Just back from hearing... Struck out, no claim in negligence for damage to the article itself, despite trying to say the law is a little uncertain when it comes to defective components causing damage. Judgment came pretty quickly, I thought there may have been a 'has everything been said' moment. Only slight moral victory is that everyone in the room knew I was right on the money with the facts, and didn't have any criticism on the way i brought the claim, but the Judge had to apply the law and that's that. Oh and no costs order so Jaguar have to pay 8K to the lawyers - I guess they're the only winners here (and the courts with the fees)!

Wow. I must just not have ever reached the right person, and it's not like I went in shouting and blazing to get their backs up, they just dismissed it all from the start (perhaps I was too nice and they thought I'd just accept their word, but surely after the 4th/5th/6th pushback they'd realise I wasn't going to - clearly not). I don't know how much trouble your associate went to to get that outcome, but I would imagine nowhere near what I'm experiencing!

but it was essentially transcribed on the particulars on claim surely effectively same as writing notes. the actual recording hasn't been shared (hence request court permission). finally if I send this document in the next 30 minutes, I wasn't really happy with the last para 9... i've added 'for the points above' so it doesn't look like I'm asking the court to dismiss the defendants application just because I'm a LiP and acknowledge can't claim for distress which may discredit me... How does this look "The Claimant is a litigant in person and realises that the claim could have been handled differently, now realises distress is not a recoverable head of damage, and for the points above therefore proposes to the Court to dismiss the application for the strike out and application for summary dismissal - and also dismiss the set-aside application – but if the Court is minded to grant the set-aside, Claimant respectfully requests that the Court orders that he is given say three weeks to file and serve an amended particulars of claim and the Defendant be given four weeks to prepare a defence." That's saying I'm looking to amend claim in any case if the judgment is set aside - I presume that's a good thing ? I feel I should add that the defendant failed to respond or properly investigate on multiple occasions "The Claimant made every effort to avoid court proceedings and the Defendant did not." sent it... now for the hearing. Was just thinking about this... Is that a risky strategy?? Could they equally fire back saying "you didn't specify what you were relying on so we had to guess" (and pick the one that suited us best - probably why they raised it). Although they did cover common law negligence and deny that too. Got lots of notes to refer to now, just need to be sure to be able to get to them quickly to make each point. I think the bar to resist strike out is fairly low one from what I've found out, may already have it covered with the statement of case sent this morning. Just found something else which could help,. a British Institute analysis of product liability (drafted 2004) - https://www.biicl.org/documents/267_overview_uk_-_aug_2004.pdf - particularly B)1)g) 'Damages' pages 8-9 - ambiguity in tort law for defective incorporated components which I think fits: As this was only just found I've printed off 3 copies and got the yellow highlighter out, and a post-it sticky index tab and will ask for permission to share if the need arises - I may not even need to at this stage if the bar is truly low enough by excluding the CPA 1987 assumption.

no

they have different meanings I think given the rules in the CPR and their last paragraph, stating summary judgment Can the defendant rely on law that differs from the law I am referencing to dispute the claim, if the shoes were on the other foot, would you? This was in my original skeleton argument doc (clearly as per the new doc which you haven't read I'd put "The Claimant was told that it would be supported in a phone call." but the detail is : I received confirmation that the case would be supported if it was the same fault as the previous case, in a telephone conversation which was transcribed, the relevant part: “I’ve sought the advice from our technical team and they’re saying they don’t believe it is that, if they thought it was, they would support it because that’s what we would do as a manufacturer.” “If you take it to an independent and if they do believe it to be coming from the inside out then if they can provide supporting documentation then we’ll happily take a look again for you” I considered this an offer, which was accepted on consideration given to the action of supplying third party evidence to support the claim. The Defendant also gave me further assurances that they were looking for confirmation of a manufacturing defect. The evidence was provided and immediately Defendant reneged and dismissed claiming it was wrong to ask. I have a single party consent recording of the above telephone call and would seek to bring into evidence with permission of the Court.

they most certainly are in their application:

Ok thanks... as this is "their" hearing for 3 actions (set aside, strike out and/or summary judgemnt on the claim)... What do you think the order of the day will be (it's an hours hearing)? When will I get my turn(s) to speak etc? I'm still wondering if I should send that case summary document or not. Please can you have a look? Are you feeling any better today btw?

