Tweet
LITSON v BRITISH PASSPORT SERVICES - WE WON TODAY!
Hello Everyone,
Good news - we had our court hearing today in London and it was over in no time...Thank you Leagle Beagles for all of your excellent support and advice.:clap2::clap2::clap2:
BPS didn't show up (They told the court "it wouldn't be cost effective for them to attend") so we then had a hearing with the judge to relay our defence and concluding, the judge not only dismissed the case but also made a demand to BPS to pay out £75 for costs incurred for us to be there.
IF YOU ARE IN ANY DOUBT - GO TO COURT - YOU WILL WIN. I also read a report yesterday in the scary mail that Richard Howard was arrested at the end of June so Trading Standards are really closing in on this evil shark. (http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/c...nt-police.html)
Our case is very similar to many people out there:
Yes, we checked the box without really reviewing the small print (...because we were focused on getting the emergency appointment that they promised). This is their only real claim but it doesn't make it legal:
- We wanted to get an emergency appointment to follow up on an existing (post office approved) application form...therefore we had no need for many of the services they added to their bulk package.
- They knowingly booked our alleged emergency appointment on the date of our travel - 11 days later.
...It was a simple process in court - a few weeks ago we received their witness statement (they went to a lot of trouble with it Exhibit A, B, C etc) and admittedly it scared me a bit because it looked well prepared albeit with their usual occasional typos and lightly aggressive choice of language ;-). We had to submit a copy back to them within 14 days of our hearing and also to the court in our defence. To be honest we're so busy juggling our daily lives that our response wasn't very detailed - but in all honesty it doesn't need to be.
The judge firstly asked me to put forward simply what happened - Do this as plainly as possible.
The judge asked what the experience of using their website was like - he allowed me to show him a screen grab of the website which showed proof of promises of next day appointments etc and prominent displays of imagery such as passports and 'urgent appointments etc. - I then explained that we were guided through their online form which asked to accept their terms before submitting further details about our need - I explained that I blinkered to believing that they were going to help so I clicked ok to the tickbox and then gave dates of our travel on a following page. By the time it got to the payment stage I realised they were not affiliated with the official government and clicked away...the rest (letters, calls texts etc - are all the same, irritating story you have all experienced)
In his summary, the judge concluded that I did click their terms, but having acknowledged that they did not provide any service that was clearly promised on their website, this does not permit them to charge anything. Case dismissed - he then asked if we had incurred any costs in being there - we said childcare (£50) and travel (£20)- which he wrote down - and stated that they are ordered to pay this by August 6th. Will we get this???! Not sure ....but so keen was the judge to sting him back (OK - he didn't make it too obvious, but we definitely think he thought badly of Richard Howard)...we should have asked for more!
Our advice:
Don't be afraid to go all the way - we're so pleased we did. We nearly gave up at mediation stage but it is really worth sticking it to the man.
Keep your defence clear & simple - don't be afraid to be a consumer - they won't expect you to be a solicitor
Don't worry if you don't have much evidence of correspondence from them (we threw a lot of ours away thinking it was junk mail) - it doesn't matter - just make a note of the key dates. Write out your main points of defence and read through their claim - it's full of nonsense but you can pick lots of holes in it.
GOOD LUCK - X :grin::yo::amen::bump2::rockon:
Good news - we had our court hearing today in London and it was over in no time...Thank you Leagle Beagles for all of your excellent support and advice.:clap2::clap2::clap2:
BPS didn't show up (They told the court "it wouldn't be cost effective for them to attend") so we then had a hearing with the judge to relay our defence and concluding, the judge not only dismissed the case but also made a demand to BPS to pay out £75 for costs incurred for us to be there.
IF YOU ARE IN ANY DOUBT - GO TO COURT - YOU WILL WIN. I also read a report yesterday in the scary mail that Richard Howard was arrested at the end of June so Trading Standards are really closing in on this evil shark. (http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/c...nt-police.html)
Our case is very similar to many people out there:
Yes, we checked the box without really reviewing the small print (...because we were focused on getting the emergency appointment that they promised). This is their only real claim but it doesn't make it legal:
- We wanted to get an emergency appointment to follow up on an existing (post office approved) application form...therefore we had no need for many of the services they added to their bulk package.
- They knowingly booked our alleged emergency appointment on the date of our travel - 11 days later.
...It was a simple process in court - a few weeks ago we received their witness statement (they went to a lot of trouble with it Exhibit A, B, C etc) and admittedly it scared me a bit because it looked well prepared albeit with their usual occasional typos and lightly aggressive choice of language ;-). We had to submit a copy back to them within 14 days of our hearing and also to the court in our defence. To be honest we're so busy juggling our daily lives that our response wasn't very detailed - but in all honesty it doesn't need to be.
The judge firstly asked me to put forward simply what happened - Do this as plainly as possible.
The judge asked what the experience of using their website was like - he allowed me to show him a screen grab of the website which showed proof of promises of next day appointments etc and prominent displays of imagery such as passports and 'urgent appointments etc. - I then explained that we were guided through their online form which asked to accept their terms before submitting further details about our need - I explained that I blinkered to believing that they were going to help so I clicked ok to the tickbox and then gave dates of our travel on a following page. By the time it got to the payment stage I realised they were not affiliated with the official government and clicked away...the rest (letters, calls texts etc - are all the same, irritating story you have all experienced)
In his summary, the judge concluded that I did click their terms, but having acknowledged that they did not provide any service that was clearly promised on their website, this does not permit them to charge anything. Case dismissed - he then asked if we had incurred any costs in being there - we said childcare (£50) and travel (£20)- which he wrote down - and stated that they are ordered to pay this by August 6th. Will we get this???! Not sure ....but so keen was the judge to sting him back (OK - he didn't make it too obvious, but we definitely think he thought badly of Richard Howard)...we should have asked for more!
Our advice:
Don't be afraid to go all the way - we're so pleased we did. We nearly gave up at mediation stage but it is really worth sticking it to the man.
Keep your defence clear & simple - don't be afraid to be a consumer - they won't expect you to be a solicitor
Don't worry if you don't have much evidence of correspondence from them (we threw a lot of ours away thinking it was junk mail) - it doesn't matter - just make a note of the key dates. Write out your main points of defence and read through their claim - it's full of nonsense but you can pick lots of holes in it.
GOOD LUCK - X :grin::yo::amen::bump2::rockon:
eace::clap2::clap2:
with another bright entrepreneur who very nearly ripped me off in a similar way, Mr B Rankine. 
)
Comment