Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
    • To which official body does one make a formal complaint about a LPA fixed charge receiver? Does one make a complaint first to the company employing the appointed individuals?    Or can one complain immediately to an official body, such as nara?    I've tried researching but there doesn't seem a very clear route on how to legally hold them to account for wrongful behaviour.  It seems frustratingly complicated because they are considered to be officers of the court and held in high esteem - and the borrower is deemed liable for their actions.  Yet what does the borrower do when disclosure shows clear evidence of wrong-doing? Does anyone have any pointers please?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • 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
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • 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
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 997 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

How come there was never a date set to activate it, maybe they never will :)

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boris Johnson is apparently looking to get shot of Cameron quickly and to trigger article 50 before Brexit is stopped. Apparently consent of Scottish Parliament is needed before UK can exit the EU. This is required under the Scotland Act.

 

http://www.smh.com.au/world/can-brexit-be-overturned-what-brits-are-asking-each-other-20160625-gprz3u.html

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leading 'out' campaigner Boris Johnson says the margin by which the UK voted to leave the European Union was "not entirely overwhelming"

 

This was on Sky. Me thinks Boris is looking for a way out and a second referendum

 

Cameron and Boris have been partners from the start in my opinion

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leading 'out' campaigner Boris Johnson says the margin by which the UK voted to leave the European Union was "not entirely overwhelming"

 

This was on Sky. Me thinks Boris is looking for a way out and a second referendum

 

Cameron and Boris have been partners from the start in my opinion

 

Boris sounds like a hypocrite now..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do we need the permission of Scotland, we voted as the UK and to which Scotland is part of. The result of the referendum is to leave the EU and the will of the majority must be respected..

 

Because of fhe complicated legal relationship between four separate countries in a union. The UK is not really one country, but a union of countries. For example Scotland has a different legal system to England and Wales. Northern Ireland also has different ways of doing things.

 

Under the Scotland act, before the UK parliament could change such a fundamental thing as Scotlands membership of the EU, the consent of the Scottish parliament would be needed. It is whether the Scottish parliament are willing to frustrate the whole of the UK and cause a major constituitional crisis between countries. If i were the SNP, i would use this as a way to negotiate a better deal for Scotland.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Article 50 explained

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/36634702/article-50-the-simplest-explanation-youll-find

 

Experts say it will probably take the UK 10 years to leave the EU !

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

just Bye Bye that is it, get on with life. all this pussy footing we must do this that & the other, and the big money job for the Boys taking over to attend a stupid meeting which produces the same end product without a meeting which cost 100,000s or more! ahhhhhhh

:mad2::-x:jaw::sad:
Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt will ever will now, as pointed out Cameron has handed the poison chalice of pushing the nuclear button of applying for section 50 to the next leader, Boris clearly had doubts about it and there are serious legal issues such as parliament has to agree to leave and as Heseltine pointed out, the majority do not want to, mp Lam has expressed concerns, Boris and gove have suggested "discussions", leaving also adds Scottish and Irish complications.

 

Even many leavers now agree that the while thing is an absolute mess, it is also beginning to tear apart both the Tory and labour parties.

Link to post
Share on other sites

just Bye Bye that is it, get on with life. all this pussy footing we must do this that & the other, and the big money job for the Boys taking over to attend a stupid meeting which produces the same end product without a meeting which cost 100,000s or more! ahhhhhhh

 

Divorce is never easy and Brexit will be a complete nightmare costing a fortune. The cost to the UK will be tens of billions.

 

As long as people don't mind seeing a cut in pensions and withdrawal of others benefits they receive. That could well happen, if the economy does go into recession as predicted. The other silly thing is that more people from the EU will come to the UK before any exit date and that will mean more pressure on public services. 17 million people voted to be in a worse position, but if sovereignty is important to them, then they may see it as a price worth paying.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone got any views on this article.

As the dust settles on the EU referendum battleground, some 33 million voters await with bated breath to see what the victors will do now that the nation has spoken to leave.

 

Political commentators forecast a dark future for the UK: Jeremy Corbyn has just sacked Hilary Benn to head off a coup, and Boris Johnson could be prime minister come November.

 

David Cameron’s decision to resign before enacting Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which sets out how a country could leave the EU, may have much bigger implications for Conservative hopefuls eyeing up the Prime Minister's seat than they bargained for.

 

While panic ensues, one person’s musings in the comments section of the Guardian has an interesting hypothesis on these complications:

 

The comment, which was picked up on Twitter, has been shared thousands of times.

 

If true, that is some parting gift.

 

http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/people-are-really-really-hoping-this-theory-about-david-cameron-and-brexit-is-true--bJhqBql0VZ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because of fhe complicated legal relationship between four separate countries in a union. The UK is not really one country, but a union of countries. For example Scotland has a different legal system to England and Wales. Northern Ireland also has different ways of doing things.

