Hi everyone, I need some advice on behalf of a friend. He started working as a self-employed DPD franchise driver last year. It means you get the title as self-employed but essentially you drive their van, you wear their uniform, they tell you what hours to work & theres little say on your part in this. During the course of his working day, he got into an accident. The insurance companies stated that they could find nobody to be at fault for the collision and any damages were paid for. I believe the other guy who was involved in the crash had quite a high excess and as such is looking to claim this back - by taking DPD to court. This is where things get complicated. The claimant wants to sue DPD to recover costs. As such, the case is being heard in the claimants local county court because DPD are a business. DPD have told my friend he is to travel some 300 miles to this court and represent himself. My friend has had nothing from any court come through summoning him to court. We believe DPD have all the paperwork. We think DPD is trying to make him go to court on behalf of them to deal with this claim. DPD do have solicitors working on this case - we have yet to establish if they will be present on the court date. My question is, if the case is against DPD the company, does my friend need to go? when essentially he was a self employed franchise worker and not an "actual worker". Has anyone got any advice for a situation like this?

Didn't see this anywhere so have posted, apologies if already done,. Needless to say, well, well, haven't they got themselves into a bit of a mess?!! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42012116

Apologies that this is a long post. This is my first time on any kind of forum. I have tried to summarise but my 2 1/2 year dispute with Npower over inncorrect bills been a complicated and very distressing process. I will be very grateful indeed for any advice on how to proceed legally through the Small Claims Court... We moved into a flat in Sept 2013 and when I called to give Npower the opening meter readings I asked to confirm what meter and tariff we were on. I was told it was an Economy 10 meter and noted down from the conversation that there were 3 cables which would give a Day rate, a Night rate and a Heating rate for the 3 night storage heaters with timings for when these rates would operate. You had to press a button on the meter several times to get the readings and I gave the 3 readings as they appeared on the screens. Npower took Actual readings for these 3 rates in Nov 13 and I gave more readings in May 14 at which point I started the complaints process because we had still not had a bill. I received letters with an account number from the complaints department and finally a letter in July 2014 saying because they could not resolve my complaint about not receiving a bill I could go to the Ombudsman. At the end of July I receive a letter with the same account number but this time addressed to the occupier saying that because of problems closing the account the balance would be written off. Followed a week later by the First bill for £366, in my name but with a different account number. In Sept 14 I call to try and figure out what is going on and am told that the first account number I’d received on complaint letters was actually the previous tennant’s but because of the confusion the balance (now £457) would be written off as per the write off letter. I give meter readings – this time 4 readings show on the meter instead of 3. That same day a bill is generated for the heat rate for £868. It is based on an estimated opening meter reading for heat. I am told again a week later on the telephone that my account would be credited to zero - clearing balance of £868 as per write off letter and to disregard any more bills/reminders and to wait during process. In Nov 14 I call again and am given apologies for distressing letters & assured case is with correct back office team. Promised that a correct bill should arrive soon showing the cleared balance of £868.72 and they had correct meter readings so a new bill would generated. I then receive a bill for £1,433, followed by ‘Our right to enter your home’ letter – with an outstanding balance £976. In December 2014 after numerous complaint calls I am given a new complaint reference number and assured collections will stop. In Jan 15 I receive a complaint deadlock letter refusing to remove the balance as promised and referring me to Ombudsman and I begin the Enquiry process. In Feb 15 I give new meter readings and receive a bill for £1481 - Tariff: Standard SC ROB Heatwise 1. I pay £505 for accurate energy usage calculated using my correct meter readings between Nov 14 and Feb 15 (leaving the disputed £976). At the end of Feb the Ombudsman says Npower incorrectly offered to write off the Sept 14 bill for £868 and that I should be given a £25 goodwill payment for the misinformation but that the outstanding balance remained. I did not agree with the Ombudsman proposal and it was reviewed in March 15. I complain that the meter reading Npower used to calculate the opening heat rate was an estimate because it had not been showing on the meter. As this was not part of the original complaint to the Ombudsman they advise me to contact Npower directly. I contacted Npower who agree to work out an accurate opening meter reading but I did not accept the Ombudsman proposal as I still hadn’t had an accurate bill and felt they had not helped resolve my issue with Npower. In April 15 we move out of the property and I give final meter readings and new address. On 1st May 15 they send: An amended bill to our old address for £1318. A letter saying because I’d rejected Ombudsman remedy my complaint has been closed thus exhausting the complaints process and balance is £1362. And a Final Bill for £1452 (the Tariff has now changed to Standard SC ROB 7 Hour Weekend Off-Peak) I call to complain about tariff changing and am told they've re-opened case though they believe bill is correct. Throughout May and June they send another Amended bill, numerous complaint reference letters, and Final demand and Act now to avoid court letters – all to the old address. I email the CEO disputing the Historic debt and Amended Bill and request again that our address be updated and debt recovery stopped. The complaint is logged and I’m given a new reference number. In July I start to get calls from Debt Managers Services attempting to recover a debt of £1,612. In August I receive 5 more amended bills each for a different amount. Throughout Sept and Oct I receive letters from Debt Managers saying my account is on hold while they await instruction from Npower. In January 16 I receive a letter from Npower with a ‘Notice of intention to file a default on your credit file’. Outstanding balance £1452. In February I email complaining that my complaints have not been handled properly and ask about the compensation arrangements Npower agreed with Ofgem. Executive Complaints reply to say I have exhausted thier complaints process and they will not look to raise a new complaint in relation to this query and refer me to their Legal Team. I point out that the Ombudsman instructed me to re-contact Npower to recalculate opening meter reading to which they had agreed. In March 16 Executive Complaints then reply with an incorrect opening meter recalculation (they use accurate winter heat readings to calculate an average daily usage and apply it to 497 days i.e saying we’d use the same heat in summer as in winter!) and advise me again to proceed legally. Moorcroft Debt Recovery begin pursuing the debt and in desperation to resolve this I contact the Citizens Advice Extra Help Unit, who help vulnerable consumers, and they agree to mediate with Npower on my behalf. They challenge Npower throughout March and April but are told Npower's final position was that they would not be opening the case and referred me back to Ombudsman or to take legal action. The amended bills – Falsifying meter readings and placing us on the wrong tariff Having now examined the 5 amended bills of Aug 15 I can see that they have previously tried to ‘re-estimate the bill’ by falsifying meter readings - changing accurate readings into estimates to justify their original estimated opening reading. All these estimates are entirely inaccurate suggesting that I have used thousands of heat units in summer periods when the night storage heaters were switched off. I am suspicious that NPower have chosen to amend the bills with estimates from May 2014 (instead of the 2013-14 winter prior to that when the disputed energy was apparently used) in order to avoid the back billing regulations. I have also asked repeatedly why the Bill that I paid in Feb 15 was cancelled, amended and then re-calculated at a higher unit rate for heat (7p per unit became 12p). No one has addressed this concern. Our tariff appears to have changed from what I understood to be the Economy 10 tariff: Standard SC ROB Heatwise 1 to Standard SC ROB 7 Hour Weekend Off-Peak. At no point did we ever ask to switch tariff or were we offered any explanation as to why the unit price and tariff had been changed, despite me asking on numerous occasions for clarification. Harassment and marking my credit file I have been threatened with court proceedings multiple times, they refuse to put a hold on their collections process so I am still having to deal with debt collections agencies, NPower may have shared data which will impact my credit record and they say this cannot be amended because they claim the outstanding balance is correct and remains payable. They now say I need to proceed legally. My time, stress and worry I have spent innumerable hours dealing with all of this, trying to decipher what has gone on, examining 15 bills, complaining by telephone and email, going through an Ombudsman enquiry that did not help to reach a resolution, and working with Citizens Advice, all of which equates to weeks worth of my time. I have had countless sleepless nights and shed many a tear worrying about everything and feeling bullied by this huge corporation who seem to operate so recklessly with no regard for how peoples lives are affected by this level of stress that they cause. And throughout this period we have a chronically sick child with a rare blood disorder who has been in and out of hospital and Great Ormond St Hospital. Our now 3 year old daughter was first admitted to hospital in a life threatening condition in Oct 14 and has since been admitted 10 times, which Npower have been aware of. I have had to take my energy away from caring for my child to dedicate to unraveling all of this mess and that is extraordinarily painful for me. I am now fully prepared to take legal action, although I have no idea how to do this and do not have any access to financial support or legal advice. I feel completely daunted by the task and almost cannot bear the stress and time of pursuing it further but it seems to be my only route forward. I want to seek damages to be remunerated for this utter failure to handle my complaints and to bill me accurately. NPower’s conduct is far from fair or transparent and does not meet their standards of conduct by a long way. I refuse to be victimized. I realize that this has been a long read and I really appreciate any advice that others can give for me to take this forward legally. Very best wishes D

