Loan - I ain't done with Them yet will tackle the ML seperatly.

 

Funny.... how DG New about that it the debt has been passed on to a so called independent company them. I dont recall giving my authority to MCS to talk to anyone about my debt - I would consider this as an invasion of my rights and a serious breach on the DATA protection ACT.. ok I owe them money but I still have rights.

 

I don't think they can just take the payment and pay it off you DCA

 

But you might be able to get a reduced settlement figure with you if you do go down that route offer 50% first however the will try to push it up to 60%.. This will also help your credit scoring your if it has gone to an DCA the will have entered a default against you.

 

 

I can really advise everyone is in a different boat.

 

If i've been helpful in any way....then tip my scales over there!

MCOL Filed 26th Feb 07

:-)

Defended 26th March 07:rolleyes:

PRT @ Cambridge 13th July 07:wink:

1st May Full Offer:grin:

Cheque arrived 16th May8)

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

have you written to the court to tell them it's settled?

 

also, this would be big help to those still worried about court bundles -

Litigation Section - View and print out litigation spreadsheets here please pm a mod with your details:

they just want username, bank, claim date, amount and date settled.

it helps to get some more wins into the info base. thanks -pass this along to others who have settled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No I haven't told the court yet, cos I thought I had to wait until I received my money from HSBC first, that's what I am doing. Court date isn't set yet anyway.

 

I'm confused with what I have to do with the Litigation Spreadsheet etc. and how does it helpt with court bundles, does this relate to me? I PM'd GaryH like you said to say I have accepted an offer but I didn't get a confirmation and my thread title hasn't been changed. Not sure what I am supposed to do!?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm sorry - i got a bit ahead of myself - you are right - that's for after you get your money - which won't be long now.

 

in the court bundle - which you aren't going to need - there is a cases resolved list - you can extract the info by bank, or whatever data base you want - on that litigation section - i'm just showing you it. the idea is to get as many successful litigants as possible to put their details in to show the judge how many have been successful - you need to pm a mod to include your data - after you get your money.

but that's not far - i'm sure for you - you'll get it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

congrats!!!:D

 

Thread title changed.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gary, as Lattie says above I should email a mod to add me on this litigation list. I have received my cheque so will be banking it this week. When it has cleared I shall make a contribution to CAG. Please could you arrange this.

 

The total figure won is £2540.55

 

Thanks for everybody's guidance in all this, I am really happy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Done Mich!!!

 

Your turn next RHS very very soon !!!!

 

 

Oyster

 

If i've been helpful in any way....then tip my scales over there!

MCOL Filed 26th Feb 07

:-)

Defended 26th March 07:rolleyes:

PRT @ Cambridge 13th July 07:wink:

1st May Full Offer:grin:

Cheque arrived 16th May8)

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...