Being sued over a car I sold :(
Discussion
PorkInsider said:
I'm in. 
Ditto, up to £60 now shouldn't be too long.We can bombard him with endless calls saying i'll be round tomorrow night, dont sell it i really want it, then not show up, or i'll give you a grand and an electrolx fridge door and a playstation 1 in exchange bruv. After 2 weeks he'll take £2k for it just to end the madness.
Edited by OldGermanHeaps on Tuesday 8th December 18:03
If it shows up on autotrader someone should pay the guy a visit, ask a few of the right questions, see who good at honestly representing the car he is.
How long you had it?
Since august
Oh so not long then, had any major problems with it?
....
Did you buy it from a dealer?
No it was private
And there weren't any issues with the sale?
.....
How long you had it?
Since august
Oh so not long then, had any major problems with it?
....
Did you buy it from a dealer?
No it was private
And there weren't any issues with the sale?
.....
Breadvan72 said:
V6Pushfit said:
Burwood said:
Hyde v. Wrench (1840) 3 Beav 334.
I deal with avoiding snails in lemonade usually. The facts of Donoghue v. Stevenson are almost as controversial as its principles. Within the first quarter century after the decision, two English judges proclaimed that there never was a snail in May Donoghue’s ginger beer. In a speech in 1942, Lord Justice MacKinnon said, “When the law had been settled by the House of Lords, the case went back to Edinburgh to be tried on the facts. At that trial it was found that there never was a snail in the bottle at all. That intruding gastropod was as much a legal fiction as the Casual Ejector.” Lord Atkin’s biographer, Geoffrey Lewis, records that this story was traced by Lord Atkin through Lord Macmillan to a misstatement of something said to Lord Justice MacKinnon by none other than David Stevenson’s counsel, then Lord Normand. Twelve years later, in Adler v. Dickson, Lord Justice Jenkins said, “The House of Lords heard the preliminary issue in Donoghue v. Stevenson and when the trial was finally held there was no snail in the bottle at all.”
It is no doubt as a consequence of these high judicial pronouncements that people have come to question whether there was a Wellmeadow Café, a May Donoghue, or a Mr. Stevenson — that there have, indeed, been misgivings about the bona fides of the Great Paisley Snail Case.
Our good friend, John Leechman, son of Walter Leechman and at the time principal of W.G. Leechman & Company of Glasgow, May Donoghue’s solicitors, provided us with much valuable material for our Festival in 1982. He also came to Vancouver to be our guest in September 1983, and at a dinner in his honour Mr Leechman asserted before us all that no such finding as the Lord Justices described was ever made. The trial they reported never took place. Professor Heuston and Vice-Chancellor Megarry confirm this. The reason there was no trial, as Mr. Leechman told us, is that David Stevenson’s executors paid £200 (not £100 as elsewhere stated) to end the matter. So the English judges of appeal had been guilty of what is called in the business “palpable and over-riding error”!
http://www.scottishlawreports.org.uk/resources/dvs...
'Twas indeed ginger beer.
Breadvan72 said:
Actus Reus said:
BV doesn't even have a proper law degree.
Just throwing that out there.
There is no such thing as a proper law degree. Law is not a fit subject for scholarship. All academic law schools should be set on fire. Just throwing that out there.
there is a bit of snobbery about if you go to a uni to study for a law degree and then onto law school for the 1 year (which was the traditional route) or go to a uni doing a different subject like English or Pottery or whatever and then do a conversion course in Law and then go to law school
matters not to me - I did it the right way........ 
Edited by superlightr on Friday 11th December 17:51
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff