Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I hope Lord Frost is OK. Islamists and the woke Left are uniting to topple the West ARCHIVE.PH archived 18 Apr 2024 19:12:37 UTC  
    • Ok you are in the clear. The PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 for two reasons. The first is that in Section 9 [2][e]  says the PCN must "state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper— (i)to pay the unpaid parking charges ". It does not say that even though it continues correctly with blurb about the driver. The other fault is that there is no parking period mentioned. Their ANPR cameras do show your arrival and departure times but as that at the very least includes driving from the entrance to the parking space then later leaving the parking space and driving to the exit. It also doesn't allow for finding a parking spot: manoeuvering into it avoiding parking on the lines: possibly having to stop to allow pedestrians/other cars to pass in front of you; returning the trolley after finishing shopping; loading children disabled people in and out of the car, etc etc.  All of that could easily add five, ten or even 15 minutes to your time which the ANPR cameras cannot take into account. So even if it was only two hours free time you could  still have been within the  time since there is a MINIMUM of 15 minutes Grace period when you leave the car park. However as they cannot even manage to get their PCN to comply with the Act you as keeper cannot be pursued. Only the driver is now liable and they do not know who was driving as you have not appealed and perhaps unwittingly given away who was driving. So you do not owe them a penny. No need to appeal. Let them waste their money pursuing you . 
    • If Labour are elected I hope they go after everyone who made huge amounts of money out of this, by loading the company with debt. The sad thing is that some pension schemes, including the universities one, USS, will lose money along with customers.
    • What's the reason for not wanting a smart meter? Personally I'm saving a pile on a tariff only available with one. Today electricity is 17.17p/kWh. If the meter is truly past its certification date the supplier is obliged to replace it. If you refuse to allow this then eventually they'll get warrant and do so by force. Certified life varies between models and generations, some only 10 or 15 years, some older types as long as 40 years or maybe even more. Your meter should have its certified start date marked somewhere so if you doubt the supplier you can look up the certified life and cross check.
    • No I'm not. Even if I was then comments on this forum wouldn't constitute legal advice in the formal sense. Now you've engaged a lawyer directly can I just make couple of final suggestions? Firstly make sure he is fully aware of the facts. And don't mix and match by taking his advice on one aspect while ploughing your own furrow on others.  Let us know how you get on now you have a solicitor acting for you.
  • 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 
        • 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

Loeby Vs Mint


loeby
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6341 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 received my statements from Mint card this morning, they took just under 3 weeks to come. My charges come to £140, not that much but still worth a claim. Have prepared my first request letter ready to be sent tommorrow morning

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have received a letter this morning stating the following

 

"we are sorry that you were less than satisfied with the level of service you received from us.Thank you for letting us know your concerns as it gives us a chance to address the issues raised.

we need more time to look into matters further so we can answer your concern fully. We will contact you within the mext ten working business days to let you know how we propose to resolve things for you, or at least let you know how we are progressing."

 

has anyone else had this letter? Is it the bog standard reply?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have received a letter this morning stating the following

 

"we are sorry that you were less than satisfied with the level of service you received from us.Thank you for letting us know your concerns as it gives us a chance to address the issues raised.

we need more time to look into matters further so we can answer your concern fully. We will contact you within the mext ten working business days to let you know how we propose to resolve things for you, or at least let you know how we are progressing."

 

has anyone else had this letter? Is it the bog standard reply?

 

I claimed £231 on behalf of OH from Mint and received 2 of these in response to LBA. Wondered if it was a stalling tactict and was about to do MCOL when they sent a cheque for the full amount!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really, thats surprising. So did you give them thet 10 working days to get back to you as they requested or did you stick to your 14 day deadline and go to the next stage?

 

They sent the first letter very quickly, so I let them have the time, and was busy with other things anyway. I was a little annoyed when I received the second letter, realising they could possibly try and stall 'forever' by sending these letters. I was going to do MCOL 14 days after the second letter, but they sent the cheque about a week after we got that.

 

Word on the forums appears to be that RBS/Mint/Natwest are settling full amounts without too much hassle, when the amount claimed is £350 or less.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have received another letter from MINT this morning basically saying that charges and fees were clearly and consistently communicated as part of their published tarriffs and that they have lowered their fees to £12 but it is not their policy to refund fees that were previously charged at a higher level and therefor the charges on my account will stand.

 

So do I send the lba now or wait till the 14 days from my 1st letter is up??

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Just to give you some encouragement, Mint have just setled my claim after LBA. Several rebuttals and stallling letters received in between. LBA sent 21st November, cheque received Monday 4th December for full amount. I realise I could have claimed contractual interest but they paid what I asked for. - £215.

 

Letter and cheque came from Scarlett Kemp Senior Customer Adviser at the PO Box 6050 address.

MINT / RBS Advanta

SAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...