Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • 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

Received Lloyds Defence today!!!!


lea2001gb
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6166 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

Received the Lloyds defence today and I believe I didn't send the charges information so their defence is as follows: -

 

1. This defence is served without prejudice to the defendant's contention that the particulars of claim is insufficiently particularised and is embarrassing. The defendant reserves the right to plead further to the particulars of claim once they are sufficiently particularised.

2. The defendant will object that the particulars of claim in this action disclose no reasonable cuase of action against the defendant and makes no specific allegations again the defendant as to why the defendant should be liable to the claimant for the amount claimed.

3. The particulars of claim do not comply with rule 16.4 1a of the civil procedure rules as "amongst other things" they do not identify the account in question that appears to the subject matter of these proceedings or indeed show how the sum of £XXX is arrived at and the particulars of claim are too vague. The particulars of claims shows no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim.

4. The claimant should, therefore, be ordered to file and serve an amended claim to set out the full particulars of the bank account and the charges they are seeking to recover, identifying each charge, the date and amount of the charge and why the claimant in each case they allege it is a disproportionate pentaly and thus unlawful.

5. The defendant should then be given the opportunity to defend the proceedings further.

 

 

Can anyone translate this into english as I have been pretty good so far at figuring out what I need to do but this has completely stumped me now so I am at a loss.

Abbey - £539 pending - !!!WON!!!

Halifax - £676 pending - stayed at court

2nd Claim with Halifax - £168 pending

Lloyds TSB - £780 (sisters) !!!WON!!! - Filed waste of costs order (on hold)

Barclays - Barclays filed crap defense - on hold

 

AND THE BANKS ARE STILL CHARGING!!!!!!!

 

How very dare you!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic GuidoT much appreciated, I was panicking all day thinking I had completely screwed it up, I knew someone would have the answer.

 

Thanks :-)

Abbey - £539 pending - !!!WON!!!

Halifax - £676 pending - stayed at court

2nd Claim with Halifax - £168 pending

Lloyds TSB - £780 (sisters) !!!WON!!! - Filed waste of costs order (on hold)

Barclays - Barclays filed crap defense - on hold

 

AND THE BANKS ARE STILL CHARGING!!!!!!!

 

How very dare you!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have checked the claim that I sent and the account number is also included also with the schedule that I sent - I have found my recorded delivery receipt so I was mistaken when I said I thought I hadn't sent the schedule. The court received it the following day and so did the solicitors. I even have the original on my computer.

 

Not quite sure what Lloyds are playing at! They decided to take another £30 charge from my sisters account on Friday, she phoned to get it back and was told flatly 'no'. And this was for going £2 overdrawn!!

Abbey - £539 pending - !!!WON!!!

Halifax - £676 pending - stayed at court

2nd Claim with Halifax - £168 pending

Lloyds TSB - £780 (sisters) !!!WON!!! - Filed waste of costs order (on hold)

Barclays - Barclays filed crap defense - on hold

 

AND THE BANKS ARE STILL CHARGING!!!!!!!

 

How very dare you!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...