Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Please see my comments in orange within your post.
    • no i meant the email from parcel2go which email address did they send it from and who signed it off (whos name is at the bottom)
    • I understand confusion with this thread.  I tried to keep threads separate because there have been so many angles.    But a team member merged them all.  This is why it's hard to keep track. This forum exists to help little people fight injustice - however big or small.  Im here to try get a decent resolution. Not to give in to the ' big boys'. My "matter' became complicated 'matters' simply because a lender refused to sell a property. What can I say?  I'll try in a nutshell to give an overview: There's a long lease property. I originally bought it short lease with a s.146 on it from original freeholder.  I had no concerns. So lender should have been able to sell a well-maintained lovely long lease property.  The property was great. The issue is not the property.  Economy, sdlt increases, elections, brexit, covid, interest hikes etc didn't help.  The issue is simple - the lender wanted to keep it.   House or Flat? Before repo I offered to clear my loan.  I was a bit short and lender refused.  They said (recorded) they thought the property was worth much more and they were happy to keep accruing interest (in their benefit) until it reached a point where they felt they could repo and still easily quickly sell to get their £s back.  This was a mistake.  The market was (and is) tough.   2y later the lender ceo bid the same sum to buy the property for himself. He'd rejected higher offers in the intervening period whilst accruing interest. Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same. I had the property under offer to a fantastic niche buyer but lender rushed to repo and buyer got spooked and walked.  It had taken a long time to find such a lucrative buyer.  A sale which would have resulted in £s and another asset for me. Post repo lender had 1 offer immediately.  But dragged out the process for >1y - allegedly trying to get other offers. But disclosure shows there was only one valid buyer. Again, points as above. Lender appointed receiver (after 4 months) - simply to try acquire the freehold.  He used his powers as receiver to use me, as leaseholder, to serve notice on freeholders.  Legally that failed. Meanwhile lender failed to secure property - and squatters got in (3 times).  And they failed to maintain it.  So freeholders served a dilapidations notice (external) - on me as leaseholder (cc-ed to lender).   (That's how it works legally) Why serve a delapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease. I don't own the freehold.  But I am a trustee and have to do right by the freeholders.  This is where matters got/ get complicated.  And probably lose most caggers.   Lawyers got involved for the freeholders to firstly void the receiver enfranchisement notice. Secondly, to serve the dilapidations notice.  The lack of maintenance was in breach of lease and had to be served to protect fh asset. Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to buy the freehold of the property. It's normal, whether it is a "normal" leaseholder or a repossession with a leasehold house, to claim this right of enfranchisement and sell the property with said rights attached and the purchase price of the freehold included in the final completion price. That's likely what the mortgage provider wished to do. The lender did no repairs. They said a buyer would undertake them. Which was probably correct. If they had sold. After 1y lender finally agreed to sell to the 1st offeror and contracts went with lawyers.  Within 1 month lender reneged.  Lender tried to suggest buyer walked. Evidence shows he/ his lawyers continued trying to exchange (cash) for 4 months.  Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been to renege and for ceo to take control.   I still think that's their plan. Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at? Lender then stupidly chose to pretty much bulldoze the property.  Other stuff was going on in the background. After repo I was in touch by phone and email and lender knew post got to me.   Despite this, after about 10 months (before and then during covid), they deliberately sent SDs and eventually a B petition to an incorrect address and an obscure small court.  They never served me properly.  (In hindsight I understand they hoped to get a backdoor B - so they could keep the property that way.)  Eventually the random court told them to email me by way of service.  At this point their ruse to make me B failed.  I got a lawyer (friend paid). The B petition was struck out. They’d failed to include the property as an asset. They were in breach of insolvency rules. So this is dealt with then. Simultaneously the receiver again appointed lawyers to act on my behalf as leaseholder. This time to serve notice on the freeholders for a lease extension.  He had hoped to try and vary the strict lease. Evidence shows the already long length of lease wasn't an issue.  The lender obviously hoped to get round their lack of permission to do works (which they were already doing) by hoping to remove the strict clauses that prevent leaseholder doing alterations.  You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension. You'd need a Deed of Variation for that. This may be done at the same time but the lease has already been extended once and that's all they have a right to. The extension created a new legal angle for me to deal with.  I had to act as trustee for freeholders against me as leaseholder/ the receiver.  Inconsistencies and incompetence by receiver lawyers dragged this out 3y.  It still isn't properly resolved. The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there. Meanwhile - going back to the the works the lender undertook. The works were consciously in breach of lease.  The lender hadn't remedied the breaches listed in the dilapidations notice.  They destroyed the property.  The trustees compiled all evidence.  The freeholders lawyers then served a forfeiture notice. This notice started a different legal battle. I was acting for the freeholders against what the lender had done on my behalf as leaseholder.  This legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease. The simple exit would have been for lender to sell. A simple agreement to remedy the breaches and recompense the freeholders in compensation - and there's have been clean title to sell.  That option was proposed to them.   This happened by way of mediation for all parties 2y ago.  A resolution option was put forward and in principle agreed.  But immediately after the lender lawyers failed to engage.  A hard lesson to learn - mediation cannot be referred to in court. It's considered w/o prejudice. The steps they took have made no difference to their ability to sell the property.  Almost 3y since they finished works they still haven't sold. ** ** I followed up some leads myself.  A qualified cash buyer offered me a substantial sum.  The lender and receiver both refused it.   I found another offer in disclosure.  6 months later someone had apparently offered a substantial sum via an agent.  The receiver again rejected it.  The problem of course was that the agent had inflated the market price to get the business. But no-one was or is ever going to offer their list price.  Yet the receiver wanted/wants to hold out for the list price.  Which means 1y later not only has it not sold - disclosure shows few viewings and zero interest.  It's transparently over-priced.  And tarnished. For those asking why I don't give up - I couldn't/ can't.  Firstly I have fiduciary duties as a trustee. Secondly, legal advice indicates I (as leaseholder) could succeed with a large compensation claim v the lender.  Also - I started a claim v my old lawyer and the firm immediately reimbursed some £s. That was encouraging.  And a sign to continue.  So I'm going for compensation.  I had finance in place (via friend) to do a deal and take the property back off the lender - and that lawyer messed up bad.   He should have done a deal.  Instead further years have been wasted.   Maybe I only get back my lost savings - but that will be a result.   If I can add some kind of complaint/ claim v the receiver's conscious impropriety I will do so.   I have been left with nothing - so fighting for something is worth it. The lender wants to talk re a form of settlement.  Similar to my proposal 2y ago.  I have a pretty clear idea of what that means to me.  This is exactly why I do not give up.  And why I continue to ask for snippets of advice/ pointers on cag.  
    • It was all my own work based on my previous emails to P2G which Bank has seen.
    • I was referring to #415 where you wrote "I was forced to try to sell - and couldn't." . And nearer the start in #79 .. "I couldn't sell.  I had an incredibly valuable asset. Huge equity.  But the interest accrued / the property market suffered and I couldn't find a buyer even at a level just to clear the debt." In #194 you said you'd tried to sell for four years.  The reason for these points is that a lot of the claims against for example your surveyor, solicitor, broker, the lender and now the receiver are mainly founded in a belief that they should have been able to do something but did not. Things that might seem self evident to you but not necessarily to others. Pressing these claims may well need a bit more hard evidence, rather than an appeal to common sense. Can you show evidence of similar properties, with similar freehold issues, selling readily? And solid reasons why the lender should have been able to sell when you couldn't.
  • 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

