Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Write to the IPC complaining that UKPC have not observed the requirements of PoFA . IPC  Waterside House, Macclesfield SK10 9NR Dear IPC, I am writing to complain about a serious breach of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 by UKPCM. I feel that as it is more a breach of the Act rather than not just  complying with your Code of Practice which is why I am bypassing your operator. Should you decide to insist that I first complain to your operator, I will instead pass over my complaint to the ICO and the DVLA . My story starts with being issued a windscreen PCN on 8/3/24 which was almost immediately removed and a second  PCN was then  sent by post on 13/3/24  [deemed delivered 15/3/24] which I did not receive and had to send an sar to have that particular mess revealed later  but that is not the reason for my complaint. UKPC then sent a Keeper Liability Notice dated 12/4/24 warning me that as 28 days have now elapsed, I as keeper am now liable for the charge.  This is in direct contravention of PoFA since the keeper does not become liable to pay until the day after the original PCN is deemed to have been given which would have been 13/4/24 -a Saturday ]. Not only does it not comply with PoFA but it fails to adhere to your Code of Practice and is in breach of their agreement with the DVLA. You will be aware that this is not the first time that UKPC have fallen foul of the DVLA and presumably yourselves. I have included copies of both Notices for information. You will realise the seriousness of this situation if this is standard practice from the UKPC to all motorists or just those where windscreen tickets are involved since the Law regarding PoFA is being abused and is unfair to misguide motorists. I await your  response which I understand will usually be within a week. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I would think that should be sufficient for the IPC to cancel your PCN though  you should await comments from the Site team before sending your complaint. Don't forget to include both PCNs.  
    • Hi DX, Sorry, fell asleep as I was up all night last night writing that statement. Yes, I attached the rest of the witness statement on post 50, bottom of webpage 2. That's the important part.  It looks like the lawyer who wrote Erudio's Witness statement does not work for them any more. So, I'll have another lawyer representing instead. Not sure if I can use Andy's hearsay argument verbally if that happens.... I did not put it in writing. Apart from not sending deferral forms, my main argument is that in 2014 Erudio fixed some arrears mistake that SLC made and then in 2018 they did the same mistake, sent me confusing letters. What is the legal defence when they send you confusing material?
    • Chinese firm MineOne Partners has been ordered to sell land it owns near a US nuclear missile site.View the full article
    • That isn’t actually what the Theft Act 1968 S1 actually says, BTW. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/section/1 (1)A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it;   The difference between what you’ve said and the Act? a) intent to permanently deprive rather than  just depriving (which is why the offence of “taking without consent” was brought in for motor vehicles, as otherwise "joyriders" could say "but I intended to give it back at the end") b) dishonesty : If I honestly believed A's pen belonged to B, and took it and gave it to B - B might be found guilty of theft but I shouldn't be. 
  • 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

Arnold shark cancelled finance


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2578 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

Hi,

I had my audi in at arnold clatk for its 5th repair under warranty within 10 minths ownership. The repair was practically a full engine rebuild and taking 2 weeks.

 

The 2nd day of it being in the garage i eventually realised i was sick of the car and disheartened so called up arnold clark to give me a trade in value.

 

The man on the phone asked me to drop the car off, which i told him its in his workshop being worked on.

He went away and valued my car and got back to me with a price which would wipe out all my finance and let me start fresh.

 

I went up and had a sit down and looked through some new cars and decided on a 16plate passat.

 

All was fine.

Car got orderd, deposit paid, finance and everything agreed in principle all signed by both parties, and shipped up from england and i was due to collect it.

 

My car came out the garage before my new car arrived so i had about 1 week of driving it.

 

I then went to the garage on a friday to collect my new car and hand my audi back as a trade in.

 

When settling down to do the handover he took all my cars details, log book, service, mots, keys etc.

 

He then went to my car to check the mileage and at that came almost sprinting back to the desk to tell me i gave him the wrong mileage.

 

I told him on the phone my car is ay roughly 70,000miles.

He went and viewed the car himself to confirm this.

But in the trade in value forms he has put 26,000 miles.

This obviously drastically increased the value of my car.

 

Now... arnold clark already posted out the V5 owenership for the passat to me which i have in my name.

. but they wanted me to pay an extra 3k towards it to make up for the value of the audi that they valued wrong.

 

We couldnt come to an agreement and i said its your mistake,

they had my audi and 2 weeks to look at it.

 

 

Everything was agreed and signed and then cancelled as they noticed their mistake and wouldnt honour the deal unless i paid an extra 3k towards the passat.

 

Where do i stand with this?

Edited by Bounci3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Arnold Clark are famous for all of the wrong reasons.

 

 

You may well have to sue them for breach of contract but that contract will be damned difficult to prove cant be repudiated because of the error.

 

 

I agree that you should get what you agreed but do you have both sets of paperwork regarding the trade in value of your Audi and the purchase agreement for the new car based on ?

 

 

If you dont then you are in a poor position to force the sale of the VW,

but you can go after the for the difference in price of that one

and another car you buy because you cant have that one ("loss of bargain")

 

You can also ask for your old car back nicely repaired as per the warranty and then take it elsewhere and do a trade-in there or if they wont keep to any agreement sue them for the value of the Audi as it is clearly not of merchantable quality

Link to post
Share on other sites

Audi--5 repairs in 10 months---not a good advert for Audi.

You're in a difficult situation, as I for one would not accept a car that Clark did a major engine job on---why not a reconditioned engine??

At the end of the day you may be better off telling sharkie to shove the VW where the sun don't shine then quickly get rid of the Audi.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I have all the paperwork that was signed. It shows my audis price. The vw price. My monthly payments and so on. Only issue is that it shows the wrong recorded mileage for my Audi, whichis the mileage their staff wrote down after inspecting my car

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...