Announcements
-
-
Tweets
-
Posts
-
By lookinforinfo · Posted
Their letter to you was rather condescending and even rude "-in order to allow a reasonable driver to be notified of the terms and conditions". So f they do decide to go ahead from here remember that when responding to their Witness Statement as they never get that right. -
Trump also threatened blanket tariffs of 15% or 20% on most trade partners, and said he will soon announce new tariffs on the EU.View the full article -
By lookinforinfo · Posted
We still have not seen either the Notice to Driver or hte Notice to Keeper PCNs. As these are legal documents that can help your case could you please post them up. I did ask last year if you didn't retain the NTD that you send UKCPS an sar. Did you do that? If you don't have those two vital PCNs [not the reminders] can you please send off an asr now. Sometimes the rogues use Trace to confirm their address is till valid with a view to sending out a letter of Claim. If you have received the SAR could you please post up its contents. -
By lookinforinfo · Posted
One more thing Madge just make sure that you include the payment confirmation from the phone app to ECP. this will never see Court if anyone at ECP has the ability to read and understand English. Then send it off to court and ECP. Next -at least one bottle of wine between the two of you and relax. It is over.......................... -
By lookinforinfo · Posted
Thank you Restart for posting the original PCN-it is the one that has to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. And thanks to Nicky - I hadn't noticed the word Reminder on the first PCN and wondered why it was posted on the 29th June but Restart said he had received it on the 24th. The original PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act Schedule 4 whicch means that you as keeper are therefore not liable for the charge. The driver is the only one now liable and as you haven't appealed they don't know who was driving so you are both in the clear. It is non compliant because they have not included the actual parking period just their own ANPR times that obviously include driving from the entrance to the parking place and later driving to the exit. Section 9 [2][a] refers- (2)The notice must—(a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; They have also failed to ask the keeper to pay Section9 [2][e] (e)state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges Sadly although both of you are in the clear there is nothing yoycan do to bring this to a quick close. So you will just have to read piles of letters containg threats and unlawful increases in the amount they are charging. They can all be safely ignored knowing that your case will be thrown out should it ever get to Court. Though Dave is right that a letter to Starbucks might get you a quick cancellation. All you have to watch out for is a Letter of Claim which if received let us know and we can advise a snotty letter to send back to them. The snottier it is the more likely they will decide not to go to CourtIn the meantime read up other cases which have been successfful or ongoing cases esprcially ones similar to yours to understand the way these vile companies operate. Do not contact them as you might let slip who was driving and that at the moment is your strongest asset.
-
-
Our picks
-
If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,
If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.-
-
- 1 reply
-
-
Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld
ATJ posted a topic in Big Motoring World,
Hello,
On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.
Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom. Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm. They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.
The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.
I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.
Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done.
Many thanks-
- 81 replies
-
-
A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report
WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,
Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299-
-
- 162 replies
-
-
Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available
BankFodder posted a post in a topic,
We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.
The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.
Frankly I don't think that is any accident.
One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.
Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.
We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
This is good ethical practice.
It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.
OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
-
-
We are now - The National Consumer Service
-
Recently Browsing 0 Caggers
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Have we helped you ...?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now