Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • notodebt
      SJP letter from courts - Car tax fine

      By notodebt · Posted

      Thanks DX , true I was reading it as my own licence when I can now see it is the VED thanks for the clarification. As for the payments that does make sense and I will give them a call today. I have to watch the date as I have 21 days from the 29th May to respond to plea of guilty or not.
    • Colosseo
      IDR letter re supposed debt to CBQ - scotland

      By Colosseo · Posted

      This is the latest response from IDR. I know exactly what has happened - I left Qatar in 2006 leaving behind card debt of QAR13,000 (unintentionally, I thought it was paid off). When I visited Qatar for a weekend in 2012, I was blocked from leaving the country - ended up having to go to the Court, met with the bank and negitiated a settlement  - they wanted about QAR90,000 in total and supposedly agreed on QAR40,000 to settle completely. Unfortunately, I only have a pay-in receipt for that and no confirmation the whole debt was settled: I was so focussed on getting the exit ban lifted. Anyway, I left and I have visited Qatar since then with no issue. My concern is that the statute of limitations  will run from 2012, rather than 2006. Should I continue to ignore or explain to IDR that I don't agree there is an exisiting debt? IDR 10062024 redacted.pdf
    • NewsBot
      dbgmarkets-ink.com (Clone of FCA Authorised Firm)

      By NewsBot · Posted

      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
    • dx100uk
      SJP letter from courts - Car tax fine

      By dx100uk · Posted

      as with some of your threads in the past. you are not reading things carefully and understanding things properly by going off on assumptions. not sure where you are getting your driving licence is being revoked from? nowhere do they use that word. nothing to do with it. vehicle excise licence. (Road Tax), a VEL cannot be revoked only voided. you are also wrong and nowhere does the DVLA state they cancelled the DD.  the court summons clearly states in the DVLA statement: it was your cancelling/reclaim of the DD on 15-02-2024 that caused this, NOTHING to do with the DVLA, they did not revoke the VEL. as they received no payment, on 02.05.2024 the VEL was Voided. it appears you have got the new DD setup wrong to the wrong DVLA account/ref number/VEL number. they have not received the payments to the correct VEL. i would be ringing DVLA and finding out where these payments are on their system and get them attributed to the correct VEL. that should solve the problem.
    • NewsBot
      PrettyLittleThing faces backlash after scrapping free returns

      By NewsBot · Posted

      Its UK customers must now pay £1.99 to return clothes, with the cost deducted from their refund.View the full article

  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • 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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • 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
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • 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
        • Like
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Tom Brennan v NatWest - This is a must-read!!!

calvi36

By calvi36
in General

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5940 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

PPMAN159

PPMAN159

Posted
Posted

I love the way that Cobbetts say that their cleint is confident that it will be successful in the final hearing and then they cave in and pay up.

 

If they are that confident then why do they not take the case to its conclusion?

 

The reason is that they know that they will lose

PPMAN159

 

If this comment has helped please click on the scales.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The cobbett slayer

The cobbett slayer

Posted
Posted

It's nice to see that they are being consistant.

 

The wording quoted from Cobbetts letter is identical to the letter they sent me with my cheque for £17000.

 

It proves that they are determined not to disclose actual costs. I had an order for disclosure but they settled on the day it was due.

Advice given is either my experience or my opinion and is given without liability. If in doubt, consult a qualified professional.

If you PM me for advice I will only reply in your own thread

 

Never under estimate your ability. I won over £17,000!

For the full story - look here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/NatWest-bank/17630-thecobbettslayer-NatWest.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bong

Guest bong

Posted
Posted
35k and they settled to save their costs. WHAT A LOAD OF BOL***

 

I agree. If bank won they would recover their costs from the claimant anyway and save themselves further litigation costs and settlement payouts 'cos people would think twice about claiming!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bong

Guest bong

Posted
Posted

I'd like to see the courts striking out all bank defences on the grounds of abuse of process and being branded vexatious litigants. It can't be far off after a year of claims, surely?

Link to post
Share on other sites
The cobbett slayer

The cobbett slayer

Posted
Posted

If (as we all know to be the case) bank charges are unlawful penalties, bravery doesn't come into it. The judge has to make his ruling according to the law. The problem is getting the banks to actually stand before a judge.

Advice given is either my experience or my opinion and is given without liability. If in doubt, consult a qualified professional.

If you PM me for advice I will only reply in your own thread

 

Never under estimate your ability. I won over £17,000!

For the full story - look here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/NatWest-bank/17630-thecobbettslayer-NatWest.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bong

Guest bong

Posted
Posted
Is there a judge brave enough to be the first to do this?

 

there have been a couple of courts sriking out on the abuse of process order on the judges own initiative but I dont know if courts operate in such a way as to make a uniform approach across all courts a possibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites
PPMAN159

PPMAN159

Posted
Posted

So can a judge rule that a bank is wasting court time?

 

I assume that each case is allocated a time slot on a particular day and yet prior to that the banks tends to settle the claim.

 

My view is that there must be more important cases that need the courts attention so to have these cases allocated and then in effect cancelled at the last minute seems to be an abuse of the courts time.

PPMAN159

 

If this comment has helped please click on the scales.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bong

Guest bong

Posted
Posted

I've even seen a few cases where the court has allocated a 1 minute hearing because they know what will happen!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mistermind

Mistermind

Posted
Posted

Those who shy away from county court cannot escape from the court of public opinion.

 

After Diana's death tabloid journalists were regarded like lepers. Now politicians are persons from whom you would not buy a used car.

 

Bankers cannot see they are becoming a public laughing stock.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
PPMAN159

PPMAN159

Posted
Posted

The banks know that even though they are having to pay back millions they will still be able to find ways to get this back and more on top.

 

There was a post on CAG yesterday saying that some one had just joined Barclays and that for every new account that they opended they were to be paid £400!!!

 

So bank clerks are now no more than salesman hiding under a different name.

PPMAN159

 

If this comment has helped please click on the scales.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mistermind

Mistermind

Posted
Posted

bong,

 

Is it possible to collate a list of dates and courts which dished out strikeouts for abuse of legal process?

 

While county courts cannot establish binding precedents, judges would understandably take an interest in other judgments.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bong

Guest bong

Posted
Posted

It is possible by searching threads but I'm not sure if individual judges are that interested in the odd quirk here and there to be honest. It would be nice to think otherwise but I suspect that it would require a directive from a senior judge before there would be any change on a global scale.

Link to post
Share on other sites
PPMAN159

PPMAN159

Posted
Posted

I know that the Brennan case it not specifically about the charges that have been levied but if he wins(or should that be when he wins) what are the implications not just for Nat West claiments but the market as a whole?

PPMAN159

 

If this comment has helped please click on the scales.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bong

Guest bong

Posted
Posted

My guess is that they are piling money into defending this because they know that if they lose it will open the floodgates to similar damages claims. I don't think it would only affect Natwest either.

 

I wonder if they would take it to appeal if they lose. I think court of appeal is precedent setting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The cobbett slayer

The cobbett slayer

Posted
Posted

Bong - were they strike outs for abuse of process or was it that the defence was flawed under part 16 CPR.

 

I know that Boston CC threw a few out and there was almost certainly an element of judges chatting in chambers involved there.

 

I agree with the comment by PPman. Cobbetts must be raking it in. They sent a barrister to Mansfield CC to defend my application for an order under Part 18 and lost. Must have cost Natwest a fortune!

Advice given is either my experience or my opinion and is given without liability. If in doubt, consult a qualified professional.

If you PM me for advice I will only reply in your own thread

 

Never under estimate your ability. I won over £17,000!

For the full story - look here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/NatWest-bank/17630-thecobbettslayer-NatWest.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
PPMAN159

PPMAN159

Posted
Posted

If they feel that confident that they are able to defend this case why have they not defended others-they could have put a stop to this months ago.

 

I suppose that the feel that they have as Brennan has them by the short and curlies and has given them no alternative but to attend.

PPMAN159

 

If this comment has helped please click on the scales.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bong

Guest bong

Posted
Posted
Bong - were they strike outs for abuse of process or was it that the defence was flawed under part 16 CPR.

 

I know that Boston CC threw a few out and there was almost certainly an element of judges chatting in chambers involved there.

 

 

I think Lincoln was one of the courts. they were strike outs for abuse of process because no defence had actually been taken as far as a hearing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mistermind

Mistermind

Posted
Posted

RBS-NatWest are the biggest retail bank group in the world, and I believe now the biggest earning group in UK private sector. Lets say they have a ballpark 25% share of the 4.5 billion per annum unlawful charges, if so Cobbetts are defending a billionpound per annum income stream against Tom Brennan.

 

God knows what a battalion of lawyers RBS-NatWest have deployed against Tom, burning the midnight candle looking for loopholes.

 

Tom said in his Radio 4 interview he has a team of colleagues working with him -- I hope so. But this 30-year-old has been short of the readies within the past 6 years, and is currently not earning. Battle will be joined in 13 days, and I do not believe we should take Tom's victory for granted.

 

For Bankfodder (I would PM if only your mailbox were not overflowing):

 

I have 2 cheques burning a hole in my pocket -- £10 for CAG, £10 for Tom Brennan. Please tell me where to send them.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...