*** WON ***CDES9194 v British Passport Service - N180 returned

[Amethyst]

[Amethyst]

Re: CDES9194 v British Passport Service - issue date 13th March

cdes9194
VIP Member





Re: British Passport Services Ltd

I am trying to put together a defence please find below a draft of my proposed defence.


I believe this website was set up for the purpose of willfully deceiving people into believing they are dealing with HM passport office. By use of clever design, keywords and search engine optimization and not for the services they are claiming.
Back in July last year I used google to make an appointment with my local passport office in Liverpool and believing I was on the government website made an appointment through what I now know as British Passport services, who willfully misrepresented itself as HM Passport Offices .I had no intention of entering into a contract with the claimant believing I was dealing directly with HM passport office.
I later cancelled the appointment British Passport Services claim they made on my behalf - which I believe was never made with HM passport office.

Can you please offer any comments on this defence.

Thank you
David Chapman

[Amethyst]

Re: CDES9194 v British Passport Service - issue date 13th March

Expanded it a little bit.

DEFENCE

1. Save where otherwise accepted within this Defence, the Particulars of Claim are denied. In particular, the Defendant denies entering into an effective and binding Agreement with the Claimant as alleged by the Particulars of Claim, or at all.

2. The Claimant, trading as British Passport Services, operates a “copycat” website, www.BritishPassportServices.co.uk (“the Website”), which claims to offer access to Government services for which the Claimant is not an official Government provider, specifically in relation to UK Passports. The Claimant used misleading advertising, words, and conduct to induce the Defendant to enter into an alleged Agreement to provide “services” in relation to obtaining a Passport, contrary to the Misrepresentation Act 1967.

3. The Defendant searched on-line for information on how to make an appointment with his local passport office in Liverpool. He came upon the Claimant's website www.BritishPassportServices.co.uk which he believed to be the official HM Passport Office website. The Defendant had no intention of entering into a contract with the Claimant and simply wanted to book an appointment with HM Passport Office in Liverpool.

4. The Defendant was misled into believing the Claimant’s website was the official HM Passport Office website and completed a form online to book an appointment. The Claimant’s advertising, conduct, express words, or overall presentation of the Claimant’s website was such that it deceived the Defendant and was likely to deceive the average consumer; it caused the Defendant, and was likely to cause the average consumer, to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise. The Defendant completed the online form and entered his payment details to the Claimant's website.

5. The Defendant has the right to rescind the alleged Agreement by virtue of the misrepresentation. The Defendant exercised this right when he contacted the Claimant to request cancellation of any service.

6. The Defendant will, amongst other evidence, rely on the ruling of the Advertising Standards Authority (“the ASA”) against the Claimant dated 17 September 2014 in relation to the Claimant’s website www.ukpassportoffices.co.uk. Specifically, the Defendant will be relying on the ASA’s ruling that: The Claimant’s website misleadingly implied that it was the official website for HMPO; and The Claimant’s website was misleading, because it did not make clear that the fee charges by the Claimant was a service charge only, and that an additional fee was payable to HMPO to obtain a passport.

7. Further, or in the alternative, the alleged Agreement was entered into by mistake and is thus void. The Defendant was mistaken as to the identity of the Claimant due to the Website’s misleading nature; the Defendant adopts and repeats the paragraphs above in this regard.

8. The alleged Agreement was conducted through the Defendant’s website, www.BritishPassportServices.co.uk. The alleged Agreement, if valid, amounts to a Distance Contract as set out in Regulation 5 of the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 (“the 2013 Regulations”).

9. The Defendant exercised his right to cancel the alleged Distance Contract under Regulation 29 of the 2013 Regulations, and within the Normal Cancellation Period under Regulation 30 of the 2013 Regulations. The Defendant therefore has no obligations under the alleged Agreement, as set out by Regulation 33 of the 2013 Regulations (or otherwise). The alleged debt is therefore not due to the Claimant.

10. The Claimant failed to give confirmation of the alleged Agreement in a Durable Medium, contrary to Regulation 5 and Regulation 16(1) of the 2013 Regulations. The alleged performance of the alleged “services” under the alleged Agreement took place without such confirmation being sent in a Durable Medium, contrary to Regulation 16(4) of the 2013 Regulations. Any performance of the alleged “services” is in breach of the alleged Agreement, contrary to Regulation 18 of the 2013 Regulations, such that the Defendant is not liable to pay for those alleged “services”.

