Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'injustice'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Helpful Organisations
    • The Bear Garden – for off-topic chat
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV/Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - Please register
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
    • Non-Retail subforums
    • Retail Subforums
  • Work, Social and Community
    • Work, Social and Community Subforums:
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
    • Debt subforums:
    • PayDay loan and other Short Term Loans subforum:
  • Motoring
    • Motoring subforums
  • Legal Forums
    • Legal Issues subforums

Categories

  • News from the National Consumer Service
  • News from the Web

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Location

Found 2 results

  1. Hi all, I have to say the civil/tribunal legal systems seem completely in favour of the rich or resourceful. I have brought discrimination claims in the past and I have found that the burden of proof is almost impossible to satisfy on occasion partly due to the fact that Defendants/Respondents are more than happy to perjure themselves as I have personally experienced on multiple occasions. I have also found that judges bend over backwards for the party that has the most resources to challenge their decision(s) (in most cases that would be an employer or small and medium-sized businesses/organisations) If you are living in poverty you have little to no access to justice. Just my thoughts.
  2. Dear Sirs, We hope you can help us or direct us to someone who can. In November 2012, my girlfriend was driving and hit by the car behind. She was waiting at a give way junction but the driver in the car behind was not looking where he was going and drove straight into her car. We were contacted by Ai Claims Solutions, a claims management company. The letter we received stated: "Please do not enter into any correspondence or conversation with the other party. It is our responsibility to obtain payment of the charges from the third party insurance company." Subsequently, the third party insurance company, Quinn Insurance wrote-off our car and offered £1,139.25. We purchased the car just under a year ago for £3,800. It is a 2002, left hand drive, diesel Smart car and as it was not listed in the car guide, the insurance assessor estimated a value of £1,139.25. We disputed this as similar cars on AutoTrader and eBay at the time were selling at around £3,000. As a result, the assessor increased the value to £2,079 and we received a letter from Ai Claims to confirm this new amount. We received a cheque for £1,139.25 but after having chased the remainder of the balance, £939.75 via emails and phone calls, we felt we were getting nowhere and decided to pursue the matter through the small claims court. We pursued the matter with Ai Claims as they had been in correspondence with us and Quinn Insurance. A hearing was scheduled in January 2014. Unfortunately, during this time, my girlfriend was diagnosed with breast cancer and we did not attend the hearing. However, the case was thrown out of court as the judge ruled Ai Claims were not liable as they were not the insurance company. Ai Claims then sought the action of the court to order me to pay Ai Claims' legal costs. Thus, Ai Claims hired MTA Solicitors LLP to represent them. A letter was received from MTA Solicitors, Richard Barr stating "I have instructions not to pursue you for our client's legal costs should you withdraw or re-direct your claim" followed by an email "If by 4pm on Wednesday 19th February 2014 you have not notified me that you have discontinued your claim or applied to the court to substitute my client for Quinn Insurance, an application for Summary Judgment will be made, the cost of which I shall ask the court you be ordered to pay." On 7 February 2014 I sent an email to Mr Richard Barr to confirm that I would not be continuing with the claim against Ai Claims on the proviso that they will not be pursuing legal costs. At the same time, a letter was sent to Bristol County Court to advise them of this development. Therefore, in May I was shocked to receive a letter requesting payment of Ai Claims' legal costs totalling £4,459.32. We cannot believe our bad luck and feel we have not been treated fairly. Through no fault of our own, we have a car that has been written-off and a payment received for only a third of the car's value, plus we have been ordered to pay Ai Claims legal costs. This whole situation has arisen from the fact that Quinn Insurance have failed to pay the full claim and Ai Claims have failed to obtain the remainder of the claim. We have contacted our insurance company, Aviva who do not want to get involved and citizen's advice bureau who were unable to offer any advice. We cannot see an end to this. We would be so grateful for your advice or help so that we can put away this worry and stress. Thank you for your time and we hope that there is someone who can help us with this problem.
×
×
  • Create New...