We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum. This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are - or become - political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

taken to court over ebay purchase

Options
12357

Comments

  • Bantex_2
    Bantex_2 Posts: 3,317 Forumite
    Options
    cyclonebri1 wrote: »
    OK guys, look, there has been some fantastic philosophical comment to the last few posts.

    I need to update as I totally believe in seeing a posted topic through.

    The complainant didn't defend

    I found I had legal protection for this type of claim as I said I would check earlier.

    Policy paid out as uneconomical to defend.


    So, the complainant has defaulted in regard to his complaint/case

    Case closed. Can I claim my expenses, postal and tele ?
    And yes, I did go not overboard but to the needed limit to press my case. Wasn't need in the end

    Thanks to all that tried to help, if I missed you, sorry.

    Bit confused, I thought he was taking you to court.
  • cyclonebri1
    cyclonebri1 Posts: 12,827 Forumite
    Options
    Bantex wrote: »
    Bit confused, I thought he was taking you to court.

    Yes, he did, but after serving my defense papers on him,, no more response to the court.

    Called them a while back, still no reply inspite of the judgement in my favour,
    I like the thanks button, but ,please, an I agree button.

    Will the grammar and spelling police respect I do make grammatical errors, and have carp spelling, no need to remind me.;)

    Always expect the unexpected:eek:and then you won't be dissapointed
  • keyser666
    keyser666 Posts: 2,140 Forumite
    Options
    You should have requested the court be changed to your local court first so he incurred travel expenses, onj the basis your claim was cast iron.
  • Herbalus
    Herbalus Posts: 2,634 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    Slightly confusing - are you the complainant in your post? You talk about the complainant in the third person not defending the case, and then saying that your insurance policy paid out as it was uneconomical to defend.

    If you accepted your insurance's offer to settle the case with the person taking you to court, then that doesn't seem like this person "got their comeuppance" like you suggested - your insurance company lost out, and this alleged fraudster got money.
  • cyclonebri1
    cyclonebri1 Posts: 12,827 Forumite
    Options
    keyser666 wrote: »
    You should have requested the court be changed to your local court first so he incurred travel expenses, on the basis your claim was cast iron.

    I did, he didn't respond, he hasn't throughout these issues.
    I like the thanks button, but ,please, an I agree button.

    Will the grammar and spelling police respect I do make grammatical errors, and have carp spelling, no need to remind me.;)

    Always expect the unexpected:eek:and then you won't be dissapointed
  • cyclonebri1
    cyclonebri1 Posts: 12,827 Forumite
    Options
    Herbalus wrote: »
    Slightly confusing - are you the complainant in your post? You talk about the complainant in the third person not defending the case, and then saying that your insurance policy paid out as it was uneconomical to defend.

    If you accepted your insurance's offer to settle the case with the person taking you to court, then that doesn't seem like this person "got their comeuppance" like you suggested - your insurance company lost out, and this alleged fraudster got money.

    Sorry Hebulus, you don't understand the procedure Sir.

    My Policy paid out as they don't defend any case they can't make a profit out of.

    They capitulate and pay or they take up your case, but only where money talks.
    I like the thanks button, but ,please, an I agree button.

    Will the grammar and spelling police respect I do make grammatical errors, and have carp spelling, no need to remind me.;)

    Always expect the unexpected:eek:and then you won't be dissapointed
  • cyclonebri1
    cyclonebri1 Posts: 12,827 Forumite
    Options
    Herbalus wrote: »
    Slightly confusing - are you the complainant in your post? You talk about the complainant in the third person not defending the case, and then saying that your insurance policy paid out as it was uneconomical to defend.

    If you accepted your insurance's offer to settle the case with the person taking you to court, then that doesn't seem like this person "got their comeuppance" like you suggested - your insurance company lost out, and this alleged fraudster got money.


    I ain't complaining sir, I'm defending, is this not clear from the 1st post?
    I like the thanks button, but ,please, an I agree button.

    Will the grammar and spelling police respect I do make grammatical errors, and have carp spelling, no need to remind me.;)

    Always expect the unexpected:eek:and then you won't be dissapointed
  • Bantex_2
    Bantex_2 Posts: 3,317 Forumite
    Options
    cyclonebri1 wrote: »
    I ain't complaining sir, I'm defending, is this not clear from the 1st post?
    Still confused, in your earlier post40, you stated that the complainant didn't defend. I cannot see how a complainant can also defend. Was there a counterclaim?
    Sure I am missing something though.
  • Herbalus
    Herbalus Posts: 2,634 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    edited 22 August 2014 at 3:32PM
    Options
    cyclonebri1 wrote: »
    I ain't complaining sir, I'm defending, is this not clear from the 1st post?

    Yes, I get that, but as it wasn't specified in your post what was being defended (was it the original claim, or your counterclaim?), I couldn't work out who was doing the complaining (was it their original complaint, or your counter-complaint?)
    cyclonebri1 wrote: »
    My Policy paid out as they don't defend any case they can't make a profit out of.

    They capitulate and pay or they take up your case, but only where money talks.

    I still don't understand. To whom did they pay the money? To the fraudster for his claim? Or to you because the fraudster didn't defend your counterclaim and hasn't paid you for that?
  • cyclonebri1
    cyclonebri1 Posts: 12,827 Forumite
    Options
    The complainant against me, yes, the chap that brought these proceedings did not defend.

    I don't see how I can maker it any clearer
    I like the thanks button, but ,please, an I agree button.

    Will the grammar and spelling police respect I do make grammatical errors, and have carp spelling, no need to remind me.;)

    Always expect the unexpected:eek:and then you won't be dissapointed
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 12 Election 2024: The MSE Leaders' Debate
  • 344.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 450.1K Spending & Discounts
  • 236.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 609.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.5K Life & Family
  • 248.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards