Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've not seen it personally but I think that's the letter Dad has had from Overdales. I'll see it tomorrow. It states balance: zero
    • Agreed as you clearly have little faith in your star runners, mind you - I have less - conditional on the welcher clause I defined being part, and that we are talking about the three defined candidates: Tice Farage and Anderson - not anyone anywhere as reform might (outside chance) get someone decent to run somewhere. If any of the three dont run - they count as a loss.   welcher clause. "If either of us loses and doesn't pay - we agree the site admin will change the welchers avatar permanently to a cows ass - specific cows ass avatar chosen by the winner - with veto by site on any too offensive - requiring another to be chosen  (or of course, DP likely allows you can delete your account and all your worthless posts to cheapskate chicken out and we'll just laugh) "
    • This is the full details, note they have made an error (1) in that paragraph 5 stated 14 days before hearing not 7. Surely a company of their size would proof read and shouldn't make basic errors like that 1) The Claimant respectfully applies for an extension of time to comply with paragraph 5 of the Order of Deputy District Judge XXX dated XX March 2024 i.e. the evidence upon which the parties intend to rely shall be filed and served not later than 7-days before the hearing. 2) The Claimant seeks a short extension of time allow them to further and properly investigate data provided to them by Royal Mail which is of importance to the proceedings and determination of the Claim. 3) The Claimant and Royal Mail have an information sharing agreement. Under the agreement, Royal Mail has provided data to the Claimant in respect of the matters forming the basis of these proceedings. The Claimant requires more time to consider this data and reconcile it against their own records. The Claimant may need to seek clarification and assurances from Royal Mail before they can be confident the data is correct and relevant to the proceedings i.e. available to be submitted as evidence. 4) The Claimant's witness is currently out of the office on annual leave and this was not relayed to DWF Law until after the event which has caused a further unfortunate delay. 5) The Court has directed parties to file and serve any evidence upon which they intend to rely not later than 14- days before the hearing i.e. by 4pm on 6 June 2024. Regrettably, the Claimant will have insufficient time to finalise their witness evidence and supporting exhibits as directed. We therefore respectfully apply to extend the time for filing/serving evidence so that the evidence upon which the parties intend to rely by filed and served not later than 7-days before the hearing i.e. by 4pm on 13 June 2024. 6) This application is a pre-emptive one for an extension of time made prior to the expiry of the deadline. In considering the application, the Court is required to exercise its broad case management powers and consider the overriding objective. 7) In circumstances where applications are made in time, the Court should be reticent to refuse reasonable applications for extensions of time which neither imperil hearing dates nor disrupt proceedings, pursuant to Hallam Estates v Baker [2014] EWCA Civ 661. 😎 It is respectfully submitted that the application is made pursuant to the provisions of CPR 3.1(2)(a) and in accordance with the overriding objective to ensure the parties are on an equal footing when presenting their cases to the Court. The requested extension of time does not put the hearing at risk and granting the Application will not be disruptive to the proceedings.   They have asked for extension Because 2) The Claimant requires additional time to consider and reconcile data received from Royal Mail which is relevant to these proceedings against their own data and records in order to submit detailed evidence in support of this Claim.
    • i was merely pointing out if the OP did put in an N244 it required a bundle. as for what they need to do now.... it might be an idea to post a link to your thread then the OP can read it and understand where your guidance is coming from and the ongoing process he will have to follow... dx
    • The notes entered into circulation yesterday and are proving popular with collectors, who will be hoping to snap up examples with low serial numbers.View the full article
  • 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

b,card offer £12 per original fee as goodwill gesture...what now?


reesdance1
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6221 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

hi all can someone please give me a copy of a letter requesting my statements under the data protection act to send to barclaycard aswell as an address . is it the same format as bank charges? cant find anything in the forums(altho prob staring me straight in the face):confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

hi all i have received all my statements from barclaycard,please can someone tell me what charges i can actually claim for as listed on my statements,and what interest?when i have done this what letter do i send them,is the procedure the same as bank charges as i made a successful claim against natwest,or are there different letters for b,card :?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

hi all i received a letter from barclaycard today saying they disagree with my legal analysis in my first letter to reclaim my charges,but are wiilling to put this aside without admission of liability anf offer me the difference between the £12 fee and the original £20 fee which amounts to £96 of the £296 im claiming for,and to top it all they have already credited my account with this before i had a chance to reply.Has anyone else had this happen and can anyone advise me on what to do now as i am determined they should be paying up the full amount :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a normal response from B'card.

Now then you need to write to them and say that you'll accept the £96 as PART PAYMENT of the claim.

Also the OFT's report from 2006 DIDN'T say that £12 was acceptable, just that they won't investigate charges below this level.

Remember the OFT doesn't make laws and as such continue with your claim.

Be VERY careful whose advice you listen too

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks ive copied letter 1,and sent it today,hopefully they will comply. Has anyone received the full amount by doing this or does it generally proceed to court from here on in?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My Wife had this, we wrote back saying we accepted this as part payment, and told them we wanted the rest. she received another letter just saying the same thing again. We have been on holiday since and only recently got back so need to follow this up, somehow...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

i sent the rejection letter to barclaycard and they have now written to say that when i opened my b.card acc i signed and agreed to the t & c's which included details of charges. basically they are not going to pay me the full amount and that is that. can anyone tell me if my next step is to send them a letter before action now,or do i just accept their offer of £96 of a £276 claim. im not sure what to do. are they just trying to intimidate me into giving in :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, they are trying to intimidate you! Stick to your original timetable of letters and send the next one in when their time is up. Keep us informed!

HSBC:

Data Protection Act S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 23/5

Prelim request sent 18/8 - ignored

LBA sent 6/9 - offer made, but it's not good enough!

Full offer received 19/9/06 :D

 

 

Barclaycard:

Data Protection Act S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 23/5

Info dating back to May 2004 received 3/6

40 day deadline is up on 4/7

Information Commissioner had to intervene, got most of the statements I asked for but some still missing.

19 March 2007 Starting on them PROPERLY (at last!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok thanks ,only just learning to find my way around the site,will stick to one thread from now on:o

Think i should send LBA to b.card as the rejection letter although threatens court proceedings is predominantly about rejecting the offer,what do you think cos thier time limit is already up?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you let them, they will write and write until you get fed up and give up.... If you have sent them 2 letters asking for full amount and allowed a month for settlemnt from your 1st request, then sue them, that will sharpen their minds wonderfully.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the same problem, offered me £312 when I was claiming £840.00. Sent a rejection letter straight back, but they credited my CLOSED barclaycard with this money. So, I have this £312.00 on an account and don't even have a card to spend it. Got another letter acknowledging my rejection but nothing about the balance offered! Nevermind, logged with MCOL yesterday. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...