Phones2u Direct.com

justwow

Hi Cookie
Can you please send me the postal address of phone2udirect that you used when you were suing them .thanks

cook!e

justwow wrote: »

Hi Cookie
Can you please send me the postal address of phone2udirect that you used when you were suing them .thanks

Unit B4
Chaucer Business Park
Watery Lane
Kemsing
Sevenoaks
TN15 6QY

DanG_4

A landmark victory was won in the Chelmsford County Court this morning against Phones2uDirect. This was a landmark case because it was won on an issue on which P2UD and several other self-opinionated contributors to this forum (who shall be nameless) claimed that the terms and conditions of P2UD were unassailable.

P2UD had failed to pay the claimed cashback on a 12 month contract because they stated that their terms and conditions (v 3.4) had to be interpreted for a 12 month contract so that it was the 7th, 10th and 13th invoices which were required to be sent to them for the first, second and third tranches of cashback respectively. The claimant argued that this was impossible to achieve for a 12 month contract terminated exactly at the 12th month, because there would be only 12 invoices produced by the network provider, and if the terms were interpreted in the way in which P2UD were claiming they had to be interpreted then there would not be any 13th invoice produced to claim the last tranche of cashback, and it would thus be impossible to achieve the terms and conditions in the manner in which P2UD were attempting to interpret them. Also the terms and conditions of P2UD were deliberately muddled and ambiguous, mixing the conditions for 12 and 18 month contracts so that the NB appeared to apply to 18 month contracts only. The terms and conditions had also been drafted in advance as a pre-formatted standard contract, and the consumer had not thus had any opportunity to negotiate the individual terms or influence the substance of any term (relative to the Unfair Terms in Contracts Regulations 1999, additions to the provision of The Unfair Contracts Terms Act 1977). In addition, as in the Tunbridge Wells case, the claimant was not given any opportunity to redress the balance of the situation when P2UD decided that they required the 7th and 10th invoices as the 6th and 9th, since P2UD had deliberately waited until after the allowable date for submission of the 7th invoice had expired before informing the claimant that they would not accept the 6th invoice as the 6th invoice. The claimant had also produced a letter from the network provider stating that there were only 12 invoices produced by them for a 12 month contract terminated at the 12th month. The claimant had additionally cited the case which P2UD also lost (Graham v phones2udirect) at Tunbridge Wells County Court on 6th August 2007.

The District Judge took 22 minutes to arrive at her verdict, and awarded the claimant their cashback with interest and costs against P2UD.

This now opens the way for other consumers who have fallen foul of this tricky interpretation of the terms and conditions of P2UD with 12 month contracts, who may cite this case. It is not clear that the same approach may be used with 18 month contracts. The case to be cited is Feltham v Phones2udirect, Chelmsford County Court, 14th November 2007.

Quentin

Unfortunately, District Judges cannot set precedents.

DanG_4

Technically correct, but as with the Tunbridge Wells case according to Halsbury's Par 1244 another District Judge would need strong grounds to depart from this spirit of judgment in similar circumstances, if it is cited and in this Chelmsford case the Tunbridge Wells judgment was cited and taken into account?

Quentin wrote: »

Unfortunately, District Judges cannot set precedents.

Quentin

Well, not just "technically correct", but factual. County Court judgements don't set Legal Precedents.

Citing other county court judgements is always useful, but a district judge cannot set a binding precedent - and other county courts aren't bound to follow the same line.

DanG_4

Bit of a legal pundit then are we Quentin? Is that amateur or professional?

How many cases have you won against any of these mobile companies then? A few hundred I suppose Eh?

I suggest you try to be more constructive instead of being so destructive. That is no help at all to these people looking for guidance and help.

Rushabh

Dear guys,

I would really appreciate if I can have some help and answers to following questions. Just to let you know I am also having my court case agains P2UD ahead

My questions are:


1) P2UD have never replied my emails/phone calls. What is the best way to prove this??
Copies of send emails through yahoo are enough?? Or court only accept hand written letters??


2) I want the my local court to refer to the case which P2UD lost on 6th August (Graham vs. P2uD) on Tunbridge wells country court.
Do I have to produce the whole case in court or only claim/case number will do??

3) What’s the best way to claim that the terms and conditions of P2UD were unassailable??

4) Do you have any other cases which I can refer?

I have decided not to give up and do what best I can do from my side. Otherwise the the only option - media contacts...

Thanks you guys...

Dr. Rushabh Vora

Rushabh

Can you please let me know what terms and conditions they urgue you to follow. In my case I submitted original invoice but forgot to send a covering letter and I am having my court case on 8th January.

Many thanks
Rushabh

David_beach

DanG wrote: »

Bit of a legal pundit then are we Quentin? Is that amateur or professional?

How many cases have you won against any of these mobile companies then? A few hundred I suppose Eh?

I suggest you try to be more constructive instead of being so destructive. That is no help at all to these people looking for guidance and help.

In my opinion Quentin WAS being constructive, his statement is fact and should be followed, might save you £30+, after all thats what we are all here for, are we not?

To many people on rubbish advice from "experts" on here have issued MCOL with out consideration of weather they actually have a case or not.

Ignorence is not a defence and neither is it a reason to justify an attack.