Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I doubt HMCTS holds any data on whether arrests by AEAs required police assistance.  They couldn't or wouldn't provide data on how many of warrants issued were successfully executed - just the number issued!  In my experience, arrest warrants whether with or without bail are [surprisingly] carried out with little or no fuss.  I think it's about how you treat people - a little respect and courtesy goes a long way. If you treat people badly they will react the same way. Occasions when police are called to assist are not common and, having undertaken or managed many thousands of these over the years, I can only recall a handful of occasions when police assistance was necessary. On one occasion, many years ago, I arrested and transported a man from Hampshire to Bristol prison on a committal warrant. It was just me and he was no problem. I didn't know the Bristol area (pre Sat Nav) and he was kind enough to provide directions - seems he knew the prison.  One young chap on another committal warrant jumped out of his back window and I had to chase him across several garden fences.  When he gave up (we were both knackered) I agreed to drive by his girlfriend's house to say farewell for a while.  I gave them a few moments and he was fine. The most difficult are breach warrants but mainly in locating the defendant as they don't want to go back to prison - can't blame them.  These were always dealt with by the police until the Access to Justice Act transferred responsibility from them to the magistrates' courts. The fact was the police did not actively pursue them and generally only executed them when they arrested someone for something else and found they had a breach warrant outstanding.  Hence the transfer of responsibility.
    • thats down to mcol making that option available for you to select, you cant force it. typically if there are known processing delays at northants bulk it will be atleast 14 days later if not more.
    • Thanks   Noting the day to apply for default judgement if necessary
    • nope, as the display model was not the colour the customer wanted. but your question is totally immaterial anyway as custom built doesn't come into it. dx
    • as long as aos is done by day 19 from the date on the claimform they get a total of 33 days to file a defence. (whereby the date top right on the claimform is ONE in the 33 day count) dx  
  • 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

Settlement Discussion Due - Any Advice?


Tuddsy
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6334 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

Following notification of a prelim court hearing on 20th March, I emailed Abbey asking whom i needed to forward any correspondance to, and asking if they would ike to negotiate settlement prior to me compiling the court bundle and adding prep costs etc.

I have received a reply saying they cannot get to my file this week but would like to discuss settlement next week and will arrange a call. This is where i would like any advice before the due call, and if there is anything i should be aware of.

 

My original claim went in MCOL on 2nd Oct and was £678 charges, £103.26 interest and £80 court fee = £861.26. Then there is any interest up to date. Does anyone have any idea or experience as to what to accept? I know it obviously could depend on individual circumstances, but for me it's more a matter of principal. I don't want them to get off lightly, with the agro they have created for myself and all you others in the same situation. On the other hand, i don't want to push unreasonably, saving the hassle of compiling the court bundle and time off for court etc.

Any ideas or views from others would be great. I thought about taking original amount, adding interest to date then offering 95%?

:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

sounds fine to me, but I would let them do the talking because they will offer less first of all, but let them know that you are not adverse to compiling the court bundle and that will cost them more and that you will accept no less that 95% of your TOTAL costs. If they are unwilling in this, terminate the conversation.

 

Let us know how it goes

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a look at the last page or two of this thread

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/19778-teebum-abbey.html

 

Teebum got 100% settlement plus an amount for the time he had spent on the claim of 49 hours at £9.25 per hour. To be honest if you tell them you want more for all your trouble they seem to be giving it. No need to go mad but a reasonable figure would be paid rather than going to all the trouble of the work involved.

 

The negotiations were with Inga Kirkman who seems to be doing most of the claims

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for advice all.

The email i received was from James Arrandale, so i guess thats who i'll be talking to. Seems the majority vote is settle for the full 100%.

 

I'll let you know how it goes, hopefully some time next week.

Link to post
Share on other sites

dont be lulled by his sex god voice on the phone :D saying that, I dealt with him and he is very reasonable to deal with

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there could you please let me know the email address you used my court date is for the 21st of March and I would also like to try and settle.

 

Good luck! don't forget to let us know how it goes:)

Buffy:wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

he is now to be known as the LGIL - Love God in London LOL to replace our young man at DLA who we dont deal with anymore

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...