Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The important thing to know is that MET - although they will send you threat after threat about how they will divert a drone from Ukraine and make it fall on your home - hardly ever do court. Even in the very small number of cases where they send court papers, if the Cagger defends, they drop the matter before the hearing.  They have no real intention of putting their rubbish claim before a judge.  The aim is to find motorists who are terrified of the idea of going to court and who will give in when the court papers arrive. Thanks for doing the sticky and well done on finding F18's thread.  Do what they did.  On the first page - I think post 19 - there is the address of the CEO of BP.  Write to them, lay it on thick about being genuine customers in the various premises, mention the small kids, the very short stay time, attach any proof of purchase - and request that they get the invoice cancelled.
    • Thank you for that, I have obviously already been convicted so I think the appeal lodged is for the previous offence? Sorry if that doesn’t make sense. I suppose my only concern is that weds I go there and they don’t let a stat dec happen. If they do then as you say and solicitor says it’s highly likely I’ll be happy with the outcome. But I’m being told there’s no guarantee for the stat dec to be hard Weds as that’s not what the hearing is proposed for. Solicitor has stated that you can put a stat dec before a magistrates at any time so it shouldn’t be a problem.   
    • I re-read the extract from your  solicitor's letter this morning and think I might understand what they have in mind. I believe (and it’s only a guess) their strategy is this: 1.    You will make your SD 2.    You will enter fresh pleas to the four charges (not guilty) but will offer to plead guilty to speeding on the understanding that the FtP charges are dropped. 3.    If this is accepted they will attempt to argue that the two offences were committed “on the same occasion” 4.    You will be sentenced for those two offences (the sentence depending on whether the “same occasion” argument succeeds). They also have a plan in the event that your offer at (2) is unsuccessful and you are convicted again of the 2xFtP charges (and so face disqualification under “totting up”): 5.    They will make an “exceptional hardship” argument to avoid a ban. 6.    If that is unsuccessful they have already lodged an appeal in the Crown Court against that decision. (This is the only “appeal” I can think of). 7.    They plan to ask the court to suspend your ban pending that appeal. If I’m correct, I’m surprised the Crown Court has agreed to accept a speculative appeal (against something that hasn’t happened). The solicitor says this is to lodge it within the normal timescales. But you will have 21 days from the date of your conviction (which will be next Wednesday) to lodge an appeal with the Crown Court, so there is no need for a speculative appeal. I have to say that an application to have your ban suspended pending an appeal is unlikely to succeed. The Magistrates Court is unlikely to agree to it for one very good reason: if they make such an order (suspending your ban until your appeal is heard), all you need to do is not to pursue the appeal and the Magistrates order suspending your ban will remain in place. Hey Presto! No ban and no need for you to trouble with an appeal. Perhaps he will ask for your ban to be suspended for (say) three months or until your appeal is heard (whichever occurs first). This potentially creates a problem because if your appeal is not heard in that time either your ban will kick in or you will have o go back to court to get the suspension extended. But the solicitor obviously knows more about these things than I do. I would want to be very clear about this solicitor’s fees and what he proposes to charge you for. As I said, there is absolutely no need to lodge an appeal with the Crown Court. That can be done if and when it becomes required. But I am still firmly of the opinion that it is overwhelmingly likely that you will not need to progress beyond point 2 above. Point 3 is optional and I don’t know whether he solicitor has made It clear to you that the only thing you will avoid in the event of success is three penalty points. You will still be fined for the second offence and your driving record will still be endorsed with the details, but no penalty points will be imposed. Do let us know how it goes.  
    • I'm really trying, but worst case I can't find what are my options?
    • John Lewis' Privacy Notice states that their CCTV Systems does not use facial recognition or collect biometric data - so I assume it should be fine?    Thank you a lot for your reply. I've scheduled my first therapy session ne t week. Really the time to turn my life around..
  • 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

It can only happen to me


crusty git
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6189 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

I've started a new thread to pull this all together. This anything but a typical claim so dont let it put any one off

 

Like all good stories the punch line is at the end

 

I started with the standard DPA lettter last MAy. Lloyds complied as far as a current account was concerned but failed to include a loan account.

 

I issued proceedings via MCOL for over £700 in respect or charges on the current account and another case to force Lloyds to comply with the DPA.

 

Lloyds defended the £700 with the standard defence, a local judge reviewed the case and decided that my claim was so short of detail that he ordered it struck out. After an awful lot of help from senior members of this site it was reinstated and set for a hearing in January where it was combined with the DPA case

 

Lloyds defended the DPA case and issued a counterclaim - for £390 which was the unpaid balance of the curent account.