No, I didn't actually state any laws on my claim as you know, only the issues I was raising, amounts and reasons to why they owe me I am very tenacious when it comes to something that feels so wrong, and they essentially employing bullying tactics and clearly they have a very legally astute barrister or similar on their side Hence and I come to it again, I have to try to rely on everything that could possibly be in my favour... if they have a rock solid defence on the negligence (it reads that way and my reviews of case suggests so) I am less sure on the legalities of that phone call "agreement to support" so can I claim that as breach of contract? it could be another spanner in the works for them but want to be sure.

Yes they claim that 1987 Consumer Protection Act (oh the irony) excludes damage to the article itself. But in any case that common law is well established that negligence can only be claimed for injury to person or damage to other property, except in negligent misstatement issues where economic loss is recoverable in .eg. 'financial advice' cases. They have engaged Counsel on their side so that's what I'm going up against tomorrow. Parties on an equal footing, my a***

Apologies for delay... I had to step away from it all for my sanity. Thank you... I will bear all the points in mind and you clearly have a knack of getting the point across quickly far better than me! It feels that some of that could be written and submitted or equally just orally on the day. Just to mention, there are two other cases I am aware of, only one I know they fixed though... I attached screenshots and photos to the original claim (and pre-claim action). also attached was a letter of support from the owner of the one that was fixed. I think the evidence speaks for itself. Their main defence is that they have no liability in tort for damage to the vehicle itself as it is pure economic loss. I still think they have dug a small hole when they offered to support in the phone call in late 2018 and think thats worth exploring too. I can probably just say they offered to support it in a phone call, leave it at that and not get bogged down as to if it forms a contract or not. I tried to write a summary of case with at least the first points (as the rest feels more oral) and perhaps about the dismissing of strike out and set aside as you aptly point out that I could forward to the court (and I guess must go to the defendant too) by 10am tomorrow (Weds). Please see attach. Yes I have practically just rewritten what you said for the main - it was so pointy down to 2 pages is better isn't it. and now I'm going to try to get some shuteye. casesummary1_Redacted.pdf

Rather than orally on the day and plead utter laymanship (clearly am!)? Should I even bother with any of the arguments around negligence, limitations and potential verbal contract stuff or is it just too sh** (I don't see what I'm left with then though). I need some more guidance around that given the issues in the case. I'm just going to go through my document which I based on https://hallellis.co.uk/write-skeleton-argument/ and try to two column type approach it considering your skeleton argument 'statement of case' too on the npower stuff - should there not be a summary as to what you want the court to do? Should I state the causes of action first (remember this is where they claim solid defence on limitations so raising this directly gives them confirmation so I think I need to be right on the money there, and if there's any potential for breach of verbal contract as I still don't think I got an answer on that one). Remember the defence stated 1987 CPA as you pointed out and 11A of 1980 LA and I'm saying 14A of LA as latent damage. If not: Should I completely scrap the (verbose) skeleton argument I did and address it as per existing particulars of claim, can attribute what the defence says about each on the right column and what I rely on (like the inspection reports) underneath.. Again if it comes to cause of action I think I'm struggling. I'm ok with the concession of distress damages and saying I will amend claim. probably no point restating that I would be open to mediation as presumably would get asked on directions questionnaire.

I think I'm of the feeling that I don't really have anything much to gain right now by acceding and making offers right now in a rush before Thursday vs doing so afterwards providing they don't win the strike out argument which as you said is probably unlikely (my risk is that it just does go t*ts up and get nothing) I am surprised I still can't make a request for at least the fixed court costs as sanctions for their unreasonable behaviour (I incurred that cost as a result of their lack of response to the letter before claim). I'm thinking I should forget the skeleton argument stuff too, just take it with me on the day, I've literally done nothing else except essential living for the past 2 days (and consumed more than 50% of my waking time for the past 2 weeks) and it's too exhausting. In the case it proceeds to trial and their potential for costs mount up it gives a bit more time to amend claim etc, but I think I'm in the same position as I am now - I can then make the very same argument and offers in a phone call when I'm a bit more relaxed about redirecting their future costs to a settlement instead, in return for withdrawing the claim. Hope that makes sense. I've been in your shoes (on other things) - giving advice to others is very easy when you're not directly involved in executing the advice so I appreciate it probably being flipping frustrating for you too when reading stuff like this. Thanks again, I'll probably be back for more gruelling reality checks in the very near future if you're willing to have me.

clearly I would need to make this call as early as possible definitely by close of play tomorrow to be helpful to them in potentially avoiding unnecessary time and travel Ok part 36 doesn't apply.. too much information out there to pick up on things, not enough self knowledge. No it's not been allocated - dangerous territory? I repeat the manufacturer has not admitted the defect in 2018 or any other time. They have led me around since 2018 for sure though! Definitely can rely on the expert opinion (given leave to rely on by court in notice of disposal). Their solicitors are in Birmingham area, My local court is about 100 miles away from them, not sure where their Counsel is from but clearly it looks like its a 7 hour round trip from costs statement. I definitely don't want to say (or not say) something to them that jeopardises me. It would definitely save them money though not to have this hearing, but I would need to be clear in what I'm proposing - given I am LiP and likely with the report etc that strike out will not occur, proposing if I consent to the set aside, for them to withdraw their application, suggest redirection of these and potential future costs (given they won't recover from me) as a cash full and final settlement (will have to agree a value - for me it really needs to be at least 3.2K as thats replacement cost for two doors), further to offer that I will pay my own costs (hopefully to be drawn out of the settlement in some way as cash gives me the option to repair in my own way) and I will then withdraw the case, otherwise i'm content to rely on the report, amend my claim and let it go to trial? I could also suggest that given the poor behaviour, court sanctions would apply to them, awarding me my costs in any event. Thank you for your words - I am extremely demoralised, all I get is sinking feelings with it. Definitely wouldn't wish it on anyone else.

Clearly you have the advantage of knowing the processes so it comes easy to you I do appreciate he has no interest (other than profit) in the case and can be as objective as anyone else not party to the issue. ok so on the conversation front though - if I start by saying I'm confident the claim will not be struck out, surely he'll ask why, I don't feel I can answer that confidently. I do feel clear to suggest though that it may be in his clients interests to perhaps redirect costs towards settling the argument in terms of a repair rather than drawn out court case, of which there's no real chance of recovery. Around £4k of the costs identified are purely for the hearing on Thursday (instructing counsel and stuff, 7 hours travel time at £295/hour etc), on that basis could agree to the set aside (and presumably in return them withdrawing the application to strike/dismiss and cancel the hearing on Thursday). That would suggest it would be in their favour not to attend on the cost ground, surely their own cost to repair would actually be considerably less than my retail quote, and I could be willing to accept the replacement of the front doors and a repair to the rear which have yet to erupt on the outside. I could be pursuaded to accept to not claim my costs in the case - around £1500 but really do feel strongly on not paying for repairs - and where is the fairness when a previous case got all four doors replaced without contribution. Alternatively if I were able to claim for a cash settlement that may be a way forward if I could then investigate alternative less costly repair than replacement (their preferred method if it were a warranty claim)? If there was an agreement in principle and to put in writing would this be a part 36 offer? Maybe I could make the call tomorrow. just as a ramble... This really feels like hobsons choice to me. If I do nothing, and just turn up at the hearing, there's still a sliver of a chance of judge not setting aside (but you strongly suggest otherwise). If I make no contact with their solicitor then extra costs are incurred which arguably would cover the repair (surely solicitor would have mentioned that fact to his client in their interests). If I submit a well defined skeleton argument or two column fact explorer over their defence points, then that could help appease judge but do nothing to appease the opposition. If I try to negotiate I'm expected to accept I pay for any betterment (you'd have to see for yourself the condition of the car, you'd be hard pressed to see any age and weathering), but it brings to an end potentially, but if it went to trial there's also a possible chance they could offer to settle of their own volition. If is such a big word... I'm not making this easy (for anyone or myself) I know. I do try to think of everything

Thanks again.. You make so many good sense points, but in my defence I didn't make the thing rust, why should I have any part in its repair I know you're demonstrating the art of compromise, but it is SO hard - I don't want to have betterment I just want to be in the same position I'd be in had the defect not arisen... so much rollercoaster... I'm really so wound up about it I don't think I can stomach a phone call with their solicitor and for the sake of my health. I try to be as objective as I can and distance myself from the emotions as hopefully it comes across but it's taking a toll. I need to sleep (or lack of sleep) on it.