met police red light ticket help!!!!!!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6232 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

can anyone help?

aparently i ran a red light, which i can not remember doing.

i receveied a letter from metropolitan police saying this, i signed and sent it back, and today i receveived another letter back saying that i could contest this red light ticket in court or pay £60 and 3 points on my liecence????

i dont know what to do, can anyone help as i genuienly cant remember jumping this red light!!!!!

thanks

:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are now stuffed.

 

To prove the offence in court there are two elements; evidence that an offence was committed and evidence as to who the driver was.

 

They have evidence of an offence - the photograph.

They have evidence of the identity of the driver - you have given them that.

 

You can either pay the £60 and get 3 points or go to court. If you do the former, that will be the end of the matter. If you do the latter, there is a slight chance that they will cock up on the court paperwork and you will get away with it. If you do not, then the fine may increase and you will be required to pay costs.

 

Oh, and don't run red lights - people get killed that way

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Gertie100

Where does it say there is a photograph? Or is that how it works? (asking cos I really don't know...)

Surely if you have photographic evidence that you ran the red light you wouldn't dream of attempting to contest in court because you did it!...?

If you can't remember doing it at the specific place and time, can you ask for the photograph along with accepting the fine and points?

Just a thought!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where does it say there is a photograph? Or is that how it works? (asking cos I really don't know...)

Surely if you have photographic evidence that you ran the red light you wouldn't dream of attempting to contest in court because you did it!...?

If you can't remember doing it at the specific place and time, can you ask for the photograph along with accepting the fine and points?

Just a thought!

 

I am assuming that it was a camera offence, otherwise the OP would have been stopped at the time and verbally warned for prosecution.