(confused? you will be)

 

At the hearing in January the Judge asked me what details the bank had failed to supply and I replied that I particulary wanted the Loan agreement

 

He then asked the solicitor if he had a copy and was told no. after tearing the solicititor of a strip he suspended the hearing for 15 mins so he could arrange to have it faxed to the bank

This the solicitor was unable to do, after a few more choice comments the judge ordered that Lloyds supply the information withinn 14 days an set both cases down for a trial yesterday

 

The solicitors wrote to me stating that "the banks policy is that all cotractual documents are destroyed after 6 years" so nothing was available.

they also produced 2 witness statements, one reducing the amount of their counterclaim by £188. the second confirming the banks Policy on destroying contracts after 6 years and claiming that £110 of my claim is statute barred.

 

I got to court yesterday and met the solicitor for the bank, (who had travelled around 160 miles to get there).

 

The Judge asked the solicitor if the witnesses were at court, they were not. he pointed out that in view of the contents of their statements I might well wish to question them.

He also pointed out that as the babk had not raised the question of limitation in their defence it was inadmissable and asked the solicitor if he would withdraw that witness statement.

The solicitor said he could not therefore the matter must go on to trial rather than being setttled there and then.

 

The Judge then declared an interest and disqulified himself from the case apparently his wife is in the process of claiming charges rom a bank!!!

 

so to sum up after 11 months the case is to be relisted for hearing

and again Lloyds have been sent away with a flea in their ear ant basicly told to settle

 

ALL THIS FOR A CLAIM FOR £700 and DPA failure

 

It can only happen to me

 

J

You may think that but . . ......

____________________________________

Total repaid to date £1947.58

 

Lloyds Currrent a/c £745.27

Moneyclaim filed 17th June

Defence and AQ 25th July. Case struck out 11 Aug

reinstated and hearing 15th Jan 2007

 

Lloyds loan a/c D A request expired 19th June

Proceedings under S7 Data Protection Act issued 29th June defence and counterclaim 27 July

Hearing Jan 3 2007

Listed final hearing April 2007-

Judge declared an interest and disqualified himself

new date to be set

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if she posts here - That could be a new thread for the bear garden - to try and identify her from her posting name

 

Any guesses

J

You may think that but . . ......

____________________________________

Total repaid to date £1947.58

 

Lloyds Currrent a/c £745.27

Moneyclaim filed 17th June

Defence and AQ 25th July. Case struck out 11 Aug

reinstated and hearing 15th Jan 2007

 

Lloyds loan a/c D A request expired 19th June

Proceedings under S7 Data Protection Act issued 29th June defence and counterclaim 27 July

Hearing Jan 3 2007

Listed final hearing April 2007-

Judge declared an interest and disqualified himself

new date to be set

Link to post
Share on other sites

come on you must have some ideas

 

J

You may think that but . . ......

____________________________________

Total repaid to date £1947.58

 

Lloyds Currrent a/c £745.27

Moneyclaim filed 17th June

Defence and AQ 25th July. Case struck out 11 Aug

reinstated and hearing 15th Jan 2007

 

Lloyds loan a/c D A request expired 19th June

Proceedings under S7 Data Protection Act issued 29th June defence and counterclaim 27 July

Hearing Jan 3 2007

Listed final hearing April 2007-

Judge declared an interest and disqualified himself

new date to be set

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nic I would if I knew how to do it, please feel free

 

J

You may think that but . . ......

____________________________________

Total repaid to date £1947.58

 

Lloyds Currrent a/c £745.27

Moneyclaim filed 17th June

Defence and AQ 25th July. Case struck out 11 Aug

reinstated and hearing 15th Jan 2007

 

Lloyds loan a/c D A request expired 19th June

Proceedings under S7 Data Protection Act issued 29th June defence and counterclaim 27 July

Hearing Jan 3 2007

Listed final hearing April 2007-

Judge declared an interest and disqualified himself

new date to be set

Link to post
Share on other sites

brilliant ..judges wife claiming priceless :D :D made my night.:D :D

 

the amount of money they earn :o :rolleyes: just goes to show how snowballing effect this is re what date etc dd's go out etc etc etc etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

dear oh dear Lloyds really do stink

 

looks like you have nothing to worry about though, just a bit drawn out - no way this will go to trial

post office WON 12/11/06

 

abbey.LBA sent 30/10/06.MCOL claim submitted 8/11/06.allocation questionnaire sent 16/12/06.schedule of charges sent 16/12/06.WON

 

2nd abbey claim SAR sent 3/1/07.WON.complaint letter sent 18/1/08

 

alliance and Leicester.WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Itsamoment,

I'm sure that I will win in the end, ive never seen a case drag on like this one, 11 months and counting. I should get a new court date this week that and the judges remarks may concentrate Lloyds minds on the subject

 

J

You may think that but . . ......

