Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I googled "prescribed disability" to see where it is defined for the purposes of S.92. I found HMRC's definition, which included deafness. I don't  think anyone is saying deaf people cant drive, though! digging deeper,  Is it that “prescribed disability” (for the purposes of S.88 and S.92) is defined at: The Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK These Regulations consolidate with amendments the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1996...   ….. and sleep apnoea / increased daytime sleepiness is NOT included there directly as a condition but only becomes prescribed under “liability to sudden attacks of disabling giddiness or fainting” (but falling asleep isn't fainting!), so it isn’t defined there as a “prescribed disability”  Yet, under S.92(2)(b) RTA 1988 “ any other disability likely to cause the driving of a vehicle by him in pursuance of a licence to be a source of danger to the public" So (IMHO) sleep apnea / daytime sleepiness MIGHT be a prescribed disability, but only if it causes likelihood of "driving being a source of danger to the public" : which is where meeting / not meeting the medical standard of fitness to drive comes into play?  
    • You can counter a Judges's question on why you didn't respond by pointing out that any company that charges you with stopping at a zebra crossing is likely to be of a criminal mentality and so unlikely to cancel the PCN plus you didn't want to give away any knowledge you had at that time that could allow them to counteract your claim if it went to Court. There are many ways in which you can see off their stupid claim-you will see them in other threads  where our members have been caught by Met at other airports as well as Bristol.  Time and again they take motorists to Court for "NO Stopping" apparently completely forgetting that the have lost doing that because no stopping is prohibitory and cannot form a contract. Yet they keep on issuing PCNs because so many people just pay up . Crazy . You can see what chuckleheads they are when you read their Claim form which is pursuing you as the driver or the keeper. they don't seem to understand that on airport land because of the Bye laws, the keeper is never liable.   
    • The video-sharing app told the BBC that a "very limited" number of accounts had been compromised.View the full article
    • The King is the second monarch to appear on Bank of England notes which will be fed gradually into the system.View the full article
    • The King is the second monarch to appear on Bank of England notes which will be fed gradually into the system.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

Which courts are carrying on????


adam1976brown
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5947 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

Thats really interesting reading. If this is the case then its a welcome bit of news, but, I have a question.

Can the courts not state that they accept these cases but in light of recent events they have a put a stay on all bank charge cases pending the outcome of the high court case. I mean dont the high courts over rule the county courts?

Ladidi

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 399
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

A judge can order a stay of his own initiative, yes. The parties can however object to it, and this is what we are recommending.

 

Having said that, it will depend on the judges. Some will be happy to blanket stay, some wil be happy to carry on as usual. Yet again, it will be the courts lottery that will prevail.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You must teach me how to do that sometime LOL.

 

And then maybe, colours & fonts when offering congratulations ;)

 

i will show you if you like, its really not difficult

 

May I present:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

 

Especially made with a lot of time and sweat by myself precisely for this kind of query. ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Handed my bundle into Woolwich County Court yesterday, it was accepted without comment, case going ahead on 17th August as far as i can tell. Will wait for court to inform me otherwise. Be careful not to let this news stop you from compiling bundles or complying with judges directions have to assume games still on. Won't be long before Abbey start trying to play games with peoples heads.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading back in post number 41 i may have come across as a bit nasty, i didnt really notice this until now, this was not m intention and if i have offended anyone i apologise here and now, I just want an end to all the bad feeling which is going on around here at the moment, at the end of the day we are all here fighting the same cause, yet all we seem to be doing is bickering at each other, this needs to end, together we are strong "una nos es validus"

:madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Legality of bank charges to be decided in court - Times Online

 

Dont like this bit, how can it takes years, to decide whether something is legal, it either is or it isnt.

 

Tens of thousands of people reclaiming unauthorised overdraft charges will have wait months – possibly years – to see if they will be refunded after the Financial Services Authority (FSA) decided to allow the banks to put all claims on hold.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is another article that doesnt contain the true facts

 

Tens of thousands of people reclaiming unauthorised overdraft charges will have wait months – possibly years – to see if they will be refunded after the Financial Services Authority (FSA) decided to allow the banks to put all claims on hold.

 

Not factual

 

The case will centre on whether overdraft charges are part of the "core" terms of current accounts and therefore subject to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract law. Under these regulations all fees should be a fair reflection of the administration costs and must not be used as a method of making money.

 

It is quite evident that the banks are making money from them

 

In a statement, the British Bankers’ Association (BBA) said: “The FSA has agreed to issue a waiver, with immediate effect, to suspend the handling of customer complaints on bank charges pending a decision by the court. Other banks who are not party to the court action will be applying to the FSA for a waiver and as such will be bound by the outcome of the court case.”

 

At least they have got this bit right "handling of customers complaints"

 

The OFT said: “The banks do not accept that the unfairness rules of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations apply. The OFT believes that they do and is seeking to establish this legal principle in court.”

 

That about says it all really

 

The Banks have already paid out about £200 million this year to customers who have complained about the charges.

 

But of course they still say there charges are not unlawful

 

Bank customers have been encouraged by consumer groups to reclaim fees after the Office of Fair Trading said last year that it believed the charges of up to £39 are illegal.

 

UNLAWFUL

:madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just telephone my local court about my hearing on 10th August.. to be told, that its business as usual and the nice lady urged me to turn up for the hearing too!! - after telling me Abbey hadnt submitted anything by the deadline on friday and its unlikely they will turn up for the hearing!

So Wrexham County Court (North Wales) are carrying on regardless!

Chin chin x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had to call Oldham courts today on another matter, while i was on the phone i asked if the OFT report would change anything, they said that claims are continuing as normal, which is exactly as i expected

:madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just spoke to claims section at Northampton CC (not a mcol case) & the bloke said "they haven't recieved any directions" so carry on as normal, as for Abbeys application to stay all cases nothing has been submitted as yet but it's still early days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thats fine by me if they dont do it by wednesday i will have won, but if they do try a blanket stay then we will devise a statergy to counteract that, but we cant really properly devise a stratergy until we know EXACTLY what we are fighting, and how everything has been worded ect

:madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

true, My bundle is in and case has been stayed until 18th August to reach settlement, otherwise they have until 1st September to answer each charge or it's thrown out & I've won, which probably means They'll apply for a stay and be granted it on 25th August or something:( OR I could be positive and say I'm going to recieve a nice cheque for about 5.5k on my 30th birthday on the 23rd.:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

 

Just spoke to Southend court and according to the guy I just spoke to they have deciede as of about half an hour ago to hold off until the outcome of the test case. He did say that it may change again (last week they were reviewing on a case by case basis) but as of today things at Southend have ground to a halt. Poo! I'm sad....I started with my very first letter end of last August.....just had the end in site and woooosh...I HATE BANKS!!!! See ya peeps x

T J :p

 

 

S.A.R Sent 21/8/06

Statements and microfiche received 11/10/06

Request for payement of charges 29/1/07

LBA sent 21/2/07

MCLO filed 26/3/07

Acknowledgement of service recieved 4/4/07

Defence filed/received - transferred to Southend 30/4/07

Stayed unitl 27/6/07

Allocation & Case Management Conference 17/7/07 14:00pm

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if this is a start of things to come, and notices are going around to all the courts requesting a stay.

 

I also wonder if a lot of people will now take abbey up on their settlement offers (if they get the letters from Abbey), instead of waiting till at least the end of the year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ashurts made it clear that they have been instructed not to negotiate settlements until after the test case, so in my case I'm now pretty much resolved to waiting it out. But if Abbey think I'm going to play nice from now on they can get stuffed...I've kinda changed to an all or nothing mentality. I would have been willing to settle as it was money I had never thought to see again. But now, what with all the stunts Abbey have pulled I want the lot including all interest and costs.

T J :p

 

 

S.A.R Sent 21/8/06

Statements and microfiche received 11/10/06

Request for payement of charges 29/1/07

LBA sent 21/2/07

MCLO filed 26/3/07

Acknowledgement of service recieved 4/4/07

Defence filed/received - transferred to Southend 30/4/07

Stayed unitl 27/6/07

Allocation & Case Management Conference 17/7/07 14:00pm

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...