The following is a copy of a very recent decision from the Local Government Ombudsman. This particular decision is a vitally important one as it refers to the correct procedure that should be followed if an individual has had his goods taken to settle another person's debt. In almost all cases, the goods in question would be a motor vehicle. PS: As the decision is very lengthly, I have split it into two separate posts. London Borough of Ealing (15 016 609) Summary: The Council’s enforcement agents were not at fault when they seized Mr X’s car to recover an outstanding penalty charge. But they failed to advise Mr X of his right to make a claim under the Civil Procedure Rules. The Council has agreed to take the steps recommended to remedy the injustice caused. The complaint The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains that enforcement agents acting for the Council removed and eventually sold his car to pay for a debt which related to the previous owner. Mr X says he provided the Council and enforcement agents with proof he had bought the car in good faith but they did not accept it. Mr X would like the cost of the car refunded. He would also like the Council to reimburse him for the cost of possessions he lost when the enforcement agents seized the car and the hire car costs he has since incurred. The History The car referred to in this complaint was formerly owned by Mr Z – who previously lived at the same address as Mr X. The Council issued a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) to Mr Z. When Mr Z did not respond to the PCN, the Council obtained a court order which allowed its enforcement agents to recover the money owed. On 10 September 2016 the enforcement agents issued Mr Z with a Notice of Enforcement (NOE). This told him that enforcement action had started and gave him 14 days to settle the balance or agree a payment plan. Schedule 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (“the Act”) says that once enforcement agents issues an NOE, the goods of a debtor are “bound”. This means the debtor cannot sell them or give them away. But Schedule 12 of the Act says that if a person buys goods from a debtor which were bound, they can keep them if they can show they obtained the goods: in good faith;for valuable consideration (normally money but can be something else of value); andwithout knowing the belongings were bound. Mr Z did not respond to the NOE and on 28 September 2016 enforcement agents visited his home address. The car was parked outside his home address and the enforcement agents took control of the car. When enforcement agents take control of goods they are deciding which goods they can sell to meet the person’s debt. Once an enforcement agent takes control of goods they are known as “controlled goods”. Enforcement agents will not always remove controlled goods straight away. The enforcement agents posted an inventory to Mr Z’s home which said the car was now controlled goods. They also affixed a notice to the car. To stop the enforcement agents removing the car Mr Z needed to pay the outstanding debt. Mr Z did not respond and the enforcement agents returned to his home on 03 November 2015. They clamped the car and posted a letter to Mr Z asking him to make contact and settle the debt or they would remove the car. On 03 November 2015 Mr X emailed the enforcement agent. Mr X said he bought the car on 20 September 2015. Mr X provided a copy of a handwritten receipt for £3000 and a copy of the “New keeper’s details” section from the car’s V5C (its registration document). When someone buys a car they keep this section and the seller sends the rest of the V5C to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA). The DVLA then issues a new V5C. Mr X also supplied an email confirmation from the DVLA which showed they had been notified using its online service that he was the registered keeper of the vehicle. The DVLA’s online service is relatively new. On 05 November 2015 the enforcement agents visited Mr Z’s home address and removed the car. The enforcement agents had not heard from Mr Z and they did not consider Mr X to have provided sufficient evidence he had bought the car. Mr X emailed the enforcement agents on the same day. He explained he had paid £3000 for the car on 20 September and had already spent £1100 on maintenance. Mr X gave them two days notice and said he would then be seeking legal advice. On 09 November 2016 the enforcement agents emailed Mr X. They set out the events to date and said that “The evidence you have provided to date is a handwritten receipt on a page out of a diary and the new keeper supplement for the logbook. Neither of these documents prove ownership of the vehicle.” The enforcement agents did not make reference to the email from the DVLA Mr X supplied. The enforcement agents also said “We notice the vehicle has remaining [sic] untaxed since 20/09/05, it is illegal to keep an untaxed car on a public highway.” The enforcement agents concluded by saying “we are satisfied that all you have done is changed the registered keeper with the DVLA to avoid seizure of the vehicle...As you live at the same address as Mr Z we strongly suggest you decide between you who will be setting the balance as the vehicle will be released to auction on 19 November 2015.” Mr X replied on the same day and said he had “instructed [his] solicitors to take this matter further.” On 19 November 2015 the enforcement agents emailed Mr X and explained they would sell the car at auction unless they received payment. They did not receive payment and the car was sold. In January 2016 Mr X complained to the Ombudsman. Because the Council had not considered Mr X’s concerns through its formal complaints process the Ombudsman asked it to do this. The Council provided formal responses to Mr X as follows: The Council was therefore satisfied the car was transferred while a warrant was held against it. If the car had been transferred at the beginning of September then the DVLA would have issued a V5C earlier than the beginning of December. If Mr X remained unhappy he could complain to the Ombudsman. Was there fault causing injustice? The Ombudsman is not an appeal body and does not retake decisions which were properly made by a Council (or parties acting on its behalf). The Ombudsman’s role is limited to checking if there was any fault in the way a council made a decision. If there was no fault or flaw, the Ombudsman may not, by law, intervene in the judgment reached by a Council. This is the case even where the Ombudsman may have given different weight to a piece of evidence or reached a different decision on the same facts. I do not consider the Council’s enforcement agents were at fault when they seized the car Mr X says he bought from Mr Z. This is because of the following: Mr X says he bought the car on 20 September 2015. This was after the enforcement agents issued the NOE and when the car became “bound”. The enforcement agents took control of the car on 28 September 2015 but Mr X did not contact them until 03 November 2015 when they clamped the car. Mr X showed the enforcement agents an undated handwritten receipt and an undated “change of keeper” section from the V5C. Mr X says he bought the car in good faith, for valuable consideration, and without knowing it was bound goods. Mr X also sent the enforcement agents an email from the DVLA showing he had told them he was now the registered keeper. I note the enforcement agents did not directly refer to this in their email dated 09 November 2015 – they simply mentioned the undated documents. But they did also say “we are satisfied that all you have done is changed the registered keeper with the DVLA to avoid seizure of the vehicle.” They also noted the vehicle was not taxed from 20 September 2015. A vehicle’s tax is automatically cancelled when the DVLA’s online system is used to register a change of keeper. I am therefore satisfied the enforcement agents did take into account all of the information provided by Mr X. But they did not consider Mr X to have provided enough supporting evidence that his purchase of the car was genuine. This was a decision they were entitled to take and meant they were entitled to seize the car. I also note that: Mr X did not provide the enforcement agents with any proof of insurance from 20 September 2015. Arranging insurance is normally the first thing a person does when they buy a new car. I asked Mr X about this and he said his insurance company needed a copy of the V5C before they could insure it. This is not normal practice. Mr X did not provide the enforcement agents with any evidence he had withdrawn money from the bank to pay for the car. As part of my investigation I asked Mr X about this. He said he borrowed the money from his brother and repaid it instalments. In response to my enquiries Mr X told me he sent the Council a revised V5C in late October / early November. The Council did not return it and so Mr X had to apply for a duplicate – this is why the V5C he has was issued in December. Mr X cannot provide proof he sent the V5C in late October / early November and the Council says it has no record of receiving the document. It is not possible for the Ombudsman to establish exactly what happened. Mr Z did not provide any evidence in support of Mr X’s case. Mr X sent me bank statements for October, November and December 2015. These show payments to the DVLA each month with a reference number which matches the car’s registration number. Mr X says these payments were for the car’s vehicle tax. But there is no evidence Mr X showed this evidence to the enforcement agents. For the reasons set out above I cannot uphold this part of Mr X’s complaint. This decision should not be seen as setting any precedent about what constitutes evidence of ownership. Each case should be considered based on the evidence provided and the particular circumstances of the case.

