Jump to content

BazzaS

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    7,567
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    52

BazzaS last won the day on September 17 2023

BazzaS had the most liked content!

Reputation

3,640 Excellent

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Any mileage in being pro-active re: it being a one-off use? The difference in patterns of usage may be obvious once highlighted. Something along the lines if “I attach printouts of usage for both my sister’s card and mine, showing that although we both start our journeys at the same station (near our home), hers are always earlier, corresponding to her school day, and those on my Oyster are later, which hopefully will reassure you that this was a one-off, using her card in error (as mentioned above), an error which I will be certain not to repeat”
  2. “I hope this email finds you well” seems to be a (new) recurring opening phrase. I don’t know if this is from ChatGPT, but I wouldn’t use such an informal opening. They’ll check back (8 weeks usage?). If they don’t see a pattern of usage that suggests repeated use by you, you may well get let off with a warning.
  3. Still haven’t replied to b). It’s an uphill battle already if they; i) fare dodge, repeatedly. ii) start replying to TfL (and potentially dig themselves further into a hole) before seeking advice here iii) expect a “magic bullet” letter to be provided, ‘on a plate’, once they realise the negative effects of being prosecuted for fare evasion. However, add to that: iv) don’t answer relevant questions - and I conclude: Can’t help those who won’t help themselves. I’m out.
  4. I don't know what you should put in the letter. I can't advise as I'd asked a) what you said when you were questioned (as TfL will have the notes of that), and b) if you'd already told them 2 different stories, and you've not answered either query. It is hard enough trying to come up with help for people who have multiple episodes of fare evasion, let alone where they have said "it was a mistake on the day", when clearly that isn't the whole truth, but: If you don't engage (by replying to relevant queries), how do you expect people to help?.
  5. What did you say when you were stopped (were you questioned?). Have you told them both a) that you and your partner "use them interchangeably" but also b) that on the day you picked up the wrong pass by mistake ? That might look to TfL that you aren't being honest with them. You don't have to answer questions they haven't asked you, but equally,if you are hoping for leniency, you don't want to get caught in a lie, either.
  6. I can’t tell from your post what stage this is at. take a breath : whilst you shouldn’t do nothing, you also shouldn’t panic. Have they obtained a CCJ? Are they threatening one? And, (most importantly: do you owe them anything?) So, don’t hang around and engage with this thread but don’t be tempted to make a knee jerk response to them. Likely the 2 best things to do ASAP are 1) post up the letter you have received as a .pdf but redacted of any personal / identifiable info of your details 2) post up a ‘bullet-point’ chronological summary of events to date, including why they think you owe them, and what happened.
  7. I’m confused : the liquidators wanted to sell you the cryptocurrency owned by the company? (That and the printer : if 300+ 340 -> 640, which would become £768 if VAT at 20% added to both). is this the same cryptocurrency you purchased as an individual? If so, then they seem to be accepting the cryptocurrency was indeed held by the company, rather than you as an individual…. In which case you shouldn’t be personally liable (provided you didn’t offer a personal guarantee). If they sold you a company asset (be that a printer or cryptocurrency) that implies it was owned by the company and not you personally!!
  8. Why? a) ANY citizen can arrest another (though it is likely unwise if they aren’t sure of their ground). If arrested it isn’t wise to resist unless fearful for one’s safety : best move is to say “OK, you’ve arrested me, now call the police to ensure no breach of the peace” (and a civil action for unlawful arrest +\- possibly false imprisonment) - even if the CPS feel the threshold for criminal charges of false imprisonment haven’t been met. b) if they say the arrest is under a warrant: ask to see the warrant. If no warrant - or if unsure - again, police to ensure no breach of the peace.
  9. If it was an investment : since a limited company “is, legally, a person” - then the company could have bought the cryptocurrency. The company didn't have to transfer the money to you to do so. It would still have been unwise, but you'd likely have benefitted from the companies limited liability* : you'd not be on the hook for 13k and at risk of being disqualified from future directorships. * likely benefited as one can, in rare circumstances, be held liable personally for ltd company debts: (absent having given a personal guarantee) if one's actions are so egregious as to "pierce the corporate veil" : such as knowingly trading while insolvent, or unfairly offering a preference to a creditor above other creditors. Given the company could have invested: I can see why the bank and liquidators will take some persuading it was the company investing.
