Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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
      • 160 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

Scottish Law - Parking on Private Land


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5128 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

Notice received from a company requesting payment of £70 i.e. £60 + Admin Fee. The Notice or invoice does give all the details that Town & City omitted in their Notice to Owner.

 

I had to search on the web to find out who they are .. Debt Recovery Agents & Sherifs Officers. Might get my day in court after all ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

LEGAL EAGLES AND INFORMED FOLKS: Could you proof read and give advice prior to posting please :)

 

Vehicles Fee Paying Enquiry Section

DVLA

Swansea

SA99 1AJ

 

RE: Release of Information Request V888/2

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

This letter requests no personal information and as such should not be interpreted as a Subject Access Request therefore no fee is due however if necessary I will serve a Subject Access Request subject to your response to this letter.

 

DVLA records will clearly detail that I am the Registered Keeper of Vehicle Reg. Number: XXXX XXX.

 

On the XX March 2009 I received an Invoice for an alleged Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued on XX Dec 2008 by PPC purported I assume against my vehicle for some form of contravention or infraction. A copy has been enclosed which will be discussed in detail later.

 

After further investigation and due diligence it’s clear that the DVLA released my personal details to this Private Company for a fee in the form of a V888/2 request! As such I request DVLA furnish me with any and all information related to this V888/2 request by (PPC) including but not limited to evidence of Contract/Agreement between Town & City Parking Ltd and the Landowner.

 

The DVLA has a duty to protect my private information and not simply disclose to Private Entities for a fee on the basis of good faith!

 

Please refer to the photocopy Invoice from PPC which demonstrates they are members of British Parking Association (BPA). DVLA have deemed BPA an Accredited Trade Association (ATA). All BPA members must adhere to the BPA’s Code of Practice and be party to the BPA Approved Operator Scheme (AOS).

 

“All BPA members who are involved in car parking enforcement on private land must become a member of the BPA’s Approved Operator Scheme. The primary focus of the scheme is to ensure that all operators wishing to electronically access the DVLA’s vehicle keepers’ details database are a regulated member of an Accredited Trade Association (ATA).” Direct quote from BPA Code of Practice!

 

I will make the assumption (as I am not an expert) that the invoice (the only correspondence ever received from this company) is deemed a Notice to Owner as such it clearly violates the BPA’s Code of Practice.

 

NOTICE TO OWNER (As detailed in the BPA Code of Practice section (67) Part A)

 

"A Notice to Owner may be sent to the registered keeper at the address provided by the DVLA, not less than 28 days after the Parking Ticket was issued. This Notice to Owner must state the following:"

 

  • That a Parking Ticket was fixed to the vehicle and has not been paid;
  • That the opportunity to pay a discounted amount has been lost;
  • The details of the alleged contravention;
  • The location, date and time;
  • The vehicle’s registration mark, make and (optionally) colour;
  • The description of the alleged contravention;

 

When serving a Notice to Owner, Operators must include a leaflet advising motorists of the ‘reasonable cause’ for the request and the complaints procedure by which keepers can notify the Information Commissioner and DVLA if they believe their data has been used inappropriately. This should also include the disputes resolution procedure if the ticket is challenged.

 

All the above items in RED were clearly omitted from the PPC Invoice. This Invoice is in dispute!

 

I look forward to your response and investigation of PPC as they are clearly violating BPA’s Code of Practice and indeed DVLA’s Accredited Trade Association Scheme.

 

Yours

Edited by Fright-Flight-Fight
PPC HA!
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ta but ...

 

How to request information from DVLA records

 

  • the V888 - for members of the public
  • the V888/2 - for companies (all circumstances, except where a penalty charge notice is issued)
  • the V888/3 - for companies (only if the keeper details are required to issue a penalty charge notice or reminder)

 

Explain please :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

“NO FURTHER INTIMATION WILL BE GIVEN”

Intimation- A slight suggestion or vague understanding?

Do they mean INTIMIDATION? the act of intimidating a weaker person to make them do something.

That will be good then!:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if 'No Further Intimation' will be given, that's their shorthand for telling you they'll no longer be contacting you, so won't that be a relief.

 

Their website is here; A. A. Hutton LLP - Debt Recovery, Sheriff Officers, Messengers-at-Arms, Credit Management

 

I've used them in the past and they're fine and upstanding - but they are only sending you the same stock letters they sent to my defaulting customer, and their charge for raising an action is considerably higher than sending out a few choice chaser letters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if 'No Further Intimation' will be given, that's their shorthand for telling you they'll no longer be contacting you, so won't that be a relief.

 

Indeed but that could translate to court papers will be filed. It's all fair and well people saying ignore but ideally one should be prepared in the unlikely event.

 

RK has a witness that the driver did not enter in to contract as no signs were visible/seen by either driver or passenger i.e. no signs were seen due to heavy rain/darkness nor yellow lines.

 

Thanks

Edited by Fright-Flight-Fight
small update/deletion
Link to post
Share on other sites

The point I was making, was that when you CONTINUE to get more plaintive bleatings that you owe them money, you'll realise that not only are they lying to you about 'no further intimations', but also the bit about court action.

 

Sure, it's not unknown, but they are there to MAKE money, not gamble it on a court case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which PPC do you work for then Dominic Creamer ;)

 

The driver will go to court if papers arrive and will defend the case. The driver did not enter in to contract and the extortionate fee is not fair or reasonable damages.

 

Oh and lets not forget that PPC did not adhere to BPA COP thus should not have access to DVLA via electronic means.

Edited by Fright-Flight-Fight
BPA COP
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he might be having a 'rest' ;)

Please help us to help you. Download the CAG tool bar for free

HERE and use the search option for all your searches. CAG earns a few pennies every time !!!

 

Please don't rush, take time to read these:-

 

 

&

 

 

This is always worth referring to

 

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by me are personal, are not endorsed by the Consumer Action Group or the Bank Action Group. Should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he might be having a 'rest' ;)

 

I think may be for the best, coz although many of the "regulars" here found some of his posts entertaining, some of his recent posts were getting very near the knuckle with lies and could have mislead some newbies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well he's on the the 'Naughty Step' now :p

Please help us to help you. Download the CAG tool bar for free

HERE and use the search option for all your searches. CAG earns a few pennies every time !!!

 

Please don't rush, take time to read these:-

 

 

&

 

 

This is always worth referring to

 

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by me are personal, are not endorsed by the Consumer Action Group or the Bank Action Group. Should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...