Hi All I bought a 2nd hand Nissan X trail on 13th January from a local dealership. On 6th February I reported to the dealer that the car was making a loud noise from under the bonnet and that the engine management light had come on. We agreed to send it to my local Nissan dealership for them to run a diagnostic check. They diagnosed the fault code as an EGR fault and said that the noise could be coming from a worn turbo. They advised replacing the turbo and intercooler. After speaking with the dealership I bought the car from, I returned the car to them to investigate and they diagnosed a worn turbo which they took over 2 weeks to replace. They acknowledged the EGR fault, but did nothing to rectify it as the engine management light had gone out. Upon receiving the car following the new turbo, the noise was still there. I reported this again only to be told its to be expected with a car of this age and mileage. Over the past 3 weeks the noise has gotten worse and the engine management light has come on again. I have had 2 garages look at the car for me in the last few days and both say that the gear box is shot and that the EGR fault is still there and the EGR valve needs replacing. I have written to the dealership rejecting the car under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, but after speaking to them this afternoon I fear that they are just going to ignore me and try to fob me off. He is all ready talking about trying again to fix it. Do I have to accept this? or is there anything I can do to force the refund?

Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd Date of issue – What is the claim for – 1.The Claimant's claim is for the amount of £800 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant, under a Store Cards, Credit Cards agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 between the Defendant and Vanquis Bank Plc under account reference xxxxxxx and assigned to the Claimant on 14/04/14 notice of which has been given to the Defendant. 2. The Defendant has failed to maintain the contractual payment under the terms of the agreement and a default notice has been served and not complied with. 3. The claim also includes the statutory interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum (a daily rate of £0.16p from the date of assignment of the agreement to 14/04/14 being an amount of £60). What is the value of the claim? £950 Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? After Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Debt collector Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? The account was opened at a different address to mine. I lived at this address about 20 years ago but have moved twice since then. I received a debt collector letter in 2013 for this and I wrote and said they have the wrong person but I did not hear a thing until March this year when I got a County Court summons. Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? No Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? No Why did you cease payments? I have never made any payments (neither has the person who opened this account) What was the date of your last payment? None Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? Yes, its not my account Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management? No Hi, I am looking for any advice that I can get. TIA. I have copied the bit from the sticky and put my information in and posted it below. I have filed the defence and done all that I can. The case will be in court in a couple of weeks time. I am not nervous about the court bit, I wanted to check to see if anyone has any advice as it is a fraudulent account. I have reported it to the police via action fraud website and told BW Legal about this, but they are not listening. I have proof that the address the account was started out is not mine etc but they are not responding to any of the points that I am making. The main question that I have is: the account was started by someone using my maiden name. The account was started in 2012. I got married in 2003. Should I tell BW Legal that they are using my name wrong?

I am so pleased but also worried sick to find this forum. Briefly, my son was driving my husband's car last year and a third party ran into the side of it resulting in it being written off. It was a classic automatic Mercedes (this may be important). As my son required to travel 50 miles each way to his work location and my husband works in a rural location we required a car asap. We were referrred to Auxilis by Admiral and despite feeling uneasy about it all we agreed to the contract. The following day we were contacted and told that they would deliver a premium automatic car the following day to our home address. I said an auto was not necessary nor a premium and as my son was not in a position to work at this time we agreed for a car to be delivered to our home the following day as we could use the only other car available to us for a day or so. I made a separate call to Admiral and asked very specific questions regarding the hire and cost of it and our liability. I even said that I realise it is very expensive and surely it would be better to get a cheaper hire ourselves. I was told that if we did that then we would be unlikely to get our money back and as it could go on for months before being settled we would be saddled with a big bill, probably thousands. That is exactly why Auxilis is recommended and people like us are referred to them I was told. The following day I phoned Auxilis to see what time to expect the car (as they even suggested that I could choose what type) and was told that the car was already on its way. A brand new 4 x 4 auto thing because our car was a 'premium' car so they provide a premium car as a replacement. This was not agreed to or suggested by me. Cutting this short - the car arrived, it took 6 weeks to get the pay out for the car and we waited to replace it until all was sorted, as we were told we could. The cost of the hire car for 6 weeks is around £7K to my horror. Obviously even though the accident was deemed completely no fault of my son's and the excess was covered in the claim and NCB is unaffected the other insurers are refusing to pay. The court date is set for end October and my husband has to attend (as the insurance is in his name). He is actually unable to attend as he has business travel at that time. I have a few concerns. The paperwork mentions wage slips, credit card details etc. Theoretically we could have put the cost on a credit card or paid from savings - I was told not to. How will this all play out in court? What will happen because he cannot attend, does that look like he is not cooperating, as he agreed he would? We were asked months ago to provide dates he could not attend for the next 6 months. This we did. That brought us to the beginning of September. No questions were asked about any period of time after that so he was not able to tell them that October would not be possible. I am really stressed over this. Any advice please? If we tell the truth in court as above I suspect we would be seen not to try and recover Auxilis' losses.

Basic background is a claim for around £600 against a large retailer. Mediation has failed, a hearing seems to be on the cards. Which, if any, of the following costs can be claimed from the defendant, assuming the claim succeeds of course. witness' loss of earnings for attending the hearing witness' travel costs claimant's loss of earnings for attending the hearing (There are two witnesses who will have to attend because the defendant will not accept witness statements from them instead and is persisting in disputing basic facts on principle) accountant's fees for providing proof of loss of earnings (claimant is self-employed, defendant is insisting on strict proof of the loss of £200ish, 16+ hours, even though the accountants fees will be more than the claim, fees were not included in the original claim)

Served papers re a small claims action raised against me by Shoosmiths on behalf of CapQuest, for a Shop Direct account they purchased. The claim is for a balance iro £500 plus costs. I have my doubts whether SD lawfully defaulted me but disposed of paperwork many moons ago. I intend to make an incidental application to cist the action and request documentation from CQ and SD. If I send the incidental application to the court, do I need to send any of the response forms back?

