** DISCONTINUED ** lind01 v BritishPassportServices - - 20th August 2015

[EXC]

Re: lind01 v BritishPassportServices - claim issued 4th March - DEFENCE BY April 6, 2

Hi Exc

yah I have an e-mail of conformation from HMPO that there was never an appointment made on the date that BPS say they made for me

Bingo! Well done, that certainly puts you in a strong position as it's an absolute defence against their main ground of the claim.

Without wanting to get your hopes up too high there's one other case where the defendant managed to get written confirmation from HMPO that the appointment wasn't booked and BPS withdrew the claim - see here http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...367#post525367

However they didn't include it in their defence and it was only after the defendant has submitted their witness statement (a stage you're yet to reach) which contained the HMPO confirmation, that BPS wrote to say they were withdrawing the claim and even then they didn't inform the court they were discontinuing the claim for weeks.

So we'll need to go through the motions of filing your defence which will mention that you have the HMPO confirmation and, if necessary, your witness statement with the actual confirmation.

You did particularly well to get the e-mail from HMPO after nearly a year as they have a policy of not keeping appointment data for longer than 6 months.

Actually, just reading through your thread again, the particulars of claim state that BPS booked the appointment at London passport office but in your post #10 you say you contacted Newport passport office about the appointment. Are you sure you've got confirmation from the right passport office?

[lind01]

Re: lind01 v BritishPassportServices - claim issued 4th March - DEFENCE BY April 6, 2

Hi

I did call HMPO and the lady who was very helpful and said that they are aware of the third party company BPS, and she directed me to e-mail Newport office because thats the office who deals with complaints, she told me that they can go back and check any appointments made in the name provided and also the office i.e London, thankfully I got a response from them quite quickly. this e-mail address my be help for other who need to defend there case newport@hmpo.gsi.gov.uk . It was a chance that I thought I'd look into and it's paid off.

Linda

[lind01]

Re: lind01 v BritishPassportServices - claim issued 4th March - DEFENCE BY April 6, 2

Hi Amethsty

Should I be copying this, not sure what I need to do. sorry .

Thanks LInda x

[lind01]

Re: lind01 v BritishPassportServices - claim issued 4th March - DEFENCE BY April 6, 2

Does it also make a difference that they BPS are saying the appointment was booked for 29th May 2014 and I was actually on holiday 25th May 2014, which they would have been aware of........

[Amethyst]

Re: lind01 v BritishPassportServices - claim issued 4th March - DEFENCE BY April 6, 2

Have a read through the defence and check the details are all correct - let me know if there's anything you don't understand - put the correct dates in where relevant - and add anything else you think should be mentioned at this stage - I don't think you need to say anything about BPS saying when they booked at this stage - the main point is that no appointment was booked - then you can submit it via Moneyclaim online (it SHOULD be short enough to fit in the space they give) - if not then it will need sorting out to send via email to the court.

Post it back up here once you've made amendments done before sending it and we'll check its all okay and make any final changes.



Email for reference

On 1 Apr 2015, at 16:48, Liverpool@ips.gsi.gov.uk <Liverpool@hmpo.gsi.gov.uk> wrote:

> Dear Mrs xxxxxxxxxx,
>
> Thank you for your enquiry.
>
> I can find no trace of the appointment on our system and the 'British
> Passport Services' does not appear to be affiliated to
> 'Her Majesty's Passport Office'
>
> Any further information, please contact us through our helpline on 0300
> 222 0000 or via E-mail Liverpool@ips.gsi.gov.uk
>
> Kind Regards
>
> Liverpool Contact Centre
>
> Her Majesty's Passport Office
>
>
> The details that you provide to Her Majesty's Passport Office (HMPO)
> and any response from us will be sent to you by unencrypted e-mail via
> the internet. This means that complete confidentiality of your personal
> information is not possible because we cannot guarantee the security of
> the internet communications. If you are not comfortable with this
> arrangement, you may prefer to contact us by telephone or post.

[lind01]

Re: lind01 v BritishPassportServices - claim issued 4th March - DEFENCE BY April 6, 2

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 Defendant visited the Claimant's website on 15 MAY 2014 while looking online for information on how to renew her Passport at Her Majesty's Passport Office ("HMPO")

3. The Claimant, trading as British Passport Services, operates a “copycat” 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.

4. The Defendant had no intention of entering into any contract with the Claimant and in fact only wanted to book an appointment directly at the HM Passport Office to obtain a passport. She was misled into believing the Claimant’s website was the official HM Passport Office website and completed a form online to book an appointment.

