Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Shabby...reclaiming **WON AFTER ISSUED SCOTTISH CLAIM**


chocolatte
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6232 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 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi all, Now that I have won my claim for bank charges from the Abbey I have just submitted my claim to the court to ask for my costs...

 

My Address

The Court

 

18 May 2007

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Me Vs Abbey

 

I wish to inform the court that the claim as detailed above, in which I am the Claimant, has now been settled. The Defender paid the full amount claimed, namely £1350.44.

As such, no further action is necessary in respect of this claim.

However, I believe that the Defender has behaved unreasonably in their approach to defending this claim, not least because I believe the Defender had no intention of ever defending this claim at a hearing.

I also enclose a list of all cases of which I am aware in which Abbey Bank was the Defender. Every one of these cases was settled in full before a hearing despite a defence being entered by the Defender.

Further, in relation to my claim, the Defender failed to file any documents to the court, breaching the orders made by Sheriff Officer on 24 April 2007. Again this is typical of the Defender’s approach in other cases of which I am aware.

The Defender’s unreasonable approach in defending a claim it always intended to settle has directly incurred myself unnecessary costs as outlined in the attached list of costs, and therefore I respectfully request that the Court consider awarding these costs, or such costs as it deems appropriate, as outlined in the Civil Procedure Rules 27.14(2)(g):

(2) The court may not order a party to pay a sum to another party in respect of that other party's costs, fees and expenses, including those relating to an appeal, except – (g) such further costs as the court may assess by the summary procedure and order to be paid by a party who has behaved unreasonably.

Please accept my sincere apologies for the waste of the courts valuable time spent processing and managing this claim. I do wish to inform the court however, that the decision to enter into this litigation was not taken lightly, and that ample opportunity was given to the Defender to resolve this matter by way of negotiation before proceeding with this claim. Regretfully, all attempts at meaningful dialogue were either rebutted or ignored. A copy of this letter, with attachments, has been sent to the Defender.

Yours faithfully,

Me

The Court

Between

 

Me

And

Abbey Bank

1. 4 letters sent by 1st Class recorded delivery at £2 each to cover postage and stationary is £8

2. The total cost of preparing the document bundles for each claim in triplicate is £24.78.

- paper cost of £20.00 (500 sheets per pack)

- printer ink cost of £1.99 per cartridge x2 = £3.98

- travel cost in fuel to and from post office 1 mile each way at £0.40 per mile is £0.80.

3. Time spent in researching Consumer Law, preparing letters, document bundles and case notes from start to finnish, running to and from the courts submitting papers, from 15 January 2007 to 24 April 2007, is at least 40 hours. Total at £9.25 per hour is £370.00.

4. Loss of time at court hearing, 2 hours at £9.25 per hour is £18.50.

Fuel travelling to and from court 2miles each way at £0.40 per mile is £1.60.

 

TOTAL COSTS: £422.88.

I will let you all know how this goes, probably a wasted excersice as I feel that the court here is a bit behind when it comes to consumer law, I get the impression the most they deal with here are parking fines, and chavs steeling from the local shops, lol :rolleyes:

 

 

:DABBEY-WON! £1,359.34

:confused:CAPITAL ONE WON £1,523.27+£39court fees.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The court have sent back my Extract of Dismissal, so as far as they are concerned that's that and I should have claimed costs either before the case was dismissed or in court on the hearing date. Grrrr!:mad:

:DABBEY-WON! £1,359.34

:confused:CAPITAL ONE WON £1,523.27+£39court fees.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Annoying.

 

So are the court saying that if you are made an offer and you want costs on top of this you should still go ahead with your hearing?

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Annoying.

 

So are the court saying that if you are made an offer and you want costs on top of this you should still go ahead with your hearing?

I think so Rory, the jist I got was that I should have went to court and asked for the costs then, I can recall the claim, just searching through all the legal mumbo jumbo on the Scottish Courts Home Page site now.

:DABBEY-WON! £1,359.34

:confused:CAPITAL ONE WON £1,523.27+£39court fees.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...