Hi All Wondering if you can help, I just took a phone call from my mum who is stressing because someone is taking her to the small claims court. Here is the story, sorry it's very long but I will try to make it as concise as possible: 1. She owns a website which sells musical instruments. People can pay her to list their instruments on her site. 2. Someone approached her to sell an instrument for around £500. She was paid £35 listing fee, and listed the instrument on her site. It was described as damaged and to be sold as is, because it was. Seller dropped the instrument off at her house as she better located for pick-ups (nearer London) 3. Buyer bought the instrument blind - did not come to see it, against the (verbal) advice of my mum. 4. Buyer paid owner of instrument directly into his account. My mum did not see any other money other than the £35 listing fee. Buyer's husband picks the instrument up. 5. Buyer tries to return the instrument because it "won't hold tune", my mum advises that it was sold as is and she should not have bought it blind 6. Buyer becomes increasingly hostile and threatens to drop the instrument off with my mum's elderly neighbors. My mum is a bit WTF at this point and tells the buyer to seek refund from the guy who actually owned the instrument, as she didn't receive any money for it. Buyer is not having any of it and insists my mum is responsible. 7. At this point my mum thinks the woman is crazy and ignores further communications 8. My mum receives a notice for remediation and calls the mediator, explains the situation and that the buyer should take the problem up with the seller, but the mediator is not interested in hearing this, so my mum says that "mediation is pointless" 9. The next thing, a letter for the small claims court arrives, and the hearing is on the 30th. I am wondering what her chances are of succeeding in small claims court are, and if anyone knows of any similar cases that we can read /bring to the hearing? In my opinion, this is a bit like someone trying to sue eBay over a listing for an item that is bought as spares or repair and sold as-is. The seller is responsible, not the agent - surely? Thanks in advance all, my mum is extremely stressed out over this. I don't know why she left it till now to tell me. Anything anyone can advise is greatly appreciated.

Hi guys will start this " high level" but appreciate we may need to delve into the lower level detail too.. In April 2017 a case I was a defendant for was "struck" as an order placed by the judge upon the defendant was not complied with. Through the post last night I get a new county court for the same account, same claimant but different "solicitor" to send " payments/ documentation though to. Is this REALLY allowed? and if so in what cases? Just strikes me as odd Thanks

A close friend of mine has come to me with an issue he has with these nice people. He is a very busy guy, so approached them to run PPI checks, he understand they take a wapping 35%. he had 4 results, cap one £160+, Natwest £700+ 300+ from another NWest and some other for £70+, He is YET to be paid out for the 2 larger ones, the other two sent the cheques to the claims guys, They called him up and informed him they would offset the smaller ones against what he owes on the other two, yet to be paid out, bear that in mind. minimum fees for the two larger ones is £350 :o0 and approx £80 for the other two £80 was fees of the small ones and £150 kept and off set against the other £350, he has an invoice asking for approx £200 for the larger two. He was talking to me this morning and he explained what was the situation, he was ok with it.. .until i pointed out, they have breeched their own agreement with him!! As he has NOT been paid for the larger two, and taking into account they run a system where you do not pay them until you have been paid, offsetting the other money is indeed breeching their own rules and agreement he has with them. be warned, these people WILL keep money owed to you BEFORE you get paid for any larger refunds. he has contacted them and is negotiating a outcome, i do not known what is the end result. I just thought this needs to be highlighted and a warning for any one out there to be careful

Hey guys, was wondering if you could give me some advice on whether I've handled a used car situation, as after putting it off as much as possible, I've been given no other choice but to take a car dealer to court 8th December, me and my girlfriend traded in her Corsa for £400, for a Polo plus £500 cash (£900) total. The dealer checked her car, and had access to it for about 4-5 hours. I test drove one car, which broke down straight away, then test drove a similar but more expensive one, but only at 30mph up and down the local road. I refused the £50 Mot offered (Had 4 months left), as I have a very trustworthy garage that I wanted to take it to. As soon as money changed hands, the car cut out when I drove it out, to which the dealer said it was just because the car was parked on a slope and it's just the petrol and would be fine after putting some petrol in it. despite driving 15 mins back to my home, and putting in £10 petrol, the car kept cutting out, whenever going over speed bumps the car would make awful scraping sounds. when I took it to my garage they said there were two minor problems and an oil leak from the sump pan. They said the dealer illegally sold me the car, and that they would have to fix these problems straight away. Dealer argued the case, but eventually accepted that they needed fixing, and booked me into his local garage. 5 days later i took it to his garage, and when the work was done the mechanic denied that he was even told to look at the sump pan, and that he wouldn't look at that until the dealer gave the go ahead (he did fix the 2 minor problems again, contacted dealer, who reluctantly said he would book it in, to which was another 5 days away. When car was taken to garage, he kept it for a few days, and finally rang us to pick it up, but it was still cutting out while driving. due to it being Christmas, it took just under 2 weeks to get it checked by my garage (5th January) to which they said that it wasn't fixed, and that I need to take it back. Again contacted seller who arranged it for the 9th (a day after a month of having the car). On the day I was unwell and my girlfriend didnt feel safe driving the car, I text to cancel, but then the dealer started ignoring us. I tried ringing but no avail. i gave it a few days and then text him again to say that I wasn't happy with the car and would like a full refund. No response. spoke to citizens advice, who said send him a recorded letter. Which I did. But again no response, i text him saying if i dont hear back I will take it to court. Thats when he finally responded saying that it's my fault for buying a used car, and that he won't be giving me a refund and that I can take him to court but to let him know in advance. There's been a lot of back and forth between me and him, but the only thing he's willing to offer is £400 refund as he says the Corsa I traded in had a Head Gasket problem and it's cost him £480 to fix, even though I was not aware of this problem, and he had ample time to check and reject the trade in on the day. He's also listed the car without saying that he's fixed it, but is saying he's fixed pads and discs, which he never mentioned to me. I offered that he could have the Corsa for free, but the minimum I would've taken was my £500 cash back, to which he declined. Now I've applied for small claims court and am claiming over £1200 as I've had to keep the car insured and taxed to keep it on the road as I have no where else to store it I was debating whether to claim for traveling costs, as the car was bought to travel to football matches but I've had to get multiple coaches and trains on the day Do I have a good chance of winning?

Hello, could someone please offer some advice. I received a ccj claim from the ncbc for a claim from Restons solicitors on behalf of their client capquest. I do not recall the debt what so ever. allegedly a catalogue. so i acknowledged the claim in order to give me time to file a defense. I sent restons a request for documents that they mentioned in the particualrs of the claim under cpr 31.14. first one got lost so sent another, they received this on 18/07/17 I asked that the request was carried out within 7 days. this has now passed also sent a cca request to capquest, to date still nothing received. as they haven't replied to my request where do I stand filing a defense when when i cant even see the documents they intend to rely on, its absurd in my opinion. obviously the clock is ticking as i filed the acknowledgement on 11/07/17. as im new to this any advice would be appreciated

I have come across too many complaints about policies being cancelled, when claims have not been disclosed properly when buying Insurance online. The Insurers don't always check the CUE (claims & underwriting exchange) when you buy Insurance online. They then check the details you have disclosed against the CUE database, which is a central claims database used by Insurers. If the details don't match up the Insurers will come back either asking for extra money or to say they have cancelled the Insurance. If they cancel the Insurance, you may not get much notice of this. Insurers are supposed to issue a letter or sometimes email giving 7 days notice of cancellation. But sometimes this is not received or until after the 7 days. There is also the possibility that undeclared claims will not come to the Insurers attention, until you try to make a claim. If this happens, it could put you in a very difficult position. In some cases, the Insurers could void the policy from inception and not cover your claim. The advice is not to buy Insurance online, if you have any claims to declare. You can get some indicative quotes online putting the claims information you have in, but you should really phone companies to arrange the cover. Make sure you are giving accurate claims information and the Insurers are happy to arrange the cover. If you are in any doubt, about claims details, obtain them from your previous Insurers. They are sometimes listed on the renewal notices received. If in doubt speak to Insurers or a brokers. Do not arrange cover online, unless you are confident you have the accurate details to provide.

Hi all Have applied for UC and soon have our interviews. OH is self-employed and works part-time. She doesn't drive, which severely restricts the number of clients she can take on. Should she face sanctions for failing to increase her business, how does that effect our claim overall? Does it just impact on the joint monthly standard allowance? Does it impact on the child element?

Hi All, Has anyone had any success with Transportation Claims Ltd? On 6th June I was clipped on my right arm by a First Bus whilst walking on the pavement. Driver did not stop but it was a loud bang and pedestrians behind me came and checked I was OK. To be honest I was more angry than hurt at the time as I had my wife and kids with me and had literally seconds before made my daughter move away from the kerb. I phoned First bus customer servicesicon within 15 minutes of the incident to report it and although I was still extremely angry I accepted they would look into it and get back to me. I gave them route number, exact location and time as it was an hourly service it would have been a simple process to determine the driver and bus concerned. I received an email cofirming my complaint within minutes. After hearing nothing for a week I called back and they said they could not discuss with me as was a matter of data protection for the driver, but I would hear from them shortly. 2 further days later I get a fairly bland letter stating my complaint had been passed to Transportation Claims Ltd and that no further contact with First would be acceptable on the matter and they would be in touch. 4th July, I called Transportation Claims Ltd quoting the claim ref from the bland letter. The person I spoke to looked up the claim ref and said the matter was being investigated and they must be having trouble finding the exact bus or driver. He then said he would send me the relevant claim forms to fill in and by the time I fill them in and return them the investigators should have finished the investigation. I wasn't badly injured, just some bruising and a sore shoulder and elbow so wondering if this is really worth pursuing? Thanks in advance fro any advice.

Long story short, without going into details.... though happy to if needed... I submitted a defence to a claim against me by a plumber (though the debt collection agency did it on their behalf) in small claims court. The claimant had to respond to my defence by a certain deadline, which they didn't, so a 'stay' has been put on the case. As it was explained to me this means the claimant has to apply to a judge to resume the case. When I spoke to the court they said an application could be put forward any time in the future, so there is no time limit. So I have a few questions I wonder if anybody could help me with... 1) Is that the case that there is no time limit for an application? I've been waiting to get some works complete until this is sorted but if they can put an application in any time this could never be concluded! 2) Do judges often agree to applications to resume the claim? Or must there be extraordinary circumstances? 3) The company seems to have stopped trading under their current name (removed their online listings). If the claimant company change their trading name, or close the business and reopen under another name in the future, can they still pursue this claim? Thanks so much for any help you can give.

Where to start! We have had our car insurance with GoGirl. Someone made a fraudulent claim against us saying we'd hit them with our car, when we hadn't. Their investigators came out to inspect the car, found nothing and left. That was the last we heard of it. Until last month. Our car insurance is due for renewal, and to cut an horrendously long story short, we can't renew our insurance with our 2 years no claims bonus because of this claim. I've told GoGirl the claim was fraudulent, but they just said that because the claim wasn't followed up it was 'settled as no-fault'. However, the claim should not have existed in the first place, and they don't seem interested in following up the fraud. No insurance company will take our no claims bonus into consideration and say the onus is on us to prove that the incident didn't happen! We have 5 days to renew our insurance, but the cheapest we can get is almost £800 instead of the £350 we were quoted online, all because of this so-called claim. I was just wondering whether we had any options, apart from paying a premium for our insurance!