 

You are not entitled in law to see any of the evidence unless and until you plead not guilty. So you can't get the photograph " along with accepting the fine and points". You may be given a copy of the photograph if you write and ask for a copy "to help identify the driver", but as the OP has already identified himself as the driver that won't work in this case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i will just pay the £60 + 3 points, as there is nothing i can do!

oh, and i really dont remember running the red light, if i did i would have accepted the fine, but i thought i would get some advice before i paided this ticket and normally i have gotten great advice by the people on this website, but i guess this time i am buggered!!

thanks

:(

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that this is a different issue, but particularly in the instance of Speeding Tickets DO NOT ASK for the photographic evidence.

 

Use the PACE letter instead. This relies on the fact that under British Law you must have been read your rights before being asked to Plead on a given offence. You provide on a seperate sheet the details of the driver, and attach it to the NIP whilst also telling them that they are not allowed to use the information you have provided in Court. You do nothing with the NIP. They may try and bully you, but just write back telling them once again that you have already dealt with the matter referring them to your letter dated XX-YY-ZZ.

 

If you decide to plead Not Guilty then the prosecution must provide their evidence to the Defence 7 days before the Trial Date. If they don't, and you would be surprised at how may do not, then that evidence is inadmissable in Court. This includes the Photographs. If you ask for them and they send them you have stuffed that up right away.

 

In the case of Red Light jumping most of the above probably holds true also.

 

But as someone else has already said - DON'T JUMP RED LIGHTS! If you did and you don't remember then PAY MORE ATTENTION WHEN DRIVING please. It may be me coming through on Green!

 

And BTW - if you feel bad about being "buggered" on this occasion just consider how someone's family would now be feeling had you killed a son/daughter/husband/wife by your actions.

 

£60 and 3 Points isn't much when weighed up against that, is it? Sounds more like the cost of a half-decent night out and a bit of inconvenience to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

went to where i suposedly got red light ticket, and reliesed my partner was driving my car at the time, but he is not insured to drive my car, which makes my case even worse!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

went to where i suposedly got red light ticket, and reliesed my partner was driving my car at the time, but he is not insured to drive my car, which makes my case even worse!!!

 

I'm sorry, running red lights is one thing, but being uninsured as well just beggars belief:eek::mad::mad:

 

Perhaps there is a reason to bring back capital punishment

Link to post
Share on other sites

As PatDavies said .... especially if he was driving with your knowledge or presence. How irresponsible can someone get?

 

I would do a deal wth your boyfriend - you take the points and he pays your fine and increase in Insurance Premiums! Assuming you declare it (which you need to by the way otherwise your Insurance will be as good as Null & Void)

 

Hopefully you will both then learn from this!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, running red lights is one thing, but being uninsured as well just beggars belief:eek::mad::mad:

 

Perhaps there is a reason to bring back capital punishment

 

Absoultely. In fact, while we're at it, let's hang, draw and quarter them too as an example to other motorists... :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

As PatDavies said .... especially if he was driving with your knowledge or presence. How irresponsible can someone get?

 

I would do a deal wth your boyfriend - you take the points and he pays your fine and increase in Insurance Premiums! Assuming you declare it (which you need to by the way otherwise your Insurance will be as good as Null & Void)

 

Hopefully you will both then learn from this!

 

Of course, Chizzy isn't suggesting that you do anything (else!) illegal here. What I'm fairly sure was meant by that statement was that if you're still unsure who was drving and, on the balance of probabilities, it looks likely that it could have been you, then you should just accept the points on your licence as punishment. It looks far more likely to me that you were driving, as your boyfriend isn't insured to drive your car and, therefore, almost certainly would not have been driving it. However, as your boyfriend no doubt loves you very much and would hate to see you short of cash due to the fine, perhaps he could help you out with payment...

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks anyways to your sugestions, i know i have been an idiot, but we all make mistakes in life, just needed a bit of advice from people who know what they are talking about, nothing else!

:Cry:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree we do all makes mistakes from time to time - but there is something different between, say, making a turn where we shouldn't have done due to poor signposting, being lost, unfamiliar territory or whatever and running a Red Light through either recklessness or lack of attention.

 

Having said that I do hope that 1) you can get it sorted, and 2) that you do learn from it.

 

I know this is going off at a tangent a little but if it was due to lack of attention rather that just pure recklessness can I urge you to get yourself on a scooter or motorcycle and get a licence for that. It's not that I want you out of a car but if you want to bring everything into sharper relief and get to understand just what a danger some people are in cars then there is no better training to be had. Besides that it makes you a better driver through the need for observation & awareness at all times.