5. The Claimant did not provide any services to the Defendant. The Defendant has confirmation from the HMPO stating no appointment was ever booked in her name.

5.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.

6. The Defendant has the right to rescind the alleged Agreement by virtue of the misrepresentation.

7. The Defendant will, amongst other evidence, rely on the ruling of the Advertising Standards Authority (“the ASA”) against the Claimant dated 17th 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 charged by the Claimant was a service charge only, and that an additional fee was payable to HMPO to obtain a passport. The Defendant notes that the Website is now materially different in format and content, however at the time of the ruling was virtually identical to the website www.britishpassportservices.co.uk .

9.The Defendant has added numerous fees and charges onto the original amount. 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 Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“the UTCCRs”).

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

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

[lind01]

Re: lind01 v BritishPassportServices - claim issued 4th March - DEFENCE BY April 6, 2

Hi Sharon thanks for putting this together for me. I have filled in the date and sent copy back you

[lind01]

Re: lind01 v BritishPassportServices - claim issued 4th March - DEFENCE BY April 6, 2

Hi Exc

I've posted up here my e-mail I sent to Newport Office on 31st March 2015

Sent: 31 March 2015 11:52
To: Liverpool@ips.gsi.gov.uk
Subject: appointment


Dear sir or madam


Please could you help me to trace an apparent appointment, that a
company named 'British Passport Services' say that they made for me.
They say that I allowed them to book my daughters appointment at London,
Victoria office on the 29th May 2014.


Her name is xxxxxxx xxxxxxx and address is xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx


I would be grateful is you could check if this appointment was made, and
if not could you send my through confirmation so that I can put this
into my defence before 6 April.


Many thanks


xxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx

[Amethyst]

Re: lind01 v BritishPassportServices - claim issued 4th March - DEFENCE BY April 6, 2

Okay I;ve added a little more in to spell out that you didn't use them so I'd slot this in at para 4

4. The Defendant had no intention of entering into any contract with the Claimant and in fact only wanted to book an appointment directly at the HM Passport Office to obtain a passport. She was misled into believing the Claimant’s website was the official HM Passport Office website and completed a form online to book an appointment.

5. When the Defendant reached the end of the online form the website requested payment. The Defendant was suspicious at this stage and didn't feel comfortable that the site was the official HMPO site. She left the site without entering any further information and thought that would be the end of the matter.

6. The Defendant started receiving numerous emails, text messages and phone calls asking for money. She refused to pay them as she had not used any of their services and did not enter into any agreement with UKS&S.

7. The Defendant contacted the HMPO who suggested she contact the police to report the fraud. She did this and has a crime reference number NFRC1414200879525.

[lind01]

Re: lind01 v BritishPassportServices - claim issued 4th March - DEFENCE BY April 6, 2

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 Defendant visited the Claimant's website on 15 MAY 2014 while looking online for information on how to renew her Passport at Her Majesty's Passport Office ("HMPO")

3. The Claimant, trading as British Passport Services, operates a “copycat” 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.

4. The Defendant had no intention of entering into any contract with the Claimant and in fact only wanted to book an appointment directly at the HM Passport Office to obtain a passport. She was misled into believing the Claimant’s website was the official HM Passport Office website and completed a form online to book an appointment.

5. When the Defendant reached the end of the online form the website requested payment. The Defendant was suspicious at this stage and didn't feel comfortable that the site was the official HMPO site. She left the site without entering any further information and thought that would be the end of the matter.

6. The Defendant started receiving numerous emails, text messages and phone calls asking for money. She refused to pay them as she had not used any of their services and did not enter into any agreement with UKS&S.

7. The Defendant contacted the HMPO who suggested she contact the police to report the fraud. She did this and has a crime reference number NFRC1414200879525.
4. The Defendant had no intention of entering into any contract with the Claimant and in fact only wanted to book an appointment directly at the HM Passport Office to obtain a passport. She was misled into believing the Claimant’s website was the official HM Passport Office website and completed a form online to book an appointment.

5. The Claimant did not provide any services to the Defendant. The Defendant has confirmation from the HMPO stating no appointment was ever booked in her name.

5.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.

6. The Defendant has the right to rescind the alleged Agreement by virtue of the misrepresentation.

7. The Defendant will, amongst other evidence, rely on the ruling of the Advertising Standards Authority (“the ASA”) against the Claimant dated 17th 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 charged by the Claimant was a service charge only, and that an additional fee was payable to HMPO to obtain a passport. The Defendant notes that the Website is now materially different in format and content, however at the time of the ruling was virtually identical to the website www.britishpassportservices.co.uk .

