Sold a car privately - COURT ACTION
Discussion
hondafanatic said:
The irony in this post is strong - but can people please stop posting?
I keep thinking it's the OP with an update just to be disappointed. I don't think I can handle the rollercoaster emotions of it all!
I bet I upset someone thinking this would be an OP update
You did.I keep thinking it's the OP with an update just to be disappointed. I don't think I can handle the rollercoaster emotions of it all!
I bet I upset someone thinking this would be an OP update
As have I.
hondafanatic said:
The irony in this post is strong - but can people please stop posting?
I keep thinking it's the OP with an update just to be disappointed. I don't think I can handle the rollercoaster emotions of it all!
I bet I upset someone thinking this would be an OP update
Probably. I keep thinking it's the OP with an update just to be disappointed. I don't think I can handle the rollercoaster emotions of it all!
I bet I upset someone thinking this would be an OP update
This one too.
No jury, no dock, no stairs to the cells. Just a fairly conventional room with some tables. Usually arranged with the opposing sides facing one-another, judge at one end, and maybe some seating for 'interested persons' opposite the judge. Usually no "Your Honour" either. Judge usually tones the formality down to "Sir" when addressing him/her. Both sides get to present their case along with supporting documents. Witnesses may be called if there are any, and the judge makes his judgement "on the balance of probabilities".
When I went, my insurer's legal bloke was very confident, as I hadn't been involved in the accident I was accused of driving away from. The judge preferred to believe the claimant's version of events, I lost (but my insurer was the real loser). That was it. Done, dusted, go home and punch a wall because some lying chancer who claimed to have been "a site manager on his way to open up a site to accept deliveries" said that nowhere in his BMW cabrio, or his phone, or on his wrist there was a watch. The case stood or fell on the time that I passed a traffic camera along the route, it seemed to prove that I would have passed the collision site minutes AFTER the claimant stated as the time of the collision. But he just lied and said "no watch - time was an estimate". I had a time-stamped receipt from a petrol station that put me miles away, but because it hadn't been made available to the other side before the case (I only found it when going through receipts when selling the car a few days before the case) it was ruled "inadmissible".
What made the case worse for me was that a few months later I saw a car the same make/model/colour as mine driving in exactly the way the claimant described around his collision, on the same route. Exactly as I had told the court, it was a case of mistaken identity. The police had marked the case as "No Further Action", but the civil court requires a different (lower) standard of evidence.
I sincerely hope the OP wins because chancers deserve to be cast into the burning fires of Hell if you ask me. But until he comes back with a positive result then I would be concerned about the outcome...
Edited by yellowjack on Tuesday 22 August 12:57
Will people stop responding until the op does. I've achieved sweet f a this morning keep checking for a result.
Dam it now you have me doing it. Come on OP, I have to go flying later and won't be able to check the outcome for ages. Assuming the engineers have fixed the bloody plane that is.
I'm secretly hoping they don't so I can find the outcome out asap.
Dam it now you have me doing it. Come on OP, I have to go flying later and won't be able to check the outcome for ages. Assuming the engineers have fixed the bloody plane that is.
I'm secretly hoping they don't so I can find the outcome out asap.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff