Jump to content

progenator

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

8 Neutral

1 Follower

  1. Ha Ha LOL. There have been loads of conventions in Geneva - from POW treatment to international driving laws/road signage. Knowing them is a GOOD thing - some amazing driving laws still stand and can be put to good use, still, despite being nearly 100 years old -as so many countries signed up.
  2. Hi, since you made a contract with Dell (buy buying from them) in England, then you are covered by English Consumer Law, and can take them to small claims court here. If they don't respond to a Court, then they may have their rights to trade suspended in this country. I have taken court action and it's simple though rather time consuming in writing letters and noting facts very carefully. Actually, that's what the courts are there for (- allowing anybody to get justice -), and have been so throughout much of our history, so don't be scared to use it. You need to give the supplier (Dell) a "reasonable time" to respond and/or correct faults. What constitutes a 'reasonable' time is is flexible - and depends on the circumstances, though there are various precedents from previous Court cases (that's how our common law is made, generally speaking - it goes on what has been judged before). Two weeks should be a reasonable time for a large organisation to reply to communication. ALWAYS make a grievance in writing if the very first phone call does not work. If there is no answer to your letter or if the terms sent in reply are not acceptable, then write again in strong but polite language, sticking to the facts and quoting them clearly (time consuming though it is), and tell them that if you are not offered satisfaction (in your case monies due to you, or a reasonable replacement) then you will ask a County Court to decide the matter. Phone the local County Court and ask for an application to take a retail company to the small claims court, and tell them what amount of money you are claiming for. You usually pay in (depending on the amount you are going to claim for) an amount, say £80 to the Court for them to start proceedings. For a Small Claims Court, when the matter is decided, if you win, you get the £80 back as well as the amount you claim for. If you loose, you loose nowt but the £80 - you will not be asked to pay for the legal fees of those you are trying to sue - even though companies often (usually, even) threaten to claim huge sounding legal costs for their solicitors, just to put you off - it's pure rubbish so don't be intimidated or frightened off by it. When you write a letter to the company you are claiming from, you will often be directed to write to Customer Services. In my experience these are usually brain donors who probably can't get a job in any other department and are incapable of independant thinking (even if they are permitted to do so) and often their job is really to put you off claiming, and in some cases they are instructed to fob you off and/or delay you until you give up. And it works - many people do. This Customer Services route has never been successful for me - and I learned long ago to write "for the urgent and personal attention of the Managing Director" - and ALWAYS send all communications recorded delivery so they can't deny they have received anything. (Keep the posting receipts and photocopies of all letters for a year or two after the event, as some companies have admitted receiving mail only later to deny it) Put presure on the company too:- write in your letter a paragraph that states that if you have to persue the matter by phone calls, letters or communication in any form, that you will claim at your normal overtime rate of £xx per hour, plus any costs (post, phone calls, photocopying, etc) for any time spent chasing them, and that you will claim interest on monies for any and all delay in payment from when it first reasonably could/should have been made from when you made them (the company) aware of the problem. This formula worked for me, and I was awarded the whole lot I claimed for (outlined above) when the matter went to Court, (against a company who tried to get out of paying for work done)- for the record, people say that if you don't have anything in writing then you have no chance in a Court- what nonsense! - I had not a jot in writing - all I had was a witness to what was said and done - and all you need is a witness (and/or some other form of proof if that's what you have). Also remember that many companies will try to part-settle, giving you a less than satisfactory offer. Take any money offered but refuse to sign anything that says you "accept this as payment in full and final payment" or anything of the kind. Once you have taken the first sum (or refused it due to a silly clause) then persue them for the rest of the money/service. Remember that at law, anything signed "under duress" is not binding so if you are scared by them (the company), by threats etc., you can always make this clear to the Court. English law Courts use the "reasonable man" as a test. I.e. would a 'reasonable man' have been scared by this statement, in these cirumstances? So don't worry too much if you felt forced into signing something then regretted it later - but it will be up to you to demonstrate to the Court that you were genuinely under duress:- so note all facts of what was said to you, how, and when: E.g: if two heavies come a knocking, making oblique but obvious threats and asking you to sign something, for example. If you don't actually know what you are entitled to claim (how much money etc) don't let that put you off or feel you have to go to an expensive solicitor, either - just say in your communications that you will "ask the court to decide the matter" in a clever way so that you don't let on that you don't know how much to go for - and the Court will decide the matter for you - remember some cases are found to be 'partially at fault' and you may be awarded 60% or what you claimed for if the Court thinks you are 40% to blame. Bear in mind mitigation of losses - by English law you must mitigate losses - i.e. if someone hits your mini you can't hire a Rolls Royce till it's fixed, as there were no minies like yours available for hire. Or if someone lets your dogs out and you know they are likely to get run over, you can't let that happen then claim for their value, unless you have clearly tried to get them back off the road and back in the yard (I'm not getting into livestock laws which are complex, just making a quick example). You must make it obvious that you have done all you can reasonably to stop your losses getting greater before making a claim. Also consider limitation to what you can claim for by the remoteness of a claim. I.e. if someone hits your car then you can claim damages for that, fine... but if your mother in law misses her dental appointment and has to pay for it because you could not pick her up on time due to the accident, then it's classed as too remote and you can't claim for it. Sorry, Mother-In-Law. Finally (yawn, at last...) an important aspect of English law is what is said when you enter into a contract. If, for example, a supplier says they will deliver goods to you next day and you pay 'em to do that, and you miss your dream place on a cruise liner as you had to wait in for the all important goods which then came a day late, then hard cheese. But if you told your supplier initially that "if the goods are a day late it will cost me the unrefundable price of a holiday" - and he willingly and knowingly enters into the contract with you knowing this - and then he delivers late - then you can claim against him for the loss. Of course there aresometimes exceptions to what I have noted in the past five paragraphs - according to cases gone before, and Blairite statutes etc. but these are general rules and knowing them gives you a better chance of winning, or of looking up relevant prior cases if you really take the trouble to research legal facts. I have to say I'm not legally trained and I can only say these roughly stated rules and this info has served me very well over the years, gleaned mostly from a Law module at Uni and some home reading - I just hope it helps someone else who has suffered an injustice. Ciaooooo......
  3. I can say that Surrey County Council say that one has to have lived in the county every day for the past three years in order to get a study loan (not a grant, I emphasise, but a LOAN!). If you have lived overseas EVEN ONE DAY in the past three years (I tried to work in Sweden to try to be near my kids there and was there three weeks) then one is entitled to nothing in the way of loans. Educational subsidy/free edu is based on having a loan - so no loan, no free education. I tried to work my way through Uni - after over three months of working with no days off, usually over 12 hrs per day and sometimes 16 hrs, even eating out of waste food skips behind the supermarkets, I found I could not subsist and was forced to give up and leave. This was almost five years ago now, and I'm now rather successful in business, though I really regret not having a degree for the pride, respect and sense of achievement education brings. But if I learned something it was that telling the whole truth on forms in the UK is a no-go. I'm not suggesting that anybody lie, but as my accountant put it - never, never volunteer any information to any authority - the less they know about you the better. Never reply to telephone questions - ask for communication in writing on any issues so you have time to consider replies carefully. In my case I had been domiciled in the UK even though I 'lived' overseas albeit temporarily. Letters from the Surrey County education people used the word "lived" overseas - whether this could be challenged in court as a valid expression when it is presumably where one is domiciled that dictates or shows whether and where one has paid tax for years i don't know, but suspect so. I learnt that the system here is fraught with Political Correctness: Mince words, lisp, limp, be unsure of what you are attracted to sexually, change it often, be a twonk and you'll end up in Cambridge on a fast track on the cushioned gravy train to a Government position. Succeeding with pride, openess and honesty means nothing but hard work. The more proud, open and honest you are the harder it is. And it's getting harder to compete as standards degenerate through PC. I hope this info helps anyone trying to get maintain a decent, honest lifestyle (not in the PC sense but in the high morales sense). We have only one chance to a decent life in the UK: Vote out Tory, Labour, and all the big parties with members who all went to either the same school or the same social club and hope that honest individuals will soon get into power (- note the recent successes of the BNP!) Cheers, J
  4. An electronics engineer friend of mine says that under the Geneva Convention one cannot legally be prevented from receiving news broadcasts and do not need to be licenced to do so. This of course may be rubbish, I know not - wonder if anyone has access to a legal library to check it out?
×
×
  • Create New...