Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Many thanks for the replies and advice!   I what to send this email to the Starbucks CEO and the area manager. Your thoughts would be appreciated.   [email protected] [email protected]   Re: MET Parking PNC at your Starbucks Southgate site   Dear Ms Rayner, / Dear Heather Christie,   I have received a Notice to Keeper regarding a Parking Charge Notice of £100 for the driver parking in the Southgate Park Car Park, otherwise infamously known as the Stanstead Starbucks/McDonalds car park(s).   Issued by: MET Parking Services Ltd Parking Charge Notice Number: XXXXXXXXX Vehicle Registration Number: XXXX XXX Date of Contravention: XX.XX.XXXX Time: XX:XX - XX:XX   After a little research it apears that the driver is not alone in being caught in what is commonly described as a scam, and has featured in the national press and on the mainstream television.   It is a shame that the reputation of Starbucks is being tarnished by this, with your customers leaving the lowest possible reviews on Trustpilot and Trip Advisor at this location, and to be associated with what on the face of it appears to be a doubious and predatory car park management company.   In this instance, during the early hours of the morning the driver required a coffee and parked up outside Starbucks with the intention of purchasing one from yourselves. Unfortunately, you were closed so the driver walked to McDonalds next door and ordered a coffee, and for this I have received the Notice to Keeper.   It is claimed that the car park is two separate car parks (Starbucks/McDonalds). However, there is no barrier or road markings to identity a boundary, and the signage in the car park(s) and outside your property is ambiguous, as such the terms would most likely be deemed unfair and unenforcable under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   I understand that Starbucks-Euro Garages neither operate or benefit from the charges imposed by MET Parking. However, MET Parking is your client.   Additionally, I understand that the charge amount of £100 had previously been upheld in court due to a ‘legitimate interest in making sure that a car park was run as efficiently as possible to benefit other drivers as well as the local stores, keeping cars from overstaying’.   However, this is not applicable when the shop or store is closed (as was the case here), as there is no legitimate interest. Therefore, the amount demanded is a penalty and is punitive, again contravening the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   As the driver’s intention of the visit was genuine, I would be grateful if you could please instruct your client to cancel this Notice to Keeper/Parking Charge Notice.   Kind regards
    • I received the promised call back from the Saga man today who informed me that the undertakers have decreed it IS a modification and they will need to recalculate a quote individually for me. However it all sounds very arbitrary. The more I think about it, and with help from forum replies, the more I am sure that it is not a modification. If for example the original seatback had become damaged by a spillage or a tear, I would be entitled to replace it with the nearest available part. The problem is when it comes to a payout after an accident, there is no telling what an individual insurer will decide when he notices the change. I am still undecided which of the two best routes to go with, either don't mention the replacement at all, or fill in the quote form without mentioning, and when it comes to buying the insurance over the phone, mention it at the time.
    • Please post up their letter so we understand what they've asked. You need to cover up your name and address and their reference number. HB
    • Hello,  I received the standard letter.  I don't understand No. 3: If this is in relation to a ticket irregularity, then if you were unable to produce a pass because you did not have it with you or if your pass was withdrawn because you were unable to produce a valid photocard to accompany it, please enclose a photocopy of the pass/photocard with your reply. Question: do i enclose my photocard? my partner's freedom pass was confiscated.
    • LFI is spot on. In fact you could sue UKPC for breach of GDPR, as UKPC knew full well right from the start that their case was hopeless.  They should never have asked for your details from the DVLA. Take some time to think if that is a road you want to go down.  
  • 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

Obtaining money by deception following RTA - what can I do?


trickyjoe7777
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5893 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

Quick background story - mid-December last year I was involved in an RTA in Manchester. Had pulled into side of road and was stationary when someone drove into rear driver's side of my car. As traffic was busy I signalled for other driver to follow me a short distance down the road so we could safely pull in.

 

At this point driver began acting aggressively towards me, using threatening getures and shouting, and I became genuinely concerned for the safety of myself and my passenger. Road was unlit, at night time and in a not very nice part of town so I decided to drive to the nearest public, well lit place before begining any conversation with him.

 

Drove for approx 1/4 mile until came to a carpark that was well lit and there were pedestrians nearby. Whilst driving here, other driver repeatedly tailgated me, tried to overtake and continued to gesture.

 

Pulled into carpark and parked up - at this point other driver decided not to follow me into carpark, due I believe to there being members of the public in the immediate vicinity, and drove away.

 

Because of the stress I had not managed to obtain either registration number, nor make and model of his car, and was unaware of where the accident had actually taken place (am unfamiliar with Manchester). Checked my car for damage and was only a tiny scratch which subsequently came out using t-cut.

 

Given the above, and the fact that neither myself nor passenger were injured, I took no further action.

 

A week later I received a letter from police (NIP) - I contacted the PC immediately and explained exactly what had happened. She stated other driver was claiming I had reversed into him and caused £7,000 (!!) of damage to his car. After I gave the correct version of events she stated that she would be taking no further action as, in her word, "he's obviously trying it on".

 

Around same time I was informed by my insurers that they were dealing with a claim from other driver's insurance company. Again, explained what hadd happened and filled in all forms sent to me, my insurance company confirmed that they would be rejecting the claim.

 

Thought that was that until yesterday when I get home to find a letter from other driver's solicitors claiming that not only has he suffered neck and back injuries, loss of earnings and emotional distress due to my negligence in reversing into him, but so have FOUR other members of his family who were in the car at the time of the incident!!

 

This is a blatent untruth - he was alone in the car.

 

Have sent the correspondence straight to my insurance company unanswered, but really want to know if I can involve the police in this matter? It seems to me to be a clear case of trying to obtain money by deception, though this is only a layman's perspective I know. When I spoke with the WPC in January she was very thorough in what he hd stated to her and at no time mentioned any passengers or injuries - his initial concern was for the £7K damage to his car.

 

Assuming he did not mention to the police at time of reporting accident that there were 4 passengers, this would now be an obviously fraudulent claim. My frustrations are not just with the driver and his family, but the solicitors who have taken on this case knowing full well it is fraudulent, and the Doctors that they have got to state all 5 people are suffering injuries.

 

Any advice on how I should proceed with this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it would certainly be worthwhile taking legal advice on this matter and certainly telephoning the police to get their view on this.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have just spoken with the WPC involved who has stated that in the statement he gave to her following the accident he said that he was the only person i the car. This statement has been recorded and held on the police file. She also stated when she advised him that the police would be taking no further action he became aggressive towards her. Given the conflict now between the statement given to police and his spurious claim for damages, what should I expect to happen? The WPC has stated that it is a civil matter and that the police would have no interest in pursuing - surely trying to obtain money in this way must be an offence?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Attempting to obtain pecuniary advantage by deception is a criminal and not a civil matter under section 16 of the Theft Act 1968 and so the police do have to take the details and give you a crime reference number for it.

 

Call again, if you are refused again, ask to speak to the Inspector and explain what you have explained here. If (s)he doesn't help, ask to speak to the Chief Inspector.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Get your insurance company to obtain a copy of the police report (which should include to third parties statement).

 

At the very worst this will get rid of the "passenger" claims straight away.

 

I'm not an expert on legal matters but I'm pretty certain the the solicitors will drop the claim for the driver aswell as soon as they get the report as it will show that the third party has lied to the police and therefore his testimony would be worthless if this went to court.

 

In addition I would assume that any medical expert who examined the driver would have been the same one who examined the "passengers" so if they indicated that the "passengers" were injuried then their report on the driver would also be questionable.

 

However as previously stated I think that based on the information in his statement to the police the solicitor would drop the case.

 

As for bringing charges against the driver for fraud I wouldn't have a clue to be honest but I would assume that fraud is a criminal matter and this is clearly a matter of fraud as far as I can see.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...