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
      • 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

The nature of Small Claims


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6498 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

Can a Small Claim be upheld in part, or is it all-or-nothing?

 

When I say "upheld in part", if your claim asks for three things, you are only awarded two (e.g. out of charges, interest, and costs, only charges and costs are awarded), or an amount smaller than your claim is awarded.

 

 

Thanks.

HSBCLloyds TSBcontractual interestNew Tax Creditscoming for you?NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites

The amount you are claiming is the amount owed to you.

 

There cannot be any fluctuation in this because, due to the nature of the claim, it is what it is. Money that is owed to you.

 

If along the course of your action you decide to settle for a lesser amount, then that it is up to you, but this is usually done out of court, and in return for the legal action to be dropped.

 

I hope this helps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, it doesn't. What I'm asking is if the court disagrees with some part of the claim, is the whole claim lost, or will I just be awarded the rest?

 

For instance, if I file a claim for:

  • excess charges by a bank
  • interest paid on those charges to that bank
  • charge for filing the claim (claim is around £600, so I'm assuming a cost of around £30)
  • compensation for undue distress caused
  • any "collateral damage"
  • the fabled "Final Judgement" (5b in the PoC template)

and the court decides that I am only entitled to the first three, do I get judgement for the first three, or does my claim fail entirely?

HSBCLloyds TSBcontractual interestNew Tax Creditscoming for you?NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites

So if (should the case come to court) I include the 5b request in the claim ("a declaration from this honourable court that the term of the contract leading to the application of the charges is unenforceable"), would I put any monetary claim (currently around £600) at risk?

HSBCLloyds TSBcontractual interestNew Tax Creditscoming for you?NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could do so. In fact, I almost did in my first claim until Bankfodder scared the living daylights out of me about the cost implications of doing so. Seeking that particular declaration would probably move the case off the small claims track and you probably don't want to do that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
meagain, how do you quantify undue distress caused? Thanks.

 

Good question. :-)

 

Pick out a number that would seem reasonable if you were being offered the amount as compensation in addition (and isn't taking the mick - I'm looking at tacking on £50 token for being screwed around every summer for the last 4 years). I would imagine the general principle to restorative justice is that you have the right to be in the position you would otherwise be in, both financially and mentally - however, since they can't retroactively put your mind at rest, they could at least give you something in lieu.

HSBCLloyds TSBcontractual interestNew Tax Creditscoming for you?NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be surpirsed if you got damages for stress and inconvenience etc. Our courts are loathe to pluck figures out of the air for such heads of damage in contract cases and where there is no adequate and quantifiable evidence of the damage suffered.

 

The only claims where such payments appear to be made routinely are in claims for ruined holidays - then claimants are awarded sums for loss of enjoyment/distress but then these sums are usually small.

 

I remember one other case where a family paid a fortune for a lovely house. The surveyor they employed had neglected to notice a blumming great crack which showed that the kitchen was actually falling off the side of the house! It had to be propped and closed off as soon as they moved in.

 

They sued. It took 2-3 years for the trial to come on at the high court and they had lived with no kitchen with two young babies for all of this time and had loads of stress/aggravation. They won their main claim in negligence against the surveyor in the high court and were also awarded only £200 each for the stress/inconvenience.

 

But as the claim for charges is a small claim might as well stick it in - nothing to lose I guess :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 11 March 2019.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

HSBCLloyds TSBcontractual interestNew Tax Creditscoming for you?NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6498 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...