Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • One other point to note, the more I read, the more I study, the more proficient I feel I am becoming in this area. Make no mistake DBCL if you are reading this, when I win in court, if I have the grounds to make any claims against you, such as breach of GDPR, I shall be doing so.
    • Yep, I read that and thought about trying to find out what the consideration and grace period is at Riverside but not sure I can. I know they say "You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is"  but I doubt they would disclose it to the public, maybe I should have asked in my CPR 31.14 letter? Yes, I think I can get rid of 5 minutes. I am also going to include a point about BPA CoP: 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place. I think that is Deception .... They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other!
    • Six months of conflict have also taken a heavy economic toll.View the full article
    • the Town and Country [advertisments ] Regulations 2007 are not easy to understand. Most Council planing officials don't so it's good that you found one who knows. Although he may not have been right if the rogues have not been "controlling" in the car park for that long. The time only starts when the ANPR signs go up, not how long the area has been used as a car park.   Sadly I have checked Highview out and they have been there since at least 2014 . I have looked at the BPA Code of Practice version 8 which covers 2023 and that states Re Consideration and Grace Periods 13.3 Where a parking location is one where a limited period of parking is permitted, or where drivers contract to park for a defined period and pay for that service in advance (Pay & Display), this would be considered as a parking event and a Grace Period of at least 10 minutes must be added to the end of a parking event before you issue a PCN. It then goes on to explain a bit more further down 13.5 You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is. 13.6 Neither a consideration period or a grace period are periods of free parking and there is no requirement for you to offer an additional allowance on top of a consideration or grace period. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________So you have  now only overstayed 5 minutes maximum since BPA quote a minimum of 10 minutes. And it may be that the Riverside does have a longer period perhaps because of the size of the car park? So it becomes even more incumbent on you to remember where the extra 5 minutes could be.  Were you travelling as a family with children or a disabled person where getting them in and out of the car would take longer. Was there difficulty finding a space, or having to queue to get out of the car park . Or anything else that could account for another 5 minutes  without having to claim the difference between the ANPR times and the actual times.
  • 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 5206 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 asking for advice for a family member.

 

In mid December he was on his sony vaio (VGN-AR41S) on his coffee table that was infront of his TV.

I came in with my children and one of them ran up to him resulting in him knocking his glass of coke over his lap top, he unplugged it straight away and rushed it into the kitchen to try an save it.

Next there was a load buzzing noise in the front which after looking (and having to leave the vaio) it was the surround sound system speaker, he went and pulled the wire out of the back of the speaker which resulted in a big spark.

He then went to turn the S/S off by the wall and noticed the coke that had split over the vaio and coffee table had been dripping down onto the S/S and freeview box.

After clearing up the mess etc he unplugged everything from the wall and TV so my children could watch TV and this had also developed a fault!!

 

Now down to the claim.

 

He rang Abbey who he has been with for the past 3 years, they took the details and went on to say IVAL would be dealing with the claim.

IVAL rang around 4 days later to say that they would have the VAIO collected and gave him a number to ask comet to come and view the TV, SURROUND SOUND and FREE VIEW BOX.

Comet came out and said all items are beyond repair.

IVAL have rang and said the VAIO is also beyond repair.

The problem is IVAL want to see the recipt for the VAIO and he does not have it as he brought it 2nd hand from myself.

I do not have the recipt because I hate clutter (boxes, paper that is not needed, etc anything goes in the bin)

IVAL are saying with out proof of purchese on his part they will only payout a box standard model (Ei System Sorrento)

They have said if he wants anything along the lines of spec for the VAIO he has to get the original recipt.

I have gone to pc world myself and tried to locate the recipt but because I was in a womens refuge at the time of buying the item (so would not of given this address for safety reasons) I can not remember what address I gave.

I have also moved 5 times since being in the refuge and no longer hold the VAIO box or manuals.

He has spoke to ABBEY who have said he needs to show where he got the VAIO from and not were I got it from and the bank statements showing instalments to myself should be enough.

IVAL have now said that ABBEY had no right to say that and they would only accept a bank statement showing the full cash ammount of £1000.00, he has tried to explain because I am family I have allowed him to pay by insalments and not in one lump sum because he could not afford it, they have said ITS THE BOX STANDARD RUBBISH OR NOTHING.

He is not asking IVAL for another VAIO only that he wants around the price he paid myself so he can go to comet/ pc world to buy another VAIO himself and he will put the difference towards the cost

There is also the TV, IVAL have said they will pay out for that but because it was a 28" tv with the large back these are no longer made and in any avent that have to replace with a lcd TV which is fine but lcd TV'S do not come in 28" so it has to be a 26"?

The surround sound and free view are being paid out as the recipt was produced for the surround sound.

 

HELP..

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK two choices

 

1) You sold him the Sony so you can legally write a receipt for it stating the date he bought it and the price paid

 

OR

 

2) Write a strongly worded letter of complaint to IVAL, tell them that a receipt is NOT fundamental to a claim. There is no doubt that the laptop existed, there is no argument over what make and model it was and there is no argument over the fact it sustained damage. Therefore they have a duty and an obligation to deal with the claim with or without a receipt. Tell them that unless they deal with it you will refer it to FOS.

 

Personally I'd go for Option2 because they have no right to make you jump through these hoops, I could understand it if it was a theft claim and the laptop wasn't available to verify the make and model.

 

Mossy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...