Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The lawsuits allege the companies preyed upon "vulnerable" young men like the 18-year-old Uvalde gunman.View the full article
    • Hi, despite saying you would post it up we have not seen the WS or EVRis WS. Please can you post them up.
    • Hi, Sorry its taken me so long to get round to this, i've been pretty busy today. Anyway, just a couple of things based on your observations.   Evri have not seen/read my WS (sent by post and by email) as they would have recognised the claim value is over £1000 as it includes court fees, trial fees, postage costs and interests, and there is a complete breakdown of the different costs and evidence. I'd say theres a 1% chance they read it , but in any case it won't change what they write. They refer to the claim amount that you claimed in your claim form originally, which will likely be in the same as the defence. They use a simple standard copy and paste format for WX and I've never seen it include any amount other than on the claim form but this is immaterial because it makes no difference to whether evri be liable and if so to what value which is the matter in dispute. However, I have a thinking that EVRi staff are under lots of pressure, they seem to be working up to and beyond 7pm even on fridays, and this is quite unusual so they likely save time by just copying and pasting certain lines of their defence to form their WX.   Evri accepts the parcel is lost after it entered their delivery network - again, this is in my WS and is not an issue in dispute. This is just one of their copy paste lines that they always use.   Evri mentions the £25 and £4.82 paid by Packlink - Again, had they read the WS, they would have realised this is not an issue in dispute. They probably haven't read your WS but did you account for this in your claim form?   Furthermore to the eBay Powered By Packlink T&Cs that Evri is referring to, Clauses 3b and c of the T&Cs states:  (b)   Packlink is a package dispatch search engine that acts as an intermediary between its Users and Transport Agencies. Through the Website, Users can check the prices that different Transport Agencies offer for shipments and contract with the Transport Agency that best suits their needs on-line. (c)  Each User shall then enter into its own contract with the chosen Transport Agency. Packlink does not have any control over, and disclaims all liability that may arise in contracts between a User and a Transport Agency This supports the view that once a user (i.e, myself) selects a transport agency (i.e Evri) that best suits the user's needs, the user (i.e, myself) enters into a contract with the chosen transport agency (i.e, myself). Therefore, under the T&Cs, there is a contract between myself and Evri.   This is correct but you have gone into this claim as trying to claim as a third party. I would say that you need to pick which fight you wan't to make. Either you pick the fight that you contracted directly with EVRi therefore you can apply the CRA OR you pick the fight that you are claiming as a third party contract to a contract between packlink and EVRi. Personally, I would go with the argument that you contracted directly with evri because the terms and conditions are pretty clear that the contract is formed with EVRi and so if the judge accepts this you are just applying your CR under CRA 2015, of which there has only been 2 judges I have seen who have failed to accept the argument of the CRA.   Evri cites their pre-existing agreement with Packlink and that I cannot enforce 3rd party rights under the 1999 Act. Evri has not provided a copy of this contract, and furthermore, my point above explains that the T&Cs clearly explains I have entered into a contract when i chose Evri to deliver my parcel.    This is fine, but again I would say that you should focus on claiming under the contract you have with EVRi as you entered into a direct contract with them according to packlink, as this gives less opportunites for the judge to get things wrong, also I think this is a much better legal position because you can apply your CR to it, if you dealt with a third party claim you would likely need to rely on business contract rights.   As explained in my WS, i am the non-gratuitous beneficiary as my payment for Evri's delivery service through Packlink is the sole reason for the principal contract coming into existence. I wouldn't focus this as your argument. I did think about this earlier and I think the sole focus of your claim should be that you contracted with evri and any term within their T&Cs that limits their liability is a breach of CRA. If you try to argue that the payment to packlink is the sole reason for the contract coming in between EVRI and packlink then you are essentially going against yourself since on one hand you are (And should be) arguing that you contracted directly with EVRi, but on the other hand by arguing about funding the contract between packlink and evri you are then saying that the contract is between packlink and evri not you and evri.  I think you should focus your argument that the contract is between you and evri as the packlink T&C's say.   Clearly Evri have not read by WS as the above is all clearly explained in there.   I doubt they have too, but I think their witness statement more than anything is an attempt to sort of confuse things. They reference various parts of the T&Cs within their WS and I've left some more general points on their WS below although I do think  point 3b as you have mentioned is very important because it says "Users can check the prices that different Transport Agencies offer for shipments and contract with the Transport Agency that best suits their needs on-line." which I would argue means that you contract directly with the agency. For points 9 and 10 focus on term 3c of the contract  points 15-18 are the same as points 18-21 of the defence if you look at it (as i said above its just a copy paste exercise) point 21 term 3c again point 23 is interesting - it says they are responsible for organising it but doesnt say anything about a contract  More generally for 24-29 it seems they are essentially saying you agreed to packlinks terms which means you can't have a contract with EVRI. This isnt true, you have simply agreed to the terms that expressly say your contract is formed with the ttransport agency (EVRi). They also reference that packlinks obligations are £25 but again this doesn't limit evris obligations, there is nothing that says that the transport agency isnt liable for more, it just says that packlinks limitation is set. for what its worth point 31 has no applicability because the contract hasn't been produced.   but overall I think its most important to focus on terms 3b and 3c of the contract and apply your rights as a consumer and not as a third party and use the third party as a backup   
    • Ms Vennells gave testimony over three days, watched by those affected by the Post Office scandal.View the full article
    • Punters are likely not getting the full amount of alcohol they are paying for, a new study suggests.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

Baviaanuk Vs Halifax


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6075 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

Ok, I have filed with court and quiet frankly am disgusted with the way The Halifax are dealing with claims now. I have been taking some legal advise over the last few days (lucky enough to have a Barrister in the family) He has kindly offered to represent me free of charge and I am taking him up on his offer, if the Halifax want to play hardball, I will protect my interests 100%

 

This may even open up new avenues of possibility for other users in the same boat with imminent court dates vs HBOS

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will try this letter, see where it gets me.

 

Dear Howard

 

I am writing to thank you for bouncing my cheque with which I endeavoured to pay my car insurance last month. By my calculations, three nanoseconds must have elapsed between presenting the cheque and the arrival in my account of the funds needed to honour it. I refer, of course, to the automatic monthly deposit of my entire salary, an arrangement which, I admit, has been in place for only eight years.

 

You are to be commended for seizing that brief window of opportunity, and also for debiting my account £39 by way of penalty for the inconvenience caused to your bank.

 

My thankfulness springs from the manner in which this incident has caused me to rethink my errant financial ways. I noticed that whereas I personally attend to your telephone calls and letters, when I try to contact you, I am confronted by the impersonal, overcharging, prerecorded faceless entity which your bank has become.

 

From now on, I, like you, choose only to deal with a flesh-and-blood person. My mortgage and loan repayments will, therefore and hereafter, no longer be automatic, but will arrive at your bank, by cheque addressed personally and confidentially to an employee at your bank whom you must nominate. Be aware that it is an offence under the Postal Act for any other person to open such an envelope. Please find attached an Application Contact Status which requires your chosen employee to complete. I am sorry it runs to eight pages, but in order that I know as much about him or her as your bank knows about me, there is no alternative.

 

Please note that all copies of his or her passport and proof of address must be countersigned by a Notary Public, and the mandatory details of his/her financial situation (income, debts, assets and liabilities) must be accompanied by documented proof.

 

In due course, I will issue your employee with a PIN number which he/she must quote in dealings with me. I regret that it cannot be shorter than 28 digits but, again, I have modelled it on the number of button presses required to access my account balance on your phone bank service. As they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

 

Let me level the playing field even further. Press buttons as follows:

 

1. - To make an appointment to see me.

2. - To query a missing payment.

3. - To transfer the call to my living room in case I am there.

4. - To transfer the call to my bedroom in case I am sleeping.

5. - To transfer the call to my toilet in case I am attending to nature.

6. - To transfer the call to my mobile phone if I am not at home.

7. - To leave a message on my computer, a password to access my computer is required. Password will be communicated at a later date to the authorized contact.

