Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have received a PCN from Euro Car Parks for MFG - Esso Cobham - Gravesend. I was completely unaware that there was any such limit for parking and always considered this to be a service station. I stopped there to use the toilet, have a coffee and made a couple of work calls. I have read the previous topics on this location which suggest I can ignore this and ECP will not take legal action. The one possible complication is that the vehicle is leased by my employer so I do not want to involve them with the associated reminders and threatening letters. The PCN was first issued to the leasing company Arval who have notified ECP of the hiring company. I have attached a copy of the PCN Notice to Hirer with details removed as per instructions. What options do I have or should I just pay the PCN promptly at the reduced rate of £60? img20240424_23142631.pdf
    • What you have uploaded is a letter with daft empty threats from third-party paper tigers.  Just ignore it. What we need to see is the original invoice you received last October or November.
    • Thanks for posting the CPR contents. i do wish you hadn't blanked out the dates and times since at times they can be relevant . Can you please repost including times and dates. They say that they sent a copy of  the original  PCN that they sent to the Hirer  along with your hire agreement documents. Did you receive them and if so can you please upload the original PCN without erasing dates and times. If they did include  all the paperwork they said, then that PCN is pretty near compliant except for their error with the discount time. In the Act it isn't actually specified but to offer a discount for 14 days from the OFFENCE is a joke. the offence occurred probably a couple of months prior to you receiving your Notice to Hirer.  Also the words in parentheses n the Act have been missed off. Section 14 [5][c] (c)warn the hirer that if, after the period of 21 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to hirer is given, the amount of unpaid parking charges referred to in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(f) or 9(2)(f) (as the case may be) has not been paid in full, the creditor will (if any applicable requirements are met) have the right to recover from the hirer so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Though it states "if any applicable ...." as opposed to "if all applicable......" in Section 8 or 9. Maybe the Site could explain what the difference between the two terms mean if there is a difference. Also on your claim form they keeper referring to you as the driver or the keeper.  You are the Hirer and only the Hirer is responsible for the charge EVEN IF THEY WEREN'T THE DRIVER. So they cannot pursue the driver and nowhere in the Hirer section of the Act is the hirer ever named as the keeper so NPC are pursuing the wrong person.  
  • 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 2959 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 created a UseNeXT account not long back and after creating the account, I went to paypal and did my usual check of seeing if it was a recurring payment setup and to my finding there was none, so I had thought I was safe. Well that was until a few hours ago when I just noticed that I've had a paypal charge of £79.84 or so and as a student I simply cannot afford that.. I have my flat to pay for and food.

 

I've contacted UseNeXT support and hopefully should get a reply soon, so I'll have to comment on what happens.

 

 

*EDIT*

 

As a update, they've replied and fortunately have been very forgiving.

 

 

 

The answer to your inquiry:

 

We have check your account and sadly you have not cancelled within the first 14 days.

 

Therefore your account as automatically renewed.

 

As a gesture of good will we will backdate your cancellation and refund your member fee.

 

A confirmation for this will be sent to your e-mail address with the next e-mail.

 

If you have any further questions, feel free to contact us again.

 

 

 

Paypal needs to easily display what you have transactions that you can be charged from. I looked for it as soon as I opened the account and saw nothing when clicking "Details" on a transaction.

Edited by Colonel_Black
Edited
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...
  • 1 year later...

I've fallen foul of this today, been charged £83 for a service I've only used once since the trial started.

 

I realise I should've cancelled before it ended but it completely slipped my mind. I cancelled immediately after I got the email that I was being charged.

 

I've emailed the support with a hope of some conclusion as I can't afford to lose £83.

 

Would PayPal follow through with a dispute?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
  • 3 months later...

I too have a similar issue with Usenet.nl and got this nasty message (see below). I was late by 2 days and was charge 1 month fee. Without informing me further, Usenet apparently sent this to collections, which I think this is. I do know know if this is real or a hoax. Now they keep on padding the original amount with charges and this looks like highway robbery. Should I consider paying this amount? Any advice is appreciated.

 

Regards,

SJ

Dear xxxxx,

 

regarding the above mentioned matter, we would like to inform you that our client Usenet.nl S.r.l., has commissioned us with the collection of their overdue claims. You have not yet paid the current invoice for the Usenet services provided by Usenet.nl S.r.l. .

Referring to the documents submitted to us, our client has complied with his contractual obligations with respect to you. Our client has duly performed his services and furnished you with his statement of account.

Unfortunately, you have not yet carried out the complete settlement of the outstanding balance in spite of repeated reminders from our client and you are already considerably in delay of payment.

The outstanding total claim is specified as follows:

1. Principal claim for services provided according to invoicenumber xxxxxxx incl. chargeback fees

 

12,00

EUR

2. Interest (see attached interest statement)

0,31

EUR

3. Dunning costs according to §§ 280, 286 BGB

11,00

EUR

Subtotal

23,31

EUR

 

 

4. Costs of our commissioning according to § 4 (5) RDGEG claimed as damage caused by your delay according to §§ 280 I,II, 286 BGB:

a) 0,5 Business fee according to § 4 (5) RDGEG in conjunction with No. 2300 VV RVG of EUR

22,50

EUR

b) Flat fee for post and telecommunications according to No. 7002 VV RVG

4,50

EUR

Total claim

50,31

EUR

To avoid further additional costs and measures, we kindly ask you to pay the above mentioned debt until 29.03.2016 at the latest.

Please use the following payment methods:

PayPal account:

paypal at tesch-inkasso.de

Please note: If you decide to pay via PayPal we have to charge handling fees in the amount of 8,00 EUR. The total claim would be then 58,31 EUR.

We would like to draw your attention to the fact that we have the authorisation to collect outstanding debts, so that payments should only be made to our account and further correspondence should also only be directed to our address.

 

We herewith indicate that the above mentioned deadline has to be absolutely kept.

Should there be any problems with the payment or discrepancies concerning the demand, please feel free to contact us at any time by e-mail or telephone.

Together we will find a solution.

Yours faithfully

R. Weidmann Tesch Inkasso Forderungsmanagement GmbH

Registered legal services provider for debt collection services pursuant to Section 10 of the Legal Services Act (Rechtsdienstleistungsgesetz)

Registry Court Cologne Reg. No. HRB 39598, Managing Directors: Robert Weidmann, VAT ID NO. DE 215 665 473

Edited by srj.1209
Link to post
Share on other sites

I too have a similar issue with Usenet.nl and got this nasty message (see below). I was late by 2 days and was charge 1 month fee. Without informing me further, Usenet apparently sent this to collections, which I think this is. I do know know if this is real or a hoax. Now they keep on padding the original amount with charges and this looks like highway robbery. Should I consider paying this amount? Any advice is appreciated.

 

Regards,

SJ

 

 

you need to start a new thread

of your own this thread is 4 yrs old

now closed

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2959 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...