 

And before you say "I wouldn't ride a motorcycle, it's too dangerous", then just think about why it's considered dangerous. It's the blind and inconsiderate idiots in cars most of the time! In spite of that it's also more fun and quicker for getting around cities on - most of the time it's also Congestion Charge/Toll Free and usually offers Free Parking.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree we do all makes mistakes from time to time - but there is something different between, say, making a turn where we shouldn't have done due to poor signposting, being lost, unfamiliar territory or whatever and running a Red Light through either recklessness or lack of attention.

 

Having said that I do hope that 1) you can get it sorted, and 2) that you do learn from it.

 

I know this is going off at a tangent a little but if it was due to lack of attention rather that just pure recklessness can I urge you to get yourself on a scooter or motorcycle and get a licence for that. It's not that I want you out of a car but if you want to bring everything into sharper relief and get to understand just what a danger some people are in cars then there is no better training to be had. Besides that it makes you a better driver through the need for observation & awareness at all times.

 

And before you say "I wouldn't ride a motorcycle, it's too dangerous", then just think about why it's considered dangerous. It's the blind and inconsiderate idiots in cars most of the time! In spite of that it's also more fun and quicker for getting around cities on - most of the time it's also Congestion Charge/Toll Free and usually offers Free Parking.

 

Good luck.

 

And of course all the motorcycle riders stay in lane, never overtake (or undertake) never speed, nevr cut across you.

It swings both ways mate.

Sorry to rant but why aren't theier TV adverts telling bikers to be carefull instead of balming all the car drivers..

And dont get me started on 17yr olds on scooters

Sorry Rant over....lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

And of course all the motorcycle riders stay in lane, never overtake (or undertake) never speed, nevr cut across you.

It swings both ways mate.

Sorry to rant but why aren't theier TV adverts telling bikers to be carefull instead of balming all the car drivers..

And dont get me started on 17yr olds on scooters

Sorry Rant over....lol

 

There are ads on TV telling motorcyclists to be careful. I guess you just don't see them, just like you probably don't see motorcyclists when you are driving on the road:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

PKea

I never said that motorcyclists do anything untoward - of course there are those that will. The point I was making was that the training they go through makes them more aware of what is happening around them for their own safety. We see every ripple, rut, hole, diesel spill, smooth tarmac, overbanding, badly placed manhole cover etc because they are potentially life threatening to us. We also see what you are upto as drivers, and sometimes it scares the crap out of us.

 

I would suggest that you open your eyes on more than one account:

 

1) Read the post before letting your prejudices and venom out

2) If bikers are as bad as you suggest then why do Dept. of Transport figures show that in only 38% of accidents involving a bike and a car was the rider at fault.

3) Get on a bike and find out for yourself pal. I ride and drive. I see bad examples of both. But strangely I have yet to see an incident when a bike has put the life of a car driver at risk just because of poor observance (although I am sure you can correct me on that)

4) The majority of us bikers have already weighed up the pro's and cons of a move before you are even aware of us because you are too bloody dozy or fiddling with your CD/Radio, using the phone, eating/drinking or just plain bored out of your brains from sitting in queues of traffic

5) 17yr olds on Scooters are someone's sons and daughters. They have just found a little freedom for the fiirst time in their lives. They may seem reckless to you. They are inexperienced and young - cut them a little slack you curmudgeonly windbag. You too were once young - try and remember what it was like.

 

I guess what gets your rag is that we bikers do not have to sit in those queues like you! And guess what? We smile more because of that - just that you can't see it! Ha ha ha .... Try being nice for once and let the biker through - he ain't holding you up, it's all the other drivers around you that are doing that. I acknowledge with a wave or 'thumbs up' every driver who moves across for me at anytime, so I ask you all to keep doing that for those of us bikers who do acknowledge your kindness - I am sorry to say that not all bikers do, but that's because they are humans not just because they are bikers. I lose count of the car drivers who also refuse to acknowledge any courtesy shown to them by me in a car.

 

Oh and for your information PKea, filtering is not illegal per se. A Court determined that not long ago when they found a driver guilty of causing a bikers death by turning right without signalling and paying due care.

 

Now go and stay warm and dry in your tin box with airbags, heating, crumple zones, ABS, EBD, Traction Control, heated mirrors, windscreen wipers etc instead of living for the sheer enjoyment of it.

 

Oh, and bye bye - see you when you get there! Eventually!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah right - go on then pick the holes in my reply.

 

You started the fight - now finish it. But you can't because your argument was just pure prejudice and nothing more. You may have raised my hackles a little with your stupid comments, but you have also failed to see any of the balance in my reply. I wonder why? Is it because you aren't looking? Again! as previously pointed out by Rob S .... hmmmm

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...