8. - To return to the main menu and to listen to options 1 through 7.

9. - To make a general complaint or inquiry. The contact will then be put on hold, pending the attention of my automated answering service. While this may, on occasion, involve a lengthy wait, uplifting music will play for the duration of the call.

 

Regrettably, but again following your example, I must also levy an establishment fee to cover the setting up of this new arrangement. May I wish you a happy, if ever-so-slightly less prosperous day?

 

Your Humble Client

Baviaanuk

 

 

Any changes necessary?? :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

GRRRRRR just found out my case has been stayed :-x

 

I will appeal once I have seen the courts letter although its obvious what the judge will do with that (A4 sized toilet paper no doubt)

 

Looks like we have to wait for the court case crap etc to finish, one question I have, once the OFT and the banks have sorted this out and a suitable amount has been decided, am I still able to recoup my court costs? I know the interest is still reclaimable, but have no clue about costs.

 

Another question I wonder, does anyone know the likelihood of the banks being forced to refund all bank charges, irrespective of whether or not people have made a claim?

 

If this is unlikely, I intend to mailshot people with full instructions on how to get a claim in place as well as (if necessary) standing outside Halifax branches, giving people all necessary information.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which court was this, and have you had conformation?

HOW TO...DUMMIES GUIDE TO CAG...Read here

STEP BY STEP GUIDE...Read here

F&Q's... Read here

EVERYTHING YOU NEED THE A~Z GUIDE...Read here

 

Go to our Cag Toolbar Download page here

 

Please don't forget this site is run on DONATIONS If this site has helped in any way, then please give a little back. ;-)

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. All I know has come from this site. If you are unsure, please seek professional advice. .

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is Maidstone Combined County Court. I have not heard officially from the court although I noticed in the "which courts are continuing thread" someone has contacted the court and been told that all claims are to be stayed :(

 

I guess the letter confirming that will be in the post tomorrow

Link to post
Share on other sites

if its any compensation my judge at aylesbury is considering my n244 application to have stay lifted (Aylesbury) also see post on 16th august here

 

SarahApples vs Barclays 16.8.07 - **WON IN COURT**

 

jan

Please note I am not an expert - I am not offering opinions or legal help - Please use all the information provided on the site in FAQ- step by step instructions and library- thanks Jansus:)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif

offer from A&L 24/8/07 - after case stayed

 

"What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well." - Antione de Saint Exupery

 

 

PROUD TO BE AN ORANGE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like we have to wait for the court case crap etc to finish, one question I have, once the OFT and the banks have sorted this out and a suitable amount has been decided, am I still able to recoup my court costs? I know the interest is still reclaimable, but have no clue about costs.

 

 

Another question I wonder, does anyone know the likelihood of the banks being forced to refund all bank charges, irrespective of whether or not people have made a claim?

 

Bump

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting development, I phoned Maidstone Combined County Court as I had not received any confirmation of the blanket stays which were apparently being put into place. The court clerk advised that this was the original plan (to make blanket stays) but "the situation is currently being reviewed as it seems that the District Judge is having second thoughts :D"

 

I also received the Halifax's response this morning (sent from Optima)

 

Great news :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

After the blanket stay situation, I must admit it kinda threw me off balance, the money I was so close to getting could have saved me a huge personal headache recently.

 

I was hoping someone could tell me how things stand at the moment, any recent advamcents I should be aware of? Or are we still waiting for the court case in early 2008?

 

Hope someone can fill me in.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

We are still waiting, so there isnt much to tell you im afraid, as soon as there is any new information, it will be added to the stickys.

 

So it is best to just keep an eye on them and keep reading around. Im sure as soon as there is something new you will hear.

HOW TO...DUMMIES GUIDE TO CAG...Read here

STEP BY STEP GUIDE...Read here

F&Q's... Read here

EVERYTHING YOU NEED THE A~Z GUIDE...Read here

 

Go to our Cag Toolbar Download page here

 

Please don't forget this site is run on DONATIONS If this site has helped in any way, then please give a little back. ;-)

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. All I know has come from this site. If you are unsure, please seek professional advice. .

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...