Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.  
    • This is simply a scam site.  It's been shown to be a scam in the national press and on national TV. Please fill in the the forum sticky and upload the invoice you've received. In fact what you have is an invoice, not a fine, a private company doesn't have the power to issue fines.  
    • Moved to the Private Parking forum.
    • Good afternoon, I am writing because I am very frustrated. I received a parking fine from MET Parking Services Ltd , ( Southgate park Stansted CM24 1PY) . We stopped for a quick meal in Mcdonalds and were there fir around 30 mins. We always do this after flights and never received a parking fine before.  Reason: The vehicle left in Southgate car park without payment made for parking and the occupants southgate premises. they took some pictures of us leaving the car. i did not try and appeal it yet as I came across many forums that this is a scam and I should leave it. But I keep getting threatening letters.  Incident happened : 23/10/2023 I did contact Mcdonalds and they said this:  Joylyn (McDonald’s Customer Services) 5 Apr 2024, 12:05 BST Dear Laura, Thank you for contacting McDonald’s Customer Services. I’m sorry to hear that you have received a Parking Charge Notice following your visit to our Stansted restaurant.   We've introduced parking restrictions at some of our restaurants to make sure there are always parking spaces available for customers.   We appreciate that some visits such as birthday parties or large group visits might take longer and the parking restrictions aren't intended to stop this. If you think your stay will exceed the stated maximum parking time then please speak to a manager in advance.   Your number plate is scanned by our Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) system when you enter our car park, and then again when you leave. If you have overstayed the maximum time allowed, you will not be notified straight away- a Parking Charge Notice will be sent to you via the post.   If you feel that a Parking Charge Notice has been issued in error, please contact our approved contractors who issued the charge in order to appeal the charge. Unfortunately McDonald's are unable to revoke parking tickets- the outcome of the appeal is final and cannot be overturned by McDonald’s.   Many thanks for taking the time to contact McDonald’s Customer Services.   Can someone please help me out and suggest what I should do next?  Thank 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 
      • 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

Government Brexit Skeleton Argument


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2547 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 refer to TJ's post 44 which to me reads this whole outcome was orchestrated.

maybe it was..

take Bertis for eg. on the one hand he was all out for out, but, on the other he had been not long before interviewed saying how being in was good. he cant then lose (it seemed), whatever the outcome of the ref. ie chameleon; wear whichever political suit fits its (favourable) circumstances :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I refer to TJ's post 44 which to me reads this whole outcome was orchestrated.

Depends what you mean by orchestrated,

Was the referendum for 'the people', or to quiet the Tory right?

... I have absolutely no doubts whatsoever that it was purely to quiet the Tory right and that if it had been JUST the public's will - it would NEVER have happened - just quietly ignored

 

 

Did Cameron think the populace would vote out

Almost certainly NOT

 

 

Was Cameron Planning on and working for an OUT vote?

I dont believe so, but neither was he working for an IN vote and risk upsetting that Tory right.

He was standing back hoping the polls were right and GAMBLING on an in vote that he could stand back from and not be 'besmirched' by.

 

 

Did Cameron give a damn about what the public wanted?

I dont believe that in the slightest

- even ignoring everything else, his 'EU renegotiation' proved to me beyond even the faintest shadow of a doubt that all he was worried about was the hard Right rich and powerful of the Tory party.

 

 

Does Farage believe in OUT?

- absolutely

 

 

Is Farage right?

Not by a looooong shot in my opinion, but he isnt entirely wrong either

- just a vast amount more wrong than right - and he is very right (wing).

Lets all understand that Farages' politics is the xenophobic politics of the fascist right. These are national front in posh frocks and theirs is the politics of hate and division.

 

 

Does Johnson Gove and IDS BELIEVE in OUT like Farage?

I dont believe so. I'm quite sure they are just political opportunists who would see Britain or anyone else burn to the ground if it progressed their own interests. and they saw OUT as progressing their interests - until they all reverted to type and started stabbing each other in the back instead of just Cameron and the country.

 

So all this 'Dont defy the will of the people stuff?

Is the Tory right now driving everything as the splits in all the parties leave them with 'relatively more power against all the other smaller divisions,

and nobody has the balls to drive the only real option against the rights will

and Corbyn doesn't want to even if he could - which would be a hard fight he doesnt even want to win. He wants OUT and he's getting it..

 

(Corbyn is almost certainly now a very black page in UK political history that simple doesn't realise the wipe is done and its long past time to flush the page away - but he's a megalomaniac fanatic)

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

until they all reverted to type and started stabbing each other in the back
yep.

this is how it wld've went re bertis

Interviewer - so, B the people have voted to stay in.

B - yes, the people have voted. we must respect our democracy, sovereignty etc. this is a great eg of the uk democratic process

Int- but, you advocated out. will you still then advocate out and even challenge the result given that its not binding.

B - no, as above. I have said before that being in the eu is better for the uk overall.

I- so why did you advocate out then.

B - Ernieage said to do so, and that i might become an out pm if so. otherwise, i wld have no chance of ever becoming pm.

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep.

this is how it wld've went re bertis

Interviewer - so, B the people have voted to stay in.

B - yes, the people have voted. we must respect our democracy, sovereignty etc. this is a great eg of the uk democratic process

Int- but, you advocated out. will you still then advocate out and even challenge the result given that its not binding.

B - no, as above. I have said before that being in the eu is better for the uk overall.

I- so why did you advocate out then.

B - Ernieage said to do so, and that i might become an out pm if so. otherwise, i wld have no chance of ever becoming pm.

:)

 

 

Spot on,

I'll never forget the genuine look of abject fear on Boris' face when the out vote was announced, and he thought it was all going to drop in his lap. Commented on it here at the time I believe.

Bet he thinks of Gove as his savior.

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

and the version re out

 

Interviewer - so, Bertis the people have voted out.

B - yes, the people have voted. we must respect our democracy, sovereignty etc. this is a great eg of the uk democratic process

Int- but, you said just before advocating out that being in the eu is good for the uk overall

B - 'rubbish'. it is as above.

I- so why did you advocate out then.

B - Ernieage said to do so, and that i might become an out pm if so. otherwise, i wld have no chance of ever becoming pm.

I-well, you are now foreign sec..

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Lets give it the proper heading

Vote Leave director admits they won because they lied to the public

 

 

"Pundits and MPs kept saying ‘why isn’t Leave arguing about the economy and living standards’. They did not realise that for millions of people, £350m/NHS was about the economy and living standards – that’s why it was so effective.

 

It was clearly the most effective argument not only with the crucial swing fifth but with almost every demographic. Even with UKIP voters it was level-pegging with immigration. Would we have won without immigration? No. Would we have won without £350m/NHS? All our research and the close result strongly suggests No. Would we have won by spending our time talking about trade and the Single Market? No way."

 

 

http://www.thelondoneconomic.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/SWNS_BREXIT_BUS_15.jpg

 

SWNS_BREXIT_BUS_15.jpg

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep.

 

wonder if Bert and Ernie et al can be sued for misrep or breach of contract or..., in consideration of a vote! No doubt though they wld then argue it was a political 'invitation to treat' laugh.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep.

 

wonder if Bert and Ernie et al can be sued for misrep or breach of contract or..., in consideration of a vote! No doubt though they wld then argue it was a political 'invitation to treat' laugh.gif

 

I'd prefer treason

But I'll settles for abuse of position of trust

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

But I'll settles for abuse of position of trust

yeah

1. A person is in breach of this section (s4 fraud act) if he:

a) occupies a position in which he is expected to safeguard, or not to act against, the financial interests of another person

b) dishonestly abuses that position, and intends, by means of the abuse of that position:

 

  • to make a gain for himself or another, or
  • to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss

2. A person may be regarded as having abused his position even though his conduct consisted of an omission rather than an act.

 

dishonesty being a no contest.

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

forgot to link above this interesting (for the technical) side point (re another poss issue requiring parliament, although prob 'easily corrected'.)

'...It is highly likely that the government also needs parliamentary authority to trigger exit from Euratom...In addition to securing parliamentary approval for a Euratom exit, the government will need to be confident that, once triggered, the two-year Euratom exit timetable is sufficient to put in place replacement arrangements to avoid a damaging hiatus for the UK nuclear industry......'

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/V-Brexit-white-paper-confuses-Euratom-debate-08021702.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

'..a retired Scottish doctor claimed the law requires there to be a second referendum on any withdrawal agreement.... a former radiologist from Glasgow, sent a letter before action – usually the first step in taking disputes to court – to the Prime Minister, in which he argued Section 2 of the European Union Act 2011 requires a referendum before the UK can leave the EU...He said he has asked Ms May to respond formally to his letter by Friday 12 May.'

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-brexit-court-challenge-second-referendum-dr-andrew-watt-a7709136.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...