9.The Defendant has added numerous fees and charges onto the original amount. 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 Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“the UTCCRs”).

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

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

[lind01]

Re: lind01 v BritishPassportServices - claim issued 4th March - DEFENCE BY April 6, 2

Sorry Sharon, it's been a long day for me and the first reply ignore and I think it's the last reply you need x

[Amethyst]

Re: lind01 v BritishPassportServices - claim issued 4th March - DEFENCE BY April 6, 2

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 Defendant visited the Claimant's website on 15 MAY 2014 while looking online for information on how to renew her Passport at Her Majesty's Passport Office ("HMPO")

3. The Claimant, trading as British Passport Services, operates a “copycat” 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.

4. The Defendant had no intention of entering into any contract with the Claimant and in fact only wanted to book an appointment directly at the HM Passport Office to obtain a passport. She was misled into believing the Claimant’s website was the official HM Passport Office website and completed a form online to book an appointment.

5. When the Defendant reached the end of the online form the website requested payment. The Defendant was suspicious at this stage and didn't feel comfortable that the site was the official HMPO site. She left the site without entering any further information and thought that would be the end of the matter.

6. The Defendant started receiving numerous emails, text messages and phone calls asking for money. She refused to pay them as she had not used any of their services and did not enter into any agreement with UKS&S.

7. The Defendant contacted the HMPO who suggested she contact the police to report the fraud. She did this and has a crime reference number NFRC1414200879525.

8. The Defendant had no intention of entering into any contract with the Claimant and in fact only wanted to book an appointment directly at the HM Passport Office to obtain a passport. She was misled into believing the Claimant’s website was the official HM Passport Office website and completed a form online to book an appointment.

9. The Claimant did not provide any services to the Defendant. The Defendant has confirmation from the HMPO stating no appointment was ever booked in her name.

10.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.

11. The Defendant has the right to rescind the alleged Agreement by virtue of the misrepresentation.

12. The Defendant will, amongst other evidence, rely on the ruling of the Advertising Standards Authority (“the ASA”) against the Claimant dated 17th 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 charged by the Claimant was a service charge only, and that an additional fee was payable to HMPO to obtain a passport. The Defendant notes that the Website is now materially different in format and content, however at the time of the ruling was virtually identical to the website www.britishpassportservices.co.uk .

13.The Defendant has added numerous fees and charges onto the original amount. 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 Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“the UTCCRs”).

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

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

Just fixed the numbering xxx

removed previous post so to save confusion xxxxxxx

[EXC]

Re: lind01 v BritishPassportServices - claim issued 4th March - DEFENCE BY April 6, 2

Can I suggest changing para 9 to include Lind's point about the date BPS claimed they booked the appointment for being useless anyway? IE:

9. The Claimant did not provide any services to the Defendant. The Claimant claims to have booked the appointment on a date that the claimant knew full well could not possibly have been kept due to my being out of the country on that date. Notwithstanding the Defendant has confirmation from the HMPO stating no appointment was ever booked in her name in any event.

[EXC]

Re: lind01 v BritishPassportServices - claim issued 4th March - DEFENCE BY April 6, 2

Hi Exc

I've posted up here my e-mail I sent to Newport Office on 31st March 2015

Sent: 31 March 2015 11:52
To: Liverpool@ips.gsi.gov.uk
Subject: appointment


Dear sir or madam


Please could you help me to trace an apparent appointment, that a
company named 'British Passport Services' say that they made for me.
They say that I allowed them to book my daughters appointment at London,
Victoria office on the 29th May 2014.


Her name is xxxxxxx xxxxxxx and address is xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx


I would be grateful is you could check if this appointment was made, and
if not could you send my through confirmation so that I can put this
into my defence before 6 April.


Many thanks


xxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx

Thanks, could you post up their response? I'd be interested to see it.

[lind01]

Re: lind01 v BritishPassportServices - claim issued 4th March - DEFENCE BY April 6, 2

Dear xxx xxxxxxxx


Thank you for your enquiry.


I can find no trace of the appointment on our system and the 'British
Passport Services' does not appear to be affiliated to
'Her Majesty's Passport Office'


Any further information, please contact us through our helpline on 0300
222 0000 or via E-mail Liverpool@ips.gsi.gov.uk


Kind Regards


Liverpool Contact Centre


Her Majesty's Passport Office



The details that you provide to Her Majesty's Passport Office (HMPO)
and any response from us will be sent to you by unencrypted e-mail via
the internet. This means that complete confidentiality of your personal
information is not possible because we cannot guarantee the security of
the internet communications. If you are not comfortable with this
arrangement, you may prefer to contact us by telephone or post.