Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No, do the section 75 chargeback to your credit card provider.
    • See what dx thinks but it seems to me that sending a photo of your own pass isn't relevant to what happened. Let's wait and see what he says. HB
    • 1st letter image.pdf1st letter 2nd page.pdf
    • Many thanks for the replies and advice!   I what to send this email to the Starbucks CEO and the area manager. Your thoughts would be appreciated.   [email protected] [email protected]   Re: MET Parking PNC at your Starbucks Southgate site   Dear Ms Rayner, / Dear Heather Christie,   I have received a Notice to Keeper regarding a Parking Charge Notice of £100 for the driver parking in the Southgate Park Car Park, otherwise infamously known as the Stanstead Starbucks/McDonalds car park(s).   Issued by: MET Parking Services Ltd Parking Charge Notice Number: XXXXXXXXX Vehicle Registration Number: XXXX XXX Date of Contravention: XX.XX.XXXX Time: XX:XX - XX:XX   After a little research it apears that the driver is not alone in being caught in what is commonly described as a scam, and has featured in the national press and on the mainstream television.   It is a shame that the reputation of Starbucks is being tarnished by this, with your customers leaving the lowest possible reviews on Trustpilot and Trip Advisor at this location, and to be associated with what on the face of it appears to be a doubious and predatory car park management company.   In this instance, during the early hours of the morning the driver required a coffee and parked up outside Starbucks with the intention of purchasing one from yourselves. Unfortunately, you were closed so the driver walked to McDonalds next door and ordered a coffee, and for this I have received the Notice to Keeper.   It is claimed that the car park is two separate car parks (Starbucks/McDonalds). However, there is no barrier or road markings to identity a boundary, and the signage in the car park(s) and outside your property is ambiguous, as such the terms would most likely be deemed unfair and unenforcable under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   I understand that Starbucks-Euro Garages neither operate or benefit from the charges imposed by MET Parking. However, MET Parking is your client.   Additionally, I understand that the charge amount of £100 had previously been upheld in court due to a ‘legitimate interest in making sure that a car park was run as efficiently as possible to benefit other drivers as well as the local stores, keeping cars from overstaying’.   However, this is not applicable when the shop or store is closed (as was the case here), as there is no legitimate interest. Therefore, the amount demanded is a penalty and is punitive, again contravening the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   As the driver’s intention of the visit was genuine, I would be grateful if you could please instruct your client to cancel this Notice to Keeper/Parking Charge Notice.   Kind regards
    • I received the promised call back from the Saga man today who informed me that the undertakers have decreed it IS a modification and they will need to recalculate a quote individually for me. However it all sounds very arbitrary. The more I think about it, and with help from forum replies, the more I am sure that it is not a modification. If for example the original seatback had become damaged by a spillage or a tear, I would be entitled to replace it with the nearest available part. The problem is when it comes to a payout after an accident, there is no telling what an individual insurer will decide when he notices the change. I am still undecided which of the two best routes to go with, either don't mention the replacement at all, or fill in the quote form without mentioning, and when it comes to buying the insurance over the phone, mention it at the time.
  • 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

(H)BoS progress and partial results?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6543 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

Trying to decide my next step here.

 

Basically, I added up my charges for Direct Debit Unpaid - the most 'unfair' charges - and had £2,618 across two accounts. I sent Letter Before Actions as originally publicised on the Govan Law whatsit site in March, but waited the 40 days for processing and responses.

 

I received an offer of £333 with a form for "Full and Final Settlement" (which I believe is illegal), so called. The offer increased to £915.

 

I have rejected that offer, but I am wondering if I should request the "all charges" information under the DPA and start over, or simply proceed with the Court action - which I will have to file as several claims, due to the £750 limit - unless anyone has other advice on this (should I, for example, file in Berwick, which is in England - as I am right on the Scottish Border).

 

Have many people completed dealing with BoS yet, and with what results? Also, I have been working within the six year Statute of Limitations - which I am wondering about with Scottish Law.

 

£915 for £2,618 charges is simply not acceptable.

 

Looking back, I have £748 and £480 for 2004/5 and 2005/6, and £810 prior to 2004, with £600 on the other account all prior to 2004, so I am wondering if I should merely go for the 2004-6 charges back.

Bank of Scotland - £4000+ returned. Scottish resident, scottish accounts, but it's Halifax Bank of Scotland now, so took 'em to court in Halifax. One small claims, one defence filed, one refund of all charges + interest! Done and dusted.

Next - Capital One :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sent a letter to the bank offering to settle for 2004-2006 and post 2001 on the accounts respectively. This was turned down, in that refusing their 12.7% + 25% offers has no further process.

 

So, court it is. I'm not accepting £915 for £2,600 worth of charges.

 

Now: my first contact was with the Govan Law Centre's Letter Before Action. IMO, that means they have been adequately informed court action is about to proceed. Should I write again and let them know, or just file now?

 

Also, I'm wondering about going for the other charges. Everyone else is. I thought the Bank might have some negotiation technique, but clearly not, so I see no reason to do myself out of further money!

 

Two stages, I expect.

 

Anyway; anything I have missed? Just grab templates and file? Can I file four actions at once?

Bank of Scotland - £4000+ returned. Scottish resident, scottish accounts, but it's Halifax Bank of Scotland now, so took 'em to court in Halifax. One small claims, one defence filed, one refund of all charges + interest! Done and dusted.

Next - Capital One :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Last week I decided that I was too tired and £915 was appealing enough, so I called to accept. Unfortunately, they weren't able to accept over the phone and insisted on sending me the offer with the usual form.

 

I was merely going to alter the form to omit "Full and Final Settlement", however, it also arrived outside of the deadline I gave them. In that time, I also downloaded the spreadsheet for calculating interest and charges, and have now added "unauthorised overdraft" charges - some of which I noticed I got £20 charges several times in a week!

 

What they had also done, was pre-format the acceptance to pay into an account I currently owe /them/ £5,000 on (the one on which many of these charges were accrued); it is actually my intention to pay most of that off, but on my terms having been offered an early settlement figure for it.

 

So: here is my letter in response, going to Leeds, and accompanied by my filling out the small claims forms (I might try the Summary Cause route to break it into two claims and a small small claims amount - assuming they don't settle in full). Anything inherently wrong with this?

 

Also - is it perhaps feasible, since all correspondance is coming from Leeds, to use an English court? It is, after all, closer to them!

 

Anyway: Letter in response to most recent offer - titled "Letter Before Action"

 

"Re: Letter from Damian Robertshaw, dated 23/05/2006

 

Unfortunately following my telephone conversation with Helen Rawnsley, it was made apparent that you were unable to quickly action the partial refund offered without requiring me to sign a document which is essentially illegal, technically attempting to prevent me from claiming back further refunds for penalties which are illegal and in breach of the Consumer Credit Act of 1999, and additionally preformatted to pay the refund into an account which is no longer active. My deadline for a response from the Bank has also passed.

 

I have had the opportunity to more thoroughly study my accounts, and have found that since May 2001 – within the five year statute of limitations commonly advised - £3,231 has been charged in penalties. I attach a spreadsheet detailing these charges.

 

I am quite happy to receive the offered amount of £915 paid either by cheque or directly into account number XXXXXXXX, sort code XX-XX-XX, however I am not prepared to accept this as full and final settlement and intend to pursue the matter further to ensure that I recover all monies legally owed to me.

 

Since I have already issued the required Letter Before Action for these charges detailing the period covered, I will be proceeding with court action to claim the £2,618 already requested, and consider this to be suitable notification as regards the remaining £613, for which action will begin 14 days from the date of this letter unless a full refund is paid."

Bank of Scotland - £4000+ returned. Scottish resident, scottish accounts, but it's Halifax Bank of Scotland now, so took 'em to court in Halifax. One small claims, one defence filed, one refund of all charges + interest! Done and dusted.

Next - Capital One :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good on you going for full amount. I know how you're feeling though, banks are useless at this. I'm sure they don't even read half the letters as some of the responses I've had have been nonsense.

 

Would be so much easier just to give us the money!!!!!!!!!!!!

Halifax: £478 (+ interest & cost) reimbursed

 

Halifax Visa: £370 - 1/2 back so far

 

Bank of Scotland: £802 (+ interest & costs) court ordered to pay (BoS failed to respond)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 10 March 2019.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Bank of Scotland - £4000+ returned. Scottish resident, scottish accounts, but it's Halifax Bank of Scotland now, so took 'em to court in Halifax. One small claims, one defence filed, one refund of all charges + interest! Done and dusted.

Next - Capital One :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6543 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...