Morning, Myself and two other passengers had an accident end of Feb 2016 with an EU lorry. I was going through some personal issues so upon advice of a friend handed over the case to a claims management company. The case has been ongoing since. I was asked to pay excess and get the car sorted so I have my car for use earliest possible as this case can take few months. I felt that claims management company isn't acting well so have spoken to them numerously in August 2016 pushing them as much as possible. I heard this phrase it takes time as it is a European company and not local - which is understandable but they didn't really do anything to pursue the the other company etc. I kept moaning and pushing them to the best I can and then 3rd week of December 2016 near christmas time I had my excess money returned from insurance company confirming they managed to get their money back. My 8 years no claim bonus was reinstated too. i spoke to the claims management company, did not get satisfactory answer so wrote them to hand over the case back to me and not pursue with the claim as i would like to either pass it to other company or process it myself. No response as always. I then had a letter from some solicitor in Bury requesting some documents. I replied to them via email saying what have you been doing for a year if you need those documents with me now. Why have you not prepared the case already? did not receive satisfactory response so telephoned solicitors office last week. Spoke to a lady who says the case worker is off today, I said you should be able to provide me with an update as you should have an administrative practice in place than saying that person is not in the office. I was then told that actually it is the manager of practice speaking and she didn't like my attitude and that i will be informed via email. I then waited for 4 working days and upon no response emailed them again but two working days have passed and no response. I honestly do not know what to do? These people are irresponsible. anyway i can hold them to account? anywhere i can complain about them. what are my rights? Do you think i should write them and provide them with 5 working days notice to reply and if not I will hire a solicitor and they will be liable to expenses? I am really lost here so would really appreciate your suggestions please.

Hello everyone, This is the first time I post on this forum so please accept my apologies in advance if I make any mistake. We are about to resort to the Small Claims Court due to a sole trader that a month ago did a terrible job on our terrace. My concern is that, even if we will (likely) win, it appears very difficult to enforce the court's decision and have our money back (£530). I read of different ways to enforce the court's decision but I would really appreciate if someone could enlighten me about the action with the highest success rate. This is the story: After receiving different quotations by different traders, basing on the quality of the works previosuly made by the trader as shown on his online websites and mybuilder.com, we decided to hire him to have our 1. terrace deck, front balustrade, 2. side fence built, and 3. a bench built in the corner of the terrace as well as a connecting pipe hanging over its corner. The agreed price for the job was £670 including labour and material (although we provided 2 types of paint). Works were supposed to be finished in 3 days. DAY 1: The trader was supposed to start the works with cleaning the deck by water brush and stated that it would have been delivered by 2.00pm but the water brush was not delivered. However he couldn’t start the cleaning and stated that the water brush had been delivered at a different site. This inconvenience led him to start building and permanently fixing the bench on the unpolished deck DAY 2: Unfortunately the water brush resulted being faulty and the cleaning had to be suspended. In the early afternoon the trader managed to get hold of a different water brush. After finishing the cleaning he stated that he did his best but due to the deck he couldn’t really thoroughly clean the deck. The trader informed me that he made a mistake when calculating the wood needed to complete the job and told him that, in order to continue, he should have bought more wood. I asked how much it would have been and he confirmed that the added cost for the extra wood would have been £45. Considering the situation I felt forced to agree. I asked him if painting the deck would cover a burnt on the deck and he reassured me that it wold have been possible by applying some extra layers of the type of paint (suggested by him). DAY 3: The trader left our flat for about an hour as he apparently forgot something. However the work was not finished so he had to come back on the next day. DAY 4: Before arriving the trader contacted my wife and said that he wouldn’t be able to mount the hanging connecting pipe in the corner (as agreed) as he could not find the parts to complete the job and proposed to swap it with a chain. The proposal was firmly rejected by us so we had to opt for a wooden bar as last resort. The trader left the flat at about 1.30 pm when I was away and told my wife that we were actually supposed to pay extra £72.53 as results of the further material he had to purchase despite agreeing with me that the extra cost would only be £45. Also he provided receipts reading a cost of £61.43 (this matter was successfully addressed though). Post Work Checks: When I was back I inspected the job and noticed that: - The burnt on the deck was not covered by the paint - Despite the contract reading that the trader should have cleaned the walls with the water brush, the walls (and other surfaces) were actually stained by both types of paints, the one used to paint the fence and the bench and the one used to paint the deck. Before him leaving the flat my wife asked him why the walls were stained but he could only reply that it was necessary and that we should have repainted the affected surfaces. More important is that part of the paint used for the deck has stained the walls and the bench: this is stain paint so simply repainting surfaces will not suffice and, in order to fix this up, a blocker will need to be applied on walls. - The hanging wooden bar split open on one of its sides due to the bad nailing, which means that it will not last long - The worst part is that the most planks (approximately 95% of them) used to build the bench and fence are badly cracked to the extent that some parts are widely split apart. Also the trader didn’t even bother painting the inside of the planks completely. - He built the bench on a screw that is now stuck under it and sticks out and cannot be removed (which is likely damaging our deck as well as being a sharp object). He saw this as he also painted over it - There are other minor imperfection like the planks roughly cut due to the use of inadequate tools After asking for an evaluation of the work by another trader it turned out that most of the stains on the wall could have been avoided by simply painting the planks and subsequently fixing them. While the other stains due to the deck paint spread around denote carelessness and a job that very likely was rushed. At the very least the trader could have used tapes and protecting layer to preserve the affected areas. Also, the wood likely split as the wooden parts should have been drilled first. At this point I spoke on the phone with the trader to inform him that we weren’t happy with all the above issues and would not proceed with the payment of the final 20% until he would at least replace the damaged wood. However he refused and said that this would cost us more money. After sending him 4 of the pictures taken to show him the entity of the damage he replied that we should pay him first in order to have him come over later to glue the broken parts. We obviously rejected the offer as he deemed it unfair. As if was not enough, all the pictures of what appeared to be his amazing previous works were taken from other sites so obviously nothing that he could possible ever do. We spoke with the Citizen Advise Bureau and they instructed us so we asked him if he was member of any ADR scheme but he never replied (which means he's not), so we asked him to have an ADR involved but he never replied (which also means no). We also spoke with a solicitor who said that the work is so bad that there's no fear to lose this case. We sent him 3 letters by registered mail and he only replied to the first one by email. He admitted he needs to fix all that mess up in a couple of emails but never confirmed he'd do this before we complete the payment (as requested by me) nor tried to arrange a date to start the works: which means that he wants the money first. He has gone silent for the last 2 weeks despite me sending him texts, mail and emails. Sorry for the long post and thanks for your help.

Hello, I've a similar story where my car got rear ended. I've decided to use Sytner (Mercedes dealer) Insurance to claim for me in order to repair the car in the official dealership. Sytner then uses Auxillis and everything was taken care properly but after 1/2 months I've received the contact from Principia Law where they will act for me to recover the HIRE CAR loses. I'm concerned about the terms and conditions where it's mentioned the costs (success costs + police report etc) that I've to pay that I was not aware! I was not aware of the need for an external company and hidden fees, can someone explain a bit more how this works ? Thanks in advance

Hi there. I hope this post makes sense. I'll try to be concise We bought a used car from a dealer and moved 250 miles away. 20 days later a grinding noise, which may have always been present and mistaken for a sports growl, became so loud that my wife pulled over and called the AA. It was taken to a local garage who had a transmission specialist tear down the gearbox to find the mainshaft was badly worn. The brake discs were also found to be badly corroded. It was the garage's opinion that there was no way this could have been caused in 20 days of driving. And that to a trained ear, the fault should have been noticeable at the point of sale. Total cost of repair £1200 We were in touch with the dealer throughout this diagnostic process. After speaking directly to the mechanic, he sent me an email stating that it was not his fault, that he couldn't tear down every gearbox before sale, and that the damage was most likely caused by reckless driving. He offered to pay about half of the fees, which I rejected and have filed a claim using MCOL. I have documented the damage and I'm the process of getting an independent report based on the evidence I have. My claim is that given the price and mileage of the car, it was not fit for purpose. Because the car was in 1,000 pieces on the other side of the country, I didn't feel it was fair (on the dealer) or convenient for us to pursue my right to reject. Instead I asked him to meet the full cost of the repair. It was the only convenient solution that I could see for all parties. Having said that, I did present both options to the dealer, but as he ultimately did not admit liability, my only course of action was to pay for the repairs and pursue the costs in court. Here is (one of) my questions. By bypassing my right to reject, where does the burden of proof lie in terms of the faults being present at the point of sale?? It is my understanding that by invoking the right to reject within the first 30 days, the burden of proof lies with the consumer and after the 30 days expires, that burden is transferred to the dealer. I essentially bypassed that right, and moved straight onto the right to a repair - but still within the first 30 days!? I have quite a few other questions as I begin to prepare my case, but this is one that is nagging me right now. Any advice, much appreciated. OR... perhaps once it reaches the courts, burden of proof no longer applies, and it simply moves to the balance of probability? (we both provide evidence)

I'm glad to see someone else has mentioned this on here, though not as glad as I might have been a few months ago to have seen it –*I'm in a near situation , albeit via Hastings. Passed onto Albany when, after being hit by a third party with the amount of damage virtually guaranteeing the car, an 2002 Ford would be a write off, I asked Hastings about a courtesy car –*Albany were too happy to help and said I needed to check a few documents online and once signed they'd be able to send a car, albeit a hire car, though they were at pains to point out that it wouldn't cost me anything and that anything about fees on the documentation I should avoid as it wouldn't apply. that done i was passed onto Helphire who arranged for a 2015 Vectra to be delivered. Only kept the car two weeks as I bought a new car then and cancelled the hire car which was then picked up. Seemed like the end of the matter. However after Albany saying in October they were submitting the costs, just over £950, to the third party insurers, the third party insurance have refused to pay so Albany then instructed Principia to act and get the money back and have issued a county court claim, with myself named as claimant and third party as defendant. They sent a questionnaire about the accident and whether there are other cars I could have used or if I have credit cards before sending out the county court form. As with the OP I have an insurance policy which indemnifies me against the third party not paying up (including, presumably, losing the case in Court), but that does rely on me cooperating with Albany in recovery of the costs. Stressed doesn't begin to cover it, it's one of those "had I known then" situations really....

hi I recently finished a full time course at the end of january and started signing on to job seekers allowance while looking for work. At the first meeting at the job centre before anything else was discussed i was told that at the start of all new claims there is a mandatory 12 weeks of daily contact. After questioning this i was told that this is a national policy for all new claims. although im not attending every day i'm getting appointments to attend 2 or 3 times per week and must email my job search activity, jobs applied for, and forward all email responses from applications. i was told this was to help me find work but after almost 2 months all it has involved is keeping them updated on my work search activity with no help whatsoever towards finding work. after searching online i cant find anything about a mandatory 12 weeks of daily contact for all new claims so suspect that it is just some local thing. can anyone let me know if this is a national or local scheme? i expect that things like this are intended for people who who need help or encouragement towards looking for work rather than everybody, and as i was placed on this before anything else was discussed they have no reasons whatsoever to suspect that i might need this extra attention. Is there any national criteria to determine who gets placed on this daily contact which i could use to complain & be placed on the normal fortnightly signing?