____________________________________

Total repaid to date £1947.58

 

Lloyds Currrent a/c £745.27

Moneyclaim filed 17th June

Defence and AQ 25th July. Case struck out 11 Aug

reinstated and hearing 15th Jan 2007

 

Lloyds loan a/c D A request expired 19th June

Proceedings under S7 Data Protection Act issued 29th June defence and counterclaim 27 July

Hearing Jan 3 2007

Listed final hearing April 2007-

Judge declared an interest and disqualified himself

new date to be set

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still waiting for the next court date

You may think that but . . ......

____________________________________

Total repaid to date £1947.58

 

Lloyds Currrent a/c £745.27

Moneyclaim filed 17th June

Defence and AQ 25th July. Case struck out 11 Aug

reinstated and hearing 15th Jan 2007

 

Lloyds loan a/c D A request expired 19th June

Proceedings under S7 Data Protection Act issued 29th June defence and counterclaim 27 July

Hearing Jan 3 2007

Listed final hearing April 2007-

Judge declared an interest and disqualified himself

new date to be set

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the support nic. One thing has been niggling away at my tiny mind. I yhink that I am correct in thinking that if a bank (or anyone for that matter) lies to a court in evidence or a statement it is a serious criminal matter.

 

The witness statement of the branch manager states very clearly that The policy of the bank is to destroy all contractual document after 6 years, therefore as the loan in question was taken out in 1998 the documents were destroyed in 2004. The same information is repeated in a letter from [problem].

 

If this statement is true then all contracts and contracts with the bank would be destroyed after 6 years -- I dont think so

 

I have checked the statement and this is exactly what was said

 

Any thoughts any one

J

You may think that but . . ......

____________________________________

Total repaid to date £1947.58

 

Lloyds Currrent a/c £745.27

Moneyclaim filed 17th June

Defence and AQ 25th July. Case struck out 11 Aug

reinstated and hearing 15th Jan 2007

 

Lloyds loan a/c D A request expired 19th June

Proceedings under S7 Data Protection Act issued 29th June defence and counterclaim 27 July

Hearing Jan 3 2007

Listed final hearing April 2007-

Judge declared an interest and disqualified himself

new date to be set

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought they weren't allowed to actually destroy ANY data? Im sure i read that somewhere. After 6 years they put it on microfiche or some other compact storage system to store it all i think. Someone please correct me if im wrong. :o

Abbey - *SETTLED IN FULL!* ;)

-£445 refunded after one phonecall

HERE

 

Lloyds - Reclaiming Charges ***WON!***

-09/05/07 - Prelim delivered

-22/05/07 - LBA sent - no response

-11/07/07 - Filed at court

- 26/07/07 - Full settlement offer!!!! Donation made ;)

HERE

 

Next - Trying to Sue us with no agreement! :lol:

-29/06/07 - Defence filed

-16/08/07 - AQ filed

-19/09/07 - Claim struck out!! :p

HERE and continued HERE

 

PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES IF I'VE HELPED!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that you are right - Has anyone had contractual documents from Lloyds that are more than 6 yrs Old?

 

j

You may think that but . . ......

____________________________________

Total repaid to date £1947.58

 

Lloyds Currrent a/c £745.27

Moneyclaim filed 17th June

Defence and AQ 25th July. Case struck out 11 Aug

reinstated and hearing 15th Jan 2007

 

Lloyds loan a/c D A request expired 19th June

Proceedings under S7 Data Protection Act issued 29th June defence and counterclaim 27 July

Hearing Jan 3 2007

Listed final hearing April 2007-

Judge declared an interest and disqualified himself

new date to be set

Link to post
Share on other sites

The plot moves on -

Another preliminary hearing this one for June 18th. This is turning into pure farce.

Great theatre but its not getting my money back -- Yet

 

J

You may think that but . . ......