11. Further, or alternatively, the alleged “service” was not started and/or completed before the Defendant cancelled the alleged Agreement, such that the Defendant can only be liable for those “services” that were actually supplied. No appointment was booked at the HM Passport Office in the Defendant's name by the Claimant.

12. Further or alternatively, the Claimant failed to supply information on the right to cancel required by paragraph (l) of Schedule 2 to the 2013 Regulations, such that the Defendant is not liable to pay for any alleged “services” that were in fact carried out prior to the cancellation of the alleged Agreement.

13. Further, or alternatively, if the Cancellation Term was incorporated (not admitted), the Defendant avers that it is an unfair term and causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations to the detriment of the Defendant as a consumer, contrary to Regulation 5(1) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“the UTCCRs”). The Cancellation Term, inter alia, inappropriately excludes/limits the legal rights of the Defendant (Schedule 2, 1(b)) and/or seeks to irrevocably bind the Defendant to a term with which he had no real opportunity of becoming acquainted before the conclusion of the contract (Schedule 2, 1(i)).

14. The Defendant accordingly submits that the Cancellation Term is unenforceable.

15. The Claimant has added additional costs, fees and charges to the Claim, which are not provided for under the alleged Agreement. As such, they are not enforceable.

16. Further or alternatively, if the relevant fees and charges are incorporated into the alleged Agreement (which is denied) by virtue of a specific clause (“the Relevant Clause”), then those fees and charges are excessive and disproportionate, and the Relevant Clause is therefore contrary to the requirement of good faith, and causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations to the detriment of the Defendant as a consumer, contrary to Regulation 5(1) of the the UTCCRs.

17. Further, or alternatively, these charges are penalties and are therefore unenforceable at common law.

18. The Defendant denies the Claimant is entitled to the relief as claimed, or at all.

[Kati]

Re: CDES9194 v British Passport Service - issue date 13th March

[MENTION=63830]cdes9194[/MENTION] ... Ame's done a bit more for your defense

[tyke1601]

Re: CDES9194 v British Passport Service - issue date 13th March

So I guess Howard is STILL issuing claims - unbelievable!!!

[Nibbler]

Re: CDES9194 v British Passport Service - issue date 13th March

So I guess Howard is STILL issuing claims - unbelievable!!!

As long as it makes him money, and it's not landing him in serious trouble, he is too much of a scumbag to just stop.

[cdes9194]

Re: CDES9194 v British Passport Service - defence submitted 24th march

Due to a family bereavement I did not get round to start completing the form N180 until today. I have a few queries please
Could you assist me.
A1 – do you agree to the case being referred to the small claims mediation service. Should I answer yes or no?
C 1 – do you agree that the small claims track is appropriate track for this case. Should I answer yes or no?
D1 - I will ask for it to be transferred to Manchester County Court.
D2 – are you asking for the Courts permission to use written evidence of an expert.Yes or no?
D3 – how many witnesses including yourself will give evidence at the hearing. ??
D4 – days not available. Laura is pregnant and due 6^th August so we would anticipate she would not be available from early July to end September. She also has a family holiday booked October school break.

Again I would appreciate your kind assistance.
David Chapman

[Amethyst]

Re: CDES9194 v British Passport Service - defence submitted 24th march

Hiya, Replied on email, will copy/paste it here

A1 – do you agree to the case being referred to the small claims mediation service. Should I answer yes or no? - Completely up to you, I'd put no, but you might want to come to a compromise, maybe offer to pay the £10 for booking the appointment... but really I'd go with No. He will say yes and will send you a message after you have completed yours offering to send an email to the court to change your mind to yes.



C 1 – do you agree that the small claims track is appropriate track for this case. Should I answer yes or no? YES

D1 - I will ask for it to be transferred to Manchester County Court. YEs - if that is your closest/most convenient

D2 – are you asking for the Courts permission to use written evidence of an expert.Yes or no? No

D3 – how many witnesses including yourself will give evidence at the hearing. ?? 1

D4 – days not available. Laura is pregnant and due 6^th August so we would anticipate she would not be available from early Ju ly to end September. She also has a family holiday booked October school break. Ahh congratulations You'll need to write that on the form.

[cdes9194]

Re: CDES9194 v British Passport Service - N180 returned

Attended court today (13.07.2015). The Claimant BPS failed to turn up and didnt not notify the courts or myself that he was not attending the hearing, resulting in the judge striking out the claim for not complying with court procedure.

[Amethyst]

Re: CDES9194 v British Passport Service - N180 returned

Good stuff, well done cdes xxx

[ostell]

Re: *** WON ***CDES9194 v British Passport Service - N180 returned

Was the question of costs raised?