Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Not really. His claim will succeed simply because its a simple matter of a lost parcel and no insurance. Its not a complex case so I think he’ll be fine, especially as it is P2G who arent very good at defending claims but I ageee its not been handled at all well.   My only concern with withdrawing is that he loses £35 in the case of £240 but thats a matter for him   I dont think it has a reduced chance of success if OP actually replies and actions things but if not then ofcourse it will struggle.   My concern is if he starts again it’ll be just as sporadic.   Maybe close thread and let him make a new one if hes ready to engage?
    • Please will you start reading up on the stories on the some form especially the pinned post. I have to say that I'm concerned that you feel that a warning from P2G is going to affect your rights and is going to subvert statutory law. I think you've been here for a few months and I would have hoped that by now you would understand that terms and conditions must always be interpreted in the light of overriding statute. Also I suggested that once you have done the reading on the sub- forum then you would understand the information that we would need in order to give you the best help. The fact that you haven't told us what the item was suggested also that you haven't done the reading. Please give us full details including identity of the item, value, where these properly declared? Dates – blah blah blah. Not paying attention to P2G. Pay attention to us
    • P2G can make clear whatever they want frankly, the judge isnt going to sit there and go “they told you to buy their insurance and you didn’t” and then dismiss your claim.  I would say you should send a formal complaint then after 7 days sent a LOC. Day 21 from now submit your claim on OCMC.    
    • I thought i could just use ( copy and paste)  the terminology from my other post earlier in the year when i previously claimed against P2g .   The parcel hasnt been 'officially ' lost yet i have another 13 days before their 'investigation' ends and then theyll probably offer the postage back as i didnt take the 'insurance'   But to recap ,  The parcel was booked through P2g and sent with Evri. No Protective Insurance was taken out. The parcels value is only £48 plus postage of £3 and the value of the parcel was declared The parcels tracking says while it was in Evri's system it was sent to an 'incorrect' depot and tracking would be updated in 24 hrs which it didnt and the delivery date passed, i then had a live chat with P2g who opened an investigation and im waiting to hear what's happened. My only concern is,  last time i claimed P2g made it clear that in future i must take out their protective insurance which i gavent and im wondering whether this will ' complicate' things ...  
    • it is precisely for these reasons that the OP should withdraw the claim and begin again. Firstly, the case has been badly handled from the start. The OP hasn't come to us and stuck to it in a regular engaging way. Secondly, it seems that the OP is now being advised on the basis of it being a matter of principle rather than looking at a sensible and pragmatic outcome. We have a duty to the people who come to help us to try and get the best solution for them that we can. Secondary is that we want to notch up a further victory against the parcel delivery industry – and frankly it doesn't matter which company it is as long as we get a victory. If we simply urge someone to continue a case at their own expense in a claim which has a very reduced chance of success, simply because it gives us personal satisfaction, then this is really contrary to what we do and certainly contrary to the interests of the claimant. I'm now urging the OP (Original Poster) to withdraw and to start again and work with us very closely in order to get a much more certain victory. By continuing this claim, not only with the OP risk even more money, it will take more time in the sense of failure will be demoralising. Better to feel that one is in control by exercising one's own choices and taking the long view
  • 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

CatLover64 v HSBC


Catlover64
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4429 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

  • Replies 331
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Awww - thanks guys! :) But....

 

To no-one's great surprise, in front of Her Honour Judge Wright, the case was stayed. She was quite rude and abrupt,and wasn't prepared to listen to anything I had to say. The solicitor sent by HSBC was quite sweet actually, although he didn't look old enough to buy a drink! There were about six or seven others there as well for different banks, not just HSBC, but the strange thing was the same solicitor represented all...

 

I really do think the banks are getting it all their own way, with absolutely no thought to us little guys at all. I feel as though I'm swimming against the tide, with no end result.....

 

At least I gave it a shot huh? :o

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Latty!

 

TBH - thoroughly ****ed off even though the outcome was no surprise. I explained that the case has been dragging on since April, and I thought it was unfair that the case could drag on for years with no end in sight.

 

Meanwhile - the bank's got my ******* money and earning interest on it to boot!:mad: I and everyone else in this position, have no money, and no chance of getting satisfaction either, whilst the banks can (& will) drag this out for years...They all make me sick! :mad:

 

Rant over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for all you support. I did try, but plainly the judge had pre-conceived ideas about the way forward.

 

Still feeling ****ed off, but I'm sure I'll recover. What I need to cheer me up is news that someone else took on the banks and won. Or that someone got judgment, got a WOE and sent the bailiffs in!

 

That would make me very happy! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for all you support. I did try, but plainly the judge had pre-conceived ideas about the way forward.

 

Still feeling ****ed off, but I'm sure I'll recover. What I need to cheer me up is news that someone else took on the banks and won. Or that someone got judgment, got a WOE and sent the bailiffs in!

 

That would make me very happy! :D

 

Sounds like you did your best under the circumstances. Chin up our day will come. I had mine adjourned yesterday which almost feels like a win...LOL

 

I think these bulk hearings do not suit the individual and I wonder if we have the right to refuse these sorts of hearings? Anyone?

 

I found my Judge more personalble and he listened to what I had to say with (I beleive) genuine interest.

 

Penfold

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you Penfold, my hearing was just 4 cases and one of those was added at the last minute. It gave the judge an opportunity to talk to us all individually, ask our reasons and make a balanced decision (hopefully when I get it).

 

I'm sure these mass hearings are just a way of telling claimants to go away and wait for the test case.

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi guys - Been away for a while (organising wedding, changing job etc.). Got a newsletter from Penalty Charges the other day. I joined the site at the same time I joined this one, but have never really been on there.

There was a para that caught my eye. Can't remember exactly what it said, (as I stupidly deleted it!), but it was along the lines of 'An announcement was expected in the next few days from OFT about bank charges. The banks will be invited to make a maximum charge of say £3 for bounced D/D's etc, along the lines of the £12 C/C charge that the C/C companies now charge. Should that happen, then the test case will be withdrawn'

 

Has anyone else heard about this either through Penalty Charges or elsewhere? And if true, what are the ramifications for people who already have stayed bank charge cases in the court system?

 

TIA :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I Haven't heard anything along those lines. Do you by any chance have a facility on your email where you can look at recently deleted items?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]If you think my post was helpful, please feel free to click my scales

 

 

A prudent question is one-half of wisdom.

 

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

This sounds a bit like the BBC story which was run in September;

BBC NEWS | Business | OFT may compromise on bank case

 

It's certainly possible that the OFT could just give up on the case if they thought the banks had fallen into line - the OFT only has powers to apply to the courts for injunctions stopping the banks from using unfair terms. It doesn't have any power to get our money back. In fact, in my humble opinion, that seems to be the most likely route for the banks to take - keep leading the OFT on until January and then drop their charges to a reasonable level - and then they don't have a case to answer any more and we are back to square one in terms of court action and with no High Court ruling to back us up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The district judges would just have to carry on as if the OFT case had never happened; although the fact that the banks had dropped their charges so dramatically would certainly be prima facie evidence that they were in the wrong with their old charges.

 

Of course, it's possible that the OFT might go ahead anyway - just to get the ruling on whether UTCCR applies to the charges - that would certainly make things a lot easier for us. Except that the banks would probably carry on raising bogus defences and then settling just before hearings - dragging their feet all the way.

 

But then again, perhaps, if we were lucky, the DJs would start issuing special directions to the banks - and striking out defences where the directions weren't complied with.

 

We have to dream.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Hey guys! Long time no see :) Good(ish) news yesterday, but still have my doubts we'll be seeing some dosh any time soon...The banks will be dragged through the process kicking & screaming while we poor mug punters are covered in the brown sticky stuff....:mad::mad::mad:

 

What do you think? :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Catlover - nice to hear from you again . :)

 

You are probably right , but don't forget , if your claim is in the court system , the interest is still ticking up ........:D .

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Hiya Catlover64 good to see you still watching :)

 

We are all still waiting and twiddling our thumbs at the moment while the test case rumbles on... the Banks have now appealed to the house of lords and that is due to be heard towards the end of next month so as ever watch this space :cool:

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...