Tortes (interference with goods) Acts 1977

We might be able to work it out.
Post Reply
williamson
Posts: 4
Joined: 20 Apr 2016 15:55

#1 Tortes (interference with goods) Acts 1977

Post by williamson » 21 Apr 2016 09:09

My car was taken illegally for several reasons - the court ordered its return and its contents. The car was returned - damaged and missing its contents. The court agreed we could make a claim under the Torts (iwg) act.
The bailiff drove the car away himself and did not leave either an inventory or condition report. They have some poor quality photos of the exterior but that is it.
The case has now been to court 3 times - each time the defendant (who was the claimant - that makes me smile every time I say that) has a new solicitor. They tried to argue that it was not his responsibility however the court has agreed that it is.
They have now put their defence in re - the claim for loss / damages.

Firstly they say that we can't claim new for old as that would be "betterment" - is that correct?

Originally we were claiming for £20 per day for the 12 days we were without the car - because that is what we paid to rent a Ford Fiesta but the car that was taken was a 3 year old Volvo estate - can I claim more? - can I claim for deprivation as well as the cost of replacing it for the 12 days?

Most of the items that have been stolen from the car belonged to my children and we have not been able to replace them - I have put £20 per day deprivation, they have been without them for the best part of a year - but this now comes to over £5000 - can I claim for deprivation and replacement?

They are saying that we can't claim simply for being without the car we must claim for actual loss - I assume because I put in £20 per day and not the actual rental receipt.

Finally - the items that are missing - it is our word against theirs but the judge has said to them it is up to them to prove that they weren't in the car - we have submitted receipts and photos where poss. to prove ownership - some items were gifts so we have no proof - is it good enough?
Sorry for that great big ramble - any help would be much appreciated!!
Best wishes Laura

User avatar
jasonDWB
Posts: 14798
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Contact:

#2 Re: Tortes (interference with goods) Acts 1977

Post by jasonDWB » 21 Apr 2016 09:35

Betterment only applies to insurance policies. Nothing to do with unlawful interference or damages.

You can recover the provable cost of the repairs. The cause of action can be paragraph 66 of Schedule 12 for breach of paragraph 35. You need EVIDENCE of the damage and EVIDENCE of the cost of the repairs and replacement goods. You are allowed new for old because you are subject to tort. Not an insurance policy.

Never claim "market value" of anything. It's always "replacement cost" because that includes reprovisioning a car back on the road. MOT tax insurance valeting repair and delivering it up to you.

When a court orders a bailiff to return a car and it's contents, the order will always say "deliver up to the claimant the goods in the condition at which they were taken".
Author, Dealing with Bailiffs. Beat the Bailiffs
Instant phone consultation with me: Click here

williamson
Posts: 4
Joined: 20 Apr 2016 15:55

#3 Re: Tortes (interference with goods) Acts 1977

Post by williamson » 21 Apr 2016 11:24

we haven't replaced any of the missing items as we can't afford to - so we have no proof apart from that we have in the past owned them.
Usually it is the job of the claimant to prove their case - however as there was no inventory taken - the judge did say to the defendant it is your responsibility to prove the items were not in the car - we are worried that without proof we will get nothing.
We have photos of the damage and an estimate from the garage - but we haven't had the work done as we can't afford it. If they didn't take an inventory or condition report does the proof lie with them?

User avatar
jasonDWB
Posts: 14798
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Contact:

#4 Re: Tortes (interference with goods) Acts 1977

Post by jasonDWB » 21 Apr 2016 13:17

Make an inventory of the contents and an estimate of the replacement cost and see if the court will run with it.

It doesn't matter of the work to repair the damage hasn't been done, the quotations for the work will suffice

Your case will rest very heavily on how much time lapsed from collecting your car and notifying the creditor or bailiff the extent of the damage and missing content. The more time lapsed, the weaker the claim.

That's why I have clients inventorise and list all damages with photographs and a walkthrough commentary video at, or outside the compound before loading it onto the truck for delivering it back to the client.
Author, Dealing with Bailiffs. Beat the Bailiffs
Instant phone consultation with me: Click here

williamson
Posts: 4
Joined: 20 Apr 2016 15:55

#5 Re: Tortes (interference with goods) Acts 1977

Post by williamson » 21 Apr 2016 14:42

Thank you that makes me feel better - you helped us at the time and we informed the claimant and bailiff company when we received it both by email and recorded letter and we took photos and a condition report/ inventory with the guy that returned the car.
Thank you, thank you
Laura

williamson
Posts: 4
Joined: 20 Apr 2016 15:55

#6 Re: Tortes (interference with goods) Acts 1977

Post by williamson » 22 Apr 2016 10:33

I have one more question - our case has been to court 3 times and we are waiting for the date - hopefully of the final hearing. The judge we have has dealt with the case so far and is very much on our side - the claimant that is now the defendant is requesting that the next hearing is held in his local court which is his right and they are quoting laws to support it.
We are going to ask for continuity, also my husband is still ill as a consequence of the incident and it was originally in our local court because we were the defendants - is there any legal procedure that we can quote or do you think these arguments will be enough?
How do I make a donation to your site/ you
thank you
Laura

User avatar
jasonDWB
Posts: 14798
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Contact:

#7 Re: Tortes (interference with goods) Acts 1977

Post by jasonDWB » 22 Apr 2016 12:18

If the defendant is an individual then its at their local court. Otherwise its at the claimants court. Ask the court to hear the claim locally to you.
Author, Dealing with Bailiffs. Beat the Bailiffs
Instant phone consultation with me: Click here

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest