Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi. Could you post up what they've sent please so we can see what the charge is? Cover up your name and address and their reference number. HB
    • I've looked through all our old NPE threads, and as far as we know they have never had the bottle to do court. There are no guarantees of course, but when it comes to put or shut up they definitely tend towards shut up. How about something like -   Dear Jonathan and Julie, Re: PCN no.XXXXX cheers for your Letter Before Claim.  I rolled around on the floor in laughter at the idea that you actually expected me to take this tripe seriously and cough up. I'll write to you not some uninterested third party, thanks all the same, because you have are the ones trying to threaten me about this non-existent "debt". Go and look up Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd, saddos.  Oh, while you're at it, go and look up your Subject Access Request obligations - we all know how you ballsed that up way back in January to March. Dear, dear, dear - you couldn't resist adding your £70 Unicorn Food Tax, you greedy gets.  Judges don't like these made-up charges, do they? You can either drop this foolishness now or get a hell of a hammering in court.  Both are fine with me.  Summer is coming up and I would love a holiday at your expense after claiming an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g). I look forward to your deafening silence.   That should show them you're not afraid of them and draw their attention to their having legal problems of their own with the SAR.  If they have any sense they'll crawl back under their stone and leave you in peace.  Over the next couple of days invest in a 2nd class stamp (all they are worth) and get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.
    • Yes that looks fine. It is to the point. I think somewhere in the that the you might want to point out that your parcel had been delivered but clearly had been opened and resealed and the contents had been stolen
    • Hi All, I just got in from work and received a letter dated 24 April 2024. "We've sent you a Single Justice Procedure notice because you have been charged with an offence, on the Transport for London Network." "You need to tell us whether you are guilty or not guilty. This is called making your plea."
    • Okay please go through the disclosure very carefully. I suggest that you use the technique broadly in line with the advice we give on preparing your court bundle. You want to know what is there – but also very importantly you want to know what is not there. For instance, the email that they said they sent you before responding to the SAR – did you see that? Is there any trace of of the phone call that you made to the woman who didn't know anything about SAR's? On what basis was the £50 sent to you? Was it unilateral or did they offer it and you accepted it on some condition? When did they send you this £50 cheque? Have you banked it? Also, I think that we need to start understanding what you have lost here. Have you lost any money – and if so how much? Send the SAR to your bank as advised above
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

clean licence but want extra premium for convictions


benn133
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5630 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 am one of the few people in the UK that has a clean driving licence, all my SP30s have been removed as they are more than 4 years.

 

I have just taken out new car insurance and on the question about convictions i put none as my licence has none.

 

A month later I receive a letter stating that there is an inconsisency from my present insurance (with Bell) and an old insurance from some years ago (with elephant), both under the Admiral group of companies. They are stating that the SP30 from 4.5 years ago should be declared and they will now be adding £56 to my premium.

 

Any advise?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if they ask then they want to know about them, and, for the record, I have a clean licence and have never had any points for anything, that is my definition of a clean licence :D.

 

I had a no fault accident in 1999, I still declare it unless they ask the question "within the last 5 years" which is what insurance companies usually ask.

 

Basically you have to state it and let them decide, if you were to have an accident and they find out that you hadnt declared something then you could find yourself uninsured.

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK lets clarify the position

 

Points added to a licence are active for totting up purposes for 3 years

 

Points stay on your licence for 4 years, after that they can be removed

 

You have a duty of disclosure (under The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act) to declare convictions until such time as they are 'spent'. For speeding and other such offences that period is 5 years, for more serious offences (ie drink drive) it is 7 years. Insurers ask about convictions in the last 5 years and since you did have some you should declare them.

 

They are quite correct in what they say and you owe them the additional premium.

 

Mossy

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's interesting here is that the reason why they can ask for 5 years and not 4 years is not due to the points but due to the fine. You are not allowed to penalise anyone for a 'spent' conviction (and the rules on this length varies according to the conviction length and type), but suffice to say that after your points are removed you wouldn't have to 'declare them due to them being points'. However the length of time for a fine is 5 years, so this means that because you received a fine at the same time as the points you have to declare the penalty and the reason why you got it. So even if your licence is clean you still need to declare the conviction within 5 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Lula, do you have your own car--insured in your own name?? Even if you have a lifetime clean licence, but have only been a named driver on someones policy for at least last three years, then you will be treated as a new start and heavily penalised through no NCB. You may be interested in another thread i wrote earlier tonight on that subject. (on this forum)

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry that is wrong there are companies that will treat you as if you have had your own in surance as long as you have a clean license and were a named driver on a vehicle. they were advertising on the tv not so long ago.

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Lula, have seen these adverts, but i am certain that they only cover named drivers from now, not retrospectivly. The old dog that i billet with has had 44yrs absolutely blemish free motoring, but it's several years since she sold her beloved Beemer. Since then she has driven company insured cars, been on my policy and most recently been a named driver on a Motability policy. When recently trying to get insurance again, her life long record has been no good at all, and is having to start at square one again. NO NCB. If you know differently, then I would really appreciate the names of companies that will insure the old dear on her merits. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting outcome, i sent them a copy of my driving licence and they have now reduced the premium again. RESULT :)

 

thanks everyone for highjacking this thread !!!

 

The word 'Result' is a final word so it has not been hijacked. The discussion has just been widened.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wulfyn,

 

The RoAA (and it's attendant 5 year period - in this case) has nothing whatsoever to do with the fine either. It arises from the conviction.

 

For speeding:

 

1)points are 'active' for totting for 3 years from the date of offence;

 

2) the 5 year rehabilitation period runs from date of conviction.

 

Now the next question: Is an FPN actually a conviction?

 

If it is not, then it doesn't need to be declared in answer to the question "Do you have any convictions in the last 5 year).

 

If it is, then Police/Traffic Warden parking FPNs also need to be declared.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Endorsements (penalty points) have no effect upon the rehabilitation period (length of conviction before it becomes spent). It is simply that it is so unlikely that you would receive endorsements without also getting a fine, disqualifiaction etc that makes the system work.

 

 

 

Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974

 

Endorsements

 

An endorsement is not a 'disability, prohibition or other penalty' within the meaning of the Act, and therefore it cannot affect the rehabilitation period of a motoring conviction. So, for example, if a motorist is fined for drink driving and has his or her licence endorsed, the rehabilitation period would be five years (the length applicable to the fine) rather than 11 years (the length of time before a driver convicted of drink driving is entitled to a clean driving licence).

 

 

 

Rehabilitation of Offenders of Motor Insurance

 

An endorsement on a driving licence, does not fall within the definition of the act so cannot affect the rehabilitation period. It is unlikely, however, that a person would receive penalty points without a fine, disqualification (see below) or prison sentence.

 

For example If a client was Caught Speeding and was given 3 Points and a £40 fine in this case it is the fine of £40 that would result in a 5-year rehabilitation period, not the endorsement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...