Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi welcome to the Forum.  If a PCN is sent out late ie after the 12th day of the alleged offence, the charge cannot then be transferred from the driver to the keeper.T he PCN is deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch so in your case, unless you can prove that Nexus sent the PCN several days after they claim you have very little chance of winning that argument. All is not lost since the majority of PCNs sent out are very poorly worded so that yet again the keeper is not liable to pay the charge, only the driver is now liable. If you post up the PCN, front and back we will be able to confirm whether it is compliant or not. Even if it is ok, there are lots of other reasons why it is not necessary to pay those rogues. 
    • Hi 1 Date of the infringement  arr 28/03/24 21:00, dep 29/03/24 01.27 2 Date on the NTK  08/04/2024 (Date of Issue) 3 Date received Monday 15/04/24 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012?  Yes 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No  7 Who is the parking company? GroupNexus 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Petrol Station Roadchef Tibshelf South DE55 5T 'operating in accordance with the BPA's Code of Practice' I received a Parking Charge letter to keeper on Monday 15/04/24, the 17th day after the alleged incident. My understanding is that this is outside the window for notifying. The issue date was 08/04/2024 which should have been in good time for it to have arrived within the notice period but in fact it actually arrived at lunchtime on the 15th. Do I have to prove when it arrived  (and if so how can I do that?) or is the onus on them to prove it was delivered in time? All I can find is that delivery is assumed to be on the second working day after issue which would have been Weds 10//04/24 but it was actually delivered 5 days later than that (thank you Royal Mail!). My husband was present when it arrived - is a family member witness considered sufficient proof?
    • lookinforinfo - many thanks for your reply. It would be very interesting to get the letter of discontinuance. The court receptionist said that the county court was in Gloucester 'today' so that makes me think that some days it is in Gloucester and some days its in Cheltenham, it was maybe changed by the courts and i was never informed, who knows if DCBL were or not. My costs were a gallon of petrol and £3.40 for parking. I certainly don't want to end up in court again that's for sure but never say never lol. Its utterly disgusting the way these crooks can legally treat motorists but that's the uk for you. I'm originally from Scotland so it's good that they are not enforceable there but they certainly still try to get money out of you. I have to admit i have lost count of the pcn's i have received in the last 2 yr and 4 months since coming to England for work, most of them stop bothering you on their own eventually, it was just this one that they took it all the way. Like i mentioned in my WS the the likes of Aldi and other companies can get them cancelled but Mcdonalds refused to help me despite me being a very good customer.   brassednecked - many thanks   honeybee - many thanks   nicky boy - many thanks    
    • Huh? This is nothing about paying just for what I use - I currently prefer the averaged monthly payment - else i wouldn't be in credit month after month - which I am comfortable with - else I wold simply request a part refund - which I  would have done if they hadn't reduced my monthly dd after the complaint I raised (handled slowly and rather badly) highlighted the errors in their systems (one of which they do seem to have fixed) Are you not aware DD is always potentially variable? ah well, look it up - but my deal is a supposed to average the payments over a year, and i dont expect them to change payments (up or down) without my informed agreement ESPECIALLY when I'm in credit over winter.   You are happy with your smart meter - jolly for you I dont want one, dont have to have one  - so wont   I have a box that tells me my electricity usage - was free donkeys years ago and shows me everything I need to know just like a smart meter but doesnt need a smart meter,  and i can manually set my charges - so as a side effect - would show me if the charges from the supplier were mismatched. Doesn't tell me if the meters actually calibrated correctly - but neither does your smart meter. That all relies on a label and the competence of the testers - and the competence of any remote fiddling with the settings. You seem happy with that - thats fine. I'm not.    
  • 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

Category C write off


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5790 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

I'm thinking about buying a car that has been recorded as a Cat C write off.

 

It's been repaired and has it's VIC certificate, V5C and 12 months MOT which suggests to me that it has been properly repaired. The current owner says that the only structural damage was the front cross member, the rest was wings, bumper and bonnet.

 

Is it likely to cause me any problems with insurance companies. Obviously I'll declare it as cat C when I get quotes, I just don't want to buy a car that I can't insure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking about buying a car that has been recorded as a Cat C write off.

 

It's been repaired and has it's VIC certificate, V5C and 12 months MOT which suggests to me that it has been properly repaired. The current owner says that the only structural damage was the front cross member, the rest was wings, bumper and bonnet.

 

Is it likely to cause me any problems with insurance companies. Obviously I'll declare it as cat C when I get quotes, I just don't want to buy a car that I can't insure.

 

Get some quotes before you buy it then:rolleyes:

 

One thing that may come up - but won't be mentioned at the quote stage - is that in the event of a total loss, the value/pay out will be reduced to reflect that the vehicle has previously been a total loss.

 

The VIC test is nothing more than an identity check (to attempt to prevent 'ringing' of a written off vehicle). It is not concerned with the roadworthiness of the vehicle.

 

An MoT test only checks tested items and certainly is not a check of the quality of the repair.

 

For your own piece of mind, I suggest a detailed, expert inspection of the repairs to ensure that they are properly done. This will probably involve checking the car on a jig to ensure that the chassis is absolutely true. The parts mentioned in your post are all bolt-on parts (even the crossmember) are you sure that the underlying structure has been properly checked for alignment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Pat

 

I've tried to get a couple of quotes this morning but the companies were very non-commital about the vehicle status and just kept saying "as long as it is roadworthy" which a new MOT suggests it is but I'm seriously thinking about not bothering. It concerns me that a 4 year old car with 18000 miles on the clock would be written off with relatively little damage apparently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Having worked in the motor insurance industry, I can say that insurers are very quick to write off a vehicle these days. It's often the labour that costs more than the parts so easier to just w/o.

 

As suggested before, get a proper independent engineers report stating that the vehicle has been repaired to a high standard and that also the vehicle IS roadworthy (the broker or insurer should ask you for this anyway!). With this report an Insurance Company cannot refuse to insure you however it can impose terms (such as reduced value should another total loss occur) and also inflate the premium how it sees fit. Anyhow, you will find an insurer that is willing to insure at a reasonable cost - it's do-able and there are plenty out there.

 

Another thing to bear in mind is bumping the car on once you've had enough though - you may have been quick to buy it but finding someone else as eager may be tough - good old ebay I say!

 

Hope this helps!

I'm the Mummy and quite frankly, the CSA can kiss my butt!! :lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

we always ask for a independant engineers report before we will put a Cat c or d on cover, we can still quote but wont accept until the report has been seen etc and confirms that all repairs have been professionally carried out etc. new or used parts etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

we always ask for a independant engineers report before we will put a Cat c or d on cover, we can still quote but wont accept until the report has been seen etc and confirms that all repairs have been professionally carried out etc. new or used parts etc

 

Not arguing with your company's stance, but

 

a) Cat D is not reportable, so how would the owner know?

 

b) I can see no requirement for professionally repaired (ie somebody has been paid to do it); I can see an argument for competently repaired (ie anyone can do it - properly)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cat D doesn't always go on the register but it may do - I myself bought a car that was a cat d write-off (I knew this). Cat D is cosmetic damage only but value not worth repair.

 

As this vehicle is cat C, I would check with HPI to see if it is on register as I looked at a vehicle recently that was listed on website as Cat C. When I checked with HPI it wasn't registered as a write-off at all! So some cat c's don't make it on the register either!

 

Asking for an independent engineers report is standard practice by an insurer, they often want to know who carried out the repairs also - receipts etc.

I'm the Mummy and quite frankly, the CSA can kiss my butt!! :lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...