 

Under the Scotland act, before the UK parliament could change such a fundamental thing as Scotlands membership of the EU, the consent of the Scottish parliament would be needed. It is whether the Scottish parliament are willing to frustrate the whole of the UK and cause a major constituitional crisis between countries. If i were the SNP, i would use this as a way to negotiate a better deal for Scotland.

 

its called , i want more power and unless you give it too me we wont help you , personally all the scots ive spoken to cant stand her

Link to post
Share on other sites

its called , i want more power and unless you give it too me we wont help you , personally all the scots ive spoken to cant stand her

 

SNP hold a very powerful position in Scotland and will use any legal position to benefit the Scottish people. Given that the pound is heading for parity with the Euro, changing to Euro after independence might not be as unattractive. I don't think a new Tory MP would stop a new indy ref.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

SNP hold a very powerful position in Scotland and will use any legal position to benefit the Scottish people. Given that the pound is heading for parity with the Euro, changing to Euro after independence might not be as unattractive. I don't think a new Tory MP would stop a new indy ref.

 

 

how ever the eu has already said scotland would be at the back of the que , also how are you going to survive without the blank check from the rest of the uk

Link to post
Share on other sites

how ever the eu has already said scotland would be at the back of the que , also how are you going to survive without the blank check from the rest of the uk

 

I am not Scottish (or a Scottish resident) and don't think independence would be a good idea, unless they came up with an economic proposition that made sense.

 

However, Scotland is a net contributor to UK Treasury and even without oil/gas revenues could do well with the right economic plan as an independent country. Scotland is important to the UK strategically, paricularly Faslane nuclear submarine base. The only possible alternative other UK base is Portsmouth or Falmouth, both of which have issues which would be difficult to overcome. If you search online there are articles on this by experts and they make it sound like UK would not have a nuclear submarine base if Scotland became independent.

 

If Scotland has a legal right to stop Brexit, so they protect their interest, that is their entitlement. Some think that article 50 being started by a new PM, would stop Scotland preventing Brexit, but there are legal questions about this.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Article 50 explained

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/36634702/article-50-the-simplest-explanation-youll-find

 

Experts say it will probably take the UK 10 years to leave the EU !

 

And judging by this excellent article, there is no need to invoke Article 50. Very interesting indeed.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/27/stop-brexit-mp-vote-referendum-members-parliament-act-europe

Link to post
Share on other sites

And judging by this excellent article, there is no need to invoke Article 50. Very interesting indeed.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/27/stop-brexit-mp-vote-referendum-members-parliament-act-europe

 

That is a good article.

 

I hope MP's block Brexit, but most MP's are saying that they are democrats so must accept how the UK has voted. Whether this is because of the current sensitive situation and they change their position later remains to be seen.

 

I am listening to a very good Australian talk radio show on ABC at the moment to gain an outside view. Very interesting and is covering things not being talked of here. For example, Ireland post Brexit will not be able to agree a direct trade deal with the UK, but would have to go through the EU. This means that if the trade deal is bad for Ireland, it could massively affect the Irish economy and there will be problems with the border with N.Ireland. For example, Irish Beef might be subject to tariffs on export to the UK, so it gets trucked up to N.Ireland to avoid the tariff.

 

When i look around i see a lot of French, Italian, German, Spannish owned companies based in the UK who will now be considering whether they will continue in the UK as they are at the moment. The same will be the case with Ford, Nissan, Toyota etc and as soon as people see the consequences of Brexit, they will get onto their MP's and there will be a change in mood.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea that MPs might block brexix does not sit right with me and it shouldn't sit right with anyone. Any government that ignores the will of the people is seriously asking for trouble..

 

You have obviously not read and understood the Guardian article linked to. It explains that this referendum is not binding in any way. If government wanted it to be binding, they could have put wording in the bill passed to say it would be implemented by government. But of course they can't do that because the UK does not have a written constituition. We elect 650 MP's to consider and vote on what the government put Forward.

 

Do you really expect government to proceed with Brexit even if the consequences are proving to be very bad for the economy and people ? For example if the currency falls to a very low level, Banks start getting into trouble, companies start cutting jobs etc.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am fully aware that it is not legally binding but it is morally and the government still uses the peoples money to do what they want. If the government wants to do its own thing and not act for the people by the people then I would urge the people to start withholding there taxes until such a time the government acts on the will of the people. Its either democracy or it is not. It can't be had both ways..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Former Sun editor Kelvin MacKenzie now wishes he voted remain.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03zqwlc#play

 

A lot of people have changed their minds and it will be interesting what happens.

  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 997 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...