Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • have you proved at what house was it left outside of & stolen from ...yours or the neighbours? the fact it was for a warranty return means nothing. neither does it that the repairer/retailer have special instructions with DPD for them not to leave a parcel outside unless specified by a customer ..you might have overruled them with your instructions on the DPD website, you stated, neighbour/safe space?? if it was left outside your door, which you appear to indicate RE: i can't see you winning this...you created your own problem with what you put on the DPD website?    
    • oh well i wonder what new fake documents they have made up then...for them to try this.... just to check nothing funky like Link have filed an n244 to lift the stay and strike out her defence....she hasnt moved since last court comms has she?   is this an n24? bit unusual for a 13mts stay to just be lifted... has she not received anything from link/kearns in the last fw weeks like a docs bundle? bit like this thread... https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/466576-lc-assetlinkkearns-claim-form-2-mbna-cc/?do=findComment&comment=5256397  
    • if the agreement was taken out jan 23, then she has not reached the 1/3rd mark so the car has not become protected goods under the consumer credit act.  this puts her in a very very vulnerable position regarding ever keeping the car....whereby once they have issued a default notice they can legally send a guy with a flatbed (though they are NOT BAILIFFS and have ZERO legal powers) to collect the car.  if the car is kept on the public highway then they can simply take it away and she will legally owe the whole stated amount on the agreement AND lose the car. if it's on private property i'e like a driveway, ok they shouldn't take it without her agreeing, but if they do, it's not really on but its better than a court case and an inevitable loss with the granting a return of goods order. are these 'health reasons' likely to resolve themselves in the very short term (like a couple of months?) and can she immediately begin working again ? i'e has she got a job or would have to find one?  answer the above and we'll try and help. but she looks to be between rock and a hard place . whatever happens she will still have to pay the loan off...car or no car....unless you can appeal to the finance company's better nature using health reasons to back off for xxx months.
    • no need to use it. it doubles the size of the thread and makes it very diff to find replies on small screens too. just like @username it - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread already inc you ...gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.
  • 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

Is Something Missing??


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6144 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

no, Gary, it just means that if they want to object to the strike out, they have to file by a certain date, that date being decided by a judge, but, the judge may not give them the option, so leave it as it is

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

again thanks lula, you are a legend..

 

thats me done, can i simply send the lot to abbey and bring in a copy to the court as it is (as in, do i need to mark it as a copy for each, or will the same thing do for both of them?)

13 July 06 - Data Protection Act request sent to NatWest :-|

7 August - Natwest want to 'discuss my account':???:

9 August - "HISTORIC STMNT FEE- £5.00" showing on online bank

16 August - Statements Arrived, tatty brown sellotaped envelope:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

so, if you have marked them then thats fine, although I would make sure that the one for the bank has your name and claim number and address on it

  • Haha 1

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

right, sorted.

 

thank you lula, appreciate the help :)

13 July 06 - Data Protection Act request sent to NatWest :-|

7 August - Natwest want to 'discuss my account':???:

9 August - "HISTORIC STMNT FEE- £5.00" showing on online bank

16 August - Statements Arrived, tatty brown sellotaped envelope:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for that robdblynd..

 

though i have just seen that i have somehow been a real donut :(

 

i sent off the AQ with its attachments to abbey, but on attachment 2A (draft order), i may have the same name, mine for claimant and defendant for the very first bit...

 

im giving the aq plus attachments into court now, correctly printed, but does anyone know how big a deal this will be? :confused:

 

feel so stupid, only hoping the courts' copy is more important....

13 July 06 - Data Protection Act request sent to NatWest :-|

7 August - Natwest want to 'discuss my account':???:

9 August - "HISTORIC STMNT FEE- £5.00" showing on online bank

16 August - Statements Arrived, tatty brown sellotaped envelope:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

any ideas on that one guys? sorry to bug but i cant stop wondering about it...

 

also, i received a copy of abbeys AQ today and have some questions on that;

 

"A - Settlement

 

Do you wish there to be a one month stay to atempt to settle the claim, either by informal discussion or by alternate dispute resolution?"

 

they said yes.... is this simply them stalling, or is it likely they will make an offer? or if they are just wasting more time, can anything be done about it?

 

"D - Case Management Information

 

.....Witnesses

 

So far as you know at this stage, what witnesses of fact do you intend to call at the trial or final hearing including, if apropriate, yourself?"

 

they have 'Bank Officer' as witness to 'Charges applied to account'

 

is that normal?also the 'amount of claim in dispute' is £200.02 more than the amount i have on my spreadsheet.....any ideas?

 

 

currently nail biting the work day away....

 

 

thanks in advance, Gary

13 July 06 - Data Protection Act request sent to NatWest :-|

7 August - Natwest want to 'discuss my account':???:

9 August - "HISTORIC STMNT FEE- £5.00" showing on online bank

16 August - Statements Arrived, tatty brown sellotaped envelope:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right gary, Witness for yourself is "nil", and as to the differing amounts, if you are sure that yours are correct, use them. Dont worry about what theyt put on their AQ, its a load of bologny anyway :-))

 

Oh yes and with the settlement, you put no, it will just delay matters and should concentrate their little minds

 

Hope this helps

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks lula, i had already put 'no' on mine, and given it in, was just wondering as they had put 'yes' on theirs..

 

what do you think to my previous predicament, about the banks copy having the same name on a draft order... but i corrected it for the courts copy...

13 July 06 - Data Protection Act request sent to NatWest :-|

7 August - Natwest want to 'discuss my account':???:

9 August - "HISTORIC STMNT FEE- £5.00" showing on online bank

16 August - Statements Arrived, tatty brown sellotaped envelope:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gary, I dont think it matters one iota, you are only giving them a copy as a curtesy, as long as the court one is correct, its ok :-)

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

:wink: thanks again

 

 

EDIT - sorry forgot to ask, would it be wise to go through the court bundle stuff now or wait to see if i get a court date?

13 July 06 - Data Protection Act request sent to NatWest :-|

7 August - Natwest want to 'discuss my account':???:

9 August - "HISTORIC STMNT FEE- £5.00" showing on online bank

16 August - Statements Arrived, tatty brown sellotaped envelope:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

cleaning the garage out today, you always catch me when i am cleaning or tidying LOL

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

haha, anything to get away from cleaning eh?

 

either that or you love me that much :grin:

 

but seriously i appreciate all the help you have given me :)

13 July 06 - Data Protection Act request sent to NatWest :-|

7 August - Natwest want to 'discuss my account':???:

9 August - "HISTORIC STMNT FEE- £5.00" showing on online bank

16 August - Statements Arrived, tatty brown sellotaped envelope:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

ok, im back..

 

been away for a little while but now im back and the court date is fast approaching, so i need to get cracking with the court bundle...so i guess there will be more questions soon on the way

 

EDIT - adding this Q..

 

for the list of settled cases for the court bundle, or 'cases relied upon', im assuming i am using the relevant bank details from this page?

 

if so, i seem to be getting the results in a gif file, fair enough, but the font of the text generated seems hard to read. its like a 'courier new' font, similar to what typewriters produced, but this seems a little broken.... is it just a problem my end or is it normal and ok? :rolleyes:

13 July 06 - Data Protection Act request sent to NatWest :-|

7 August - Natwest want to 'discuss my account':???:

9 August - "HISTORIC STMNT FEE- £5.00" showing on online bank

16 August - Statements Arrived, tatty brown sellotaped envelope:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

bump?

 

Also, with the schedule of charges to be submitted this time, should i use the same ones as i submitted from the court claim or the current ones?

 

(by current ones i mean those with th updated 8% interest calculations as obviously the dates will have changed...)

 

thanks

13 July 06 - Data Protection Act request sent to NatWest :-|

7 August - Natwest want to 'discuss my account':???:

9 August - "HISTORIC STMNT FEE- £5.00" showing on online bank

16 August - Statements Arrived, tatty brown sellotaped envelope:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

anyone?

 

really panicking now as i'll need to submit my papers tomorrow, yet i dont seem to be getting replies..

 

(i've come into work to get this done, what a sunday :-|)

 

also can i just use copies of the statement pages that have charges on? (and leave out the rest?

 

thanks

13 July 06 - Data Protection Act request sent to NatWest :-|

7 August - Natwest want to 'discuss my account':???:

9 August - "HISTORIC STMNT FEE- £5.00" showing on online bank

16 August - Statements Arrived, tatty brown sellotaped envelope:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...