Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
  • 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

Re-claiming airport tax and charges from non-refundable flights....


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5029 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 read somewhere that when you book a flight with el-cheapo airlines and they state that it's non-refundable, that only means the actual cost of the flight and not the airport tax and charges.

 

Recently I had to put this to the test with flybe, in that there were 3 return flights I had previously booked but couldn't take due to my mother's terminal illness. When I called their call centre staff I was told there would be an administration fee of £20 per leg of the flight (so £120 admin charge for 3 return flights). I wrote a letter explaining why I couldn't take these flights, they asked me to prove my mother's illness, which I did with a doctors letter, and then "as a gesture of goodwill" refunded me the FULL cost of all airport tax and charges (which came to £131, so wouldn't have been worth it if they'd have insisted on the £120 admin fee).

 

Recently I also asked Thomsonfly about their policy on refund and taxes adn was told a new law passed in May meant they did not have to refund tax and charges. When pressed further this 'new law' was actually only a new Thomsonfly policy.

 

Is this correct? Is an airline allowed to keep hold of the airport tax and charges it adds on to a ticket when it states that only the cost of the actual flight itself is non-refundable?

 

On what basis can they now keep those charges? (Previously they'd discourage you by having an idiot admin charge that was the same price as tax etc).

 

Anyway well done flybe for honouring my request, though boo to them that they actually wanted proof from a doctor re: my mother's terminal illness. Who'd lie about soemthing like that??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who'd lie about soemthing like that??

 

 

I recall an episode of Airline where a group of passengers had arrived late at check-in, and were only let through after pleading with the staff that they were going to a family funeral. Later they admitted on camera that they had lied, and that they were going to a stag party.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who'd lie about soemthing like that??

 

Plenty of people, that's who.

 

I used to organise medical repatriations, air ambulances, emergency flights and all that. We always had to check because so many lie.

 

I have had the "deceased" father answering the phone in the UK. Turns out the son was not enjoying himself where he was, so wanted to come home.

 

I have had people with advanced cancer flying to the US to beat the queue from the UK, and expecting their emergency travel insurance to pay the hundreds of thousands dollars medical bill.

 

I have had people wanting to come home because it was too hot in August in Turkey (well, DUH!), and expecting their insurance to pay for it.

 

More Vuitton luggage are claimed as lost every year than are actually sold worldwide.

 

Travel insurance is the fastest growing insurance fraud.

 

I could tell you stories that would make you roar with laughter or cry with despair at human nature.

 

So not "boo" for checking, well done, because if they didn't, watch the cost of the insurance soaring faster then the plane on which you didn't travel! ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

As others have said before me, one of the commonest 'frailties of human nature' is the ability to lie when it suits!

Jimbo 44 - always happy to help, but always willing to learn from being corrected too!!! Whilst any advice given may be based upon personal experience, please always be sure you seek guidance from a professional in the particular field.

 

Never be afraid to try something new. Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark, but a large group of professionals built the Titanic.

 

A 'click' on the scales is always appreciated if I have helped. Many Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm well aware that as humans we lie when it suits, but shame on those who'll falsely use the death of a family member! It's completely abhorent and makes my blood boil! I'll stop there cos it's an emotive subject for me at the moment.

 

.... But back to the flights and re-claiming airport tax and charges, anyone know the legal position on this please?

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

Ok, maybe it's a commercial what I am doing right now. But I've been freaking out with Easyjet for the last 4 months of getting an airport tax refund for my unused flight (I was planning to go from Luton to Malaga with my family of 4 persons, but due to a funeral we skipped the holiday)

 

The ticket was 100% non-refundable (a crap reason of course) but I asked for a refund for at least the taxes. It took me 4 months and 18 e-mails with Easyjet but, they didn't even think about a refund.

 

Eventually I contacted a guy from link removed (long story, but a friend of mine sold his ticket on this site and they also have a Re-fund service) and paid about 20 USD. 3 days later I got an e-mail from the same guy with the confirmation of a tax refund, and about 60 days later 220 USD showed up on my credit-card statement!!!!

 

So, I don't know how they did it, but for some strange reason they did the same thing in 3 days as what I tried to in 4 months.

 

Again, this is not a commercial for them or anything like that, but I just wanted to share it with you, because eventually it saved me a lot of frustration. And I was very happy to pay this 20 USD to them. By the way, I think they are based in the Netherlands or Germany (according to their last names in the e-mails) so that was some sort of sign of confidence to me.

Edited by ims21
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...