  10. I doubt they’d go for a CCJ alone …. As has been pointed out, it (at least in its own!) is a toothless threat. As this relates to what looks like an improper loan to the sole director, which has then been invested in a high-risk (cryptocurrency!) scheme : more likely (with, or without a CCJ) a) action to disqualify the director from future directorships, and b) bankruptcy proceedings. in terms of the Companies Act, one can’t claim “ I have very little understanding of the legalities surrounding running a company," as as a director of a limited company the law imposes fiduciary duties. Who helped you set up the limited company? did they give you any pointers to advice? (one company formation agent I used, albeit many years ago, provided the ebook version [current for then] of what is now) https://www.lawpack.co.uk/how-run-limited-company/p it lists the major advantages and disadvantages of a limited company and cites as a disadvantage; ” Please remember it’s not your money. Any money in the company’s bank account belongs to the company and it can only be taken out as a dividend or wage, or set against money you put into the business." The Bounce Back loans were intended to support SME’s affected by coronavirus. They weren’t intended to allow individuals to improperly siphon £13k off of a limited company to gamble on cryptocurrency, and (as they were/are) government backed …. The people have funded the OP’s £13k gamble (and loss). It isn't unfair for there to be attempts to recover what they can, and civil action against the OP.
  11. Was it the first time you used it, or first time you got caught (they’ll look back at at least 8 weeks of Oyster history looking for patterns of use / misuse)
  12. By comparison with how much for the administrative settlement? (Or, if prosecuted, total fine / costs & the cost to you of the criminal record…….)
  13. You should have! What with the BTP base there, and main COLP station on Bishopsgate, not to forget one of the highest concentrations of CCTV cameras to follow you: good chance of being nabbed. Then, none of this letter tennis and pleading for an admin settlement: straight to court, RRA 1889 S5(3)(a). Sorted. you regret getting caught and regret not running off, rather than regretting fare evading.
  14. Don’t forget : medical professionals shouldn’t report you to DVLA (absent you not having capacity to do so yourself, or deliberately failing to do so) Because of confidentiality the ideal is they don’t report you. You inform DVLA and the DVLA forms you then complete make it clear you are giving permission for those medical professionals to respond to a DVLA enquiry. (For info, and I hope it wouldn’t come to it for most sensible people who don’t lack capacity:) However, if it is clear someone lacks capacity to inform DVLA (so, if they are a dementia sufferer, for example) , they can inform DVLA on the basis the person would do so if they were capable, and there is a clear public interest aspect. Similarly, if they advise someone who is competent to inform DVLA, and the person chooses not to, they might then repeat to that patient that they MUST inform DVLA, and if that too fails, suggest (for example) a second opinion. If all else fails AND the medical professional believes the person continuing driving represents a risk to others of death or serious harm : they can inform the patient that they will be informing DVLA (and then do so). Again : on a public interest basis, and trying reasonable alternatives first.
  15. The risk here is if DVLA revoke your license. It is then an uphill battle to get it back, and when you do you’ll lose any “automatically granted C1” [if your test pass was pre-1997] so, you might be better to VOLUNTEER to hand back your license for now, (take a copy of it, front AND back, so any e.g. C1 entitlement doesnt 'disappear' Then get your medical proof, including a sleep specialists opinion on when your condition is a) “ adequately controlled", and b) that they say you are safe to drive. Then advise DVLA of your assessment, the fact your licence wasnt revoked, that you are applying for your licence back (if need be on a 1, 2, or 3 year renewal medical licence) Why the palaver? because Drivers Meficsl Group take ages (way more than their 18 week target). If your license was revoked you cant drive until a new one is issued (and any pre-99 C1 entitlement will have gone). If your license wasn't revoked but you surrendered it, when you get the evidence to get it back, as soon as you apply you can drive again (in the UK, not abroad), under S.88 of the road traffic act https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/64edcf3a13ae1500116e2f5d/inf1886-can-i-drive-while-my-application-is-with-dvla.pdf This is why you may well be better to have a short period of voluntary surrender than the hassle you’ll get if DVLA revoke your license. 1) photocopy anything you send DVLA for when they say they’ve lost it. 2) Send anything special delivery for when they say it wasn’t received (at which point, when you offer proof it was received - see 1)) recorded gets signed for ‘en bloc’, Special signed for individually: hence Special instead of Recorded (for the individual signature rather than the ‘next day’ aspect) 3) Record any calls. They’ll lie (or, at least be mistaken and make errors), saying complaints weren’t made when they were, that a complaint was made but unfortunately missed being recorded, that there isn’t any appeals mechanism, or that appeals are dealt with by the same people so there is no point in appealing. (1st appeal is to Drivers Med Group, 2nd is to DVLA chief exec, next is to PHSO [Ombudsman] via your MP If they unfairly refuse, you can appeal to magistrates court, but it’s more usual they just “don’t make a decision” for over 6 months - hence why the S88 route is important
×
×
  • Create New...