____________________________________

Total repaid to date £1947.58

 

Lloyds Currrent a/c £745.27

Moneyclaim filed 17th June

Defence and AQ 25th July. Case struck out 11 Aug

reinstated and hearing 15th Jan 2007

 

Lloyds loan a/c D A request expired 19th June

Proceedings under S7 Data Protection Act issued 29th June defence and counterclaim 27 July

Hearing Jan 3 2007

Listed final hearing April 2007-

Judge declared an interest and disqualified himself

new date to be set

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am no longer welcome on CAG

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TES

 

Tomterm8 I owe you a very large pint Thanks

 

I have t think about this now, the loan account that they cannot produce the agreement for is paid in full, I am reclaiming the charges for late payment of installments.

 

So the loan itself may be gone, but what about the interest on it?

 

Advice any one

 

Thanks

 

John

You may think that but . . ......

____________________________________

Total repaid to date £1947.58

 

Lloyds Currrent a/c £745.27

Moneyclaim filed 17th June

Defence and AQ 25th July. Case struck out 11 Aug

reinstated and hearing 15th Jan 2007

 

Lloyds loan a/c D A request expired 19th June

Proceedings under S7 Data Protection Act issued 29th June defence and counterclaim 27 July

Hearing Jan 3 2007

Listed final hearing April 2007-

Judge declared an interest and disqualified himself

new date to be set

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am no longer welcome on CAG

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this is not 'helping' in any shape or form, but i have to just say every time i see your username 'crusty git' it makes me giigle...:lol:

Lovin it ....

XxXxX

:p

If I have been helpful, PLEASE click the scales

 

 

You may receive differing advice as people have had different experiences. Please use your own judgement in deciding whose advice to take. If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional. Any advice I offer is done so informally, without prejudice & without liability.

 

 

I WON !!!!

 

 

HERE WE GO AGAIN .... BRING IT ON

 

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blame my wife for the name I simply omitted the word OLD from her description. but payback time will come in August at the Petrerborough CAG Partyin he park - she will be known as Mrs Git.

 

J

You may think that but . . ......

____________________________________

Total repaid to date £1947.58

 

Lloyds Currrent a/c £745.27

Moneyclaim filed 17th June

Defence and AQ 25th July. Case struck out 11 Aug

reinstated and hearing 15th Jan 2007

 

Lloyds loan a/c D A request expired 19th June

Proceedings under S7 Data Protection Act issued 29th June defence and counterclaim 27 July

Hearing Jan 3 2007

Listed final hearing April 2007-

Judge declared an interest and disqualified himself

new date to be set

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Right the day for the preliminary hearing finally arrived, armed with two large folders and numerous printouts of CAG threads I atteded court.

At five minutes to go the same solicitor apperaed with a big smile on his face, obvioously regarding me as a long lost friend.

He was very pleased to offer me a settlement of abot 60% of the claim and took some pleasure in telling me that LTSB won a case the other day.

 

I must watch too much daytime TV, I thought for a moment and said No Deal.

After a bit of half hearted haggling guess what -- yes he settled for the full amount.

 

Date of issue of MCOL 17 June 2006

settled 18 June 2007

 

As I said at the start of this thread this story is not typical dont let it put any one off - It can only happen to me

 

J

You may think that but . . ......

____________________________________

Total repaid to date £1947.58

 

Lloyds Currrent a/c £745.27

Moneyclaim filed 17th June

Defence and AQ 25th July. Case struck out 11 Aug

reinstated and hearing 15th Jan 2007

 

Lloyds loan a/c D A request expired 19th June

Proceedings under S7 Data Protection Act issued 29th June defence and counterclaim 27 July

Hearing Jan 3 2007

Listed final hearing April 2007-

Judge declared an interest and disqualified himself

new date to be set

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right the day for the preliminary hearing finally arrived, armed with two large folders and numerous printouts of CAG threads I atteded court.

At five minutes to go the same solicitor apperaed with a big smile on his face, obvioously regarding me as a long lost friend.

He was very pleased to offer me a settlement of abot 60% of the claim and took some pleasure in telling me that LTSB won a case the other day.

 

I must watch too much daytime TV, I thought for a moment and said No Deal.

After a bit of half hearted haggling guess what -- yes he settled for the full amount.

 

Date of issue of MCOL 17 June 2006

settled 18 June 2007

 

As I said at the start of this thread this story is not typical dont let it put any one off - It can only happen to me

 

J

 

Congratulations!!!

 

the virtual pints are on you:)

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...