Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
  • 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

Tachograph offences fine


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5951 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,

not sure if i'm posting in the right bit here but here goes...

 

A friend of mine has just been fined nearly £2000 for tachograph offences, he received the court notification for it today - it says that the amount must be paid in 28 days:o

Can anyone tell me if this is right as he would really struggle to pay this amount in that time especially at this time of year. Is it possible for him to arrange installments?

 

Anyone :confused:

Thanks in advance,

kez.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He must have known about this. The Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (Vosa) prosecute for tachograph offences and they will have confiscated the relevant tachographs when he was stopped.

 

At the time he would of been informed that he is being reported for X offences.

 

He would have had the right to attend the court and defend himself and I’m guessing he did not and the court found in his absence.

 

Fines for tachograph offences are heavy and £2000 is about right these days in fact he should feel lucky, many drivers has been sentenced to varying terms of imprisonment for tachograph offences.

 

He can now write to the court asking for time to pay, he should do this ASAP.

If my comments have been helpful please click my scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather than write to the Court, I would suggest it would be better to attend. You don't need an appointment. Just go on a day that the Court is sitting, arrive at 10 o' clock and explain to the Court usher you want to be seen by the magistrates about case no XXXX. You might get in straight away or you might have to wait all day. When in, explain that the amount will cause hardship blah blah blah and ask for time to pay. The magistrates will listen and because you made the effort to turn up will consider you take the matter seriously, and should work out a weekly sum. They understand there's no point persuing somebody for money he doesn't have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From a different perspective, can you advise what the offence was ? Was it a case that he was "forced" by his employer to drive over the limits etc. If so then he could have a claim against his employer under H&S regulations. I'm not an expert on H&S law however I would suspect that there may be an arguement here that the employer may be liable.

 

Just a thought.

:p :p If my advice as been of help, please give me a quick click on the scales to your right ;) ;) :)
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that argument would work. I can't see that a driver's responsibilities when alone in a cab could be laid at somebody elses door. The company in this case would also have had a similar fine anyway.

Unles of course we are talking about an owner/driver here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem you have with saying the employer forced you to break the law is that the Traffic Commissioners consider that the driver is a professional and must refuse at all times to break the law.

The driver is 100% reasonable for his/her conduct on the road. When a driver is reported for tachograph offences, the employer is spoken to as well; this is because under their operators licence they are reasonable for their drivers conduct too.

If it is proven that the employer “forced " a driver to break the law then the H & S are the least of their problems, They can have their operators licence cut, suspended or removed, at the very least a heavy fine.

If my comments have been helpful please click my scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's enlightened me also. As I said, it was just a thought which funnily enough answers a questioned raised last month at work (insurance) by a colleague on behalf of a haulier.

:p :p If my advice as been of help, please give me a quick click on the scales to your right ;) ;) :)
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think that if the time restraints were so tight that speeding was involved or regulated breaks could not be taken, then the employer would have given him a vehicle without a taco.

Knowing you have a taco means that you cannot be forced to do something that is not allowed as everything is recorded, so the driver will have to take the full concequences.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think that if the time restraints were so tight that speeding was involved or regulated breaks could not be taken, then the employer would have given him a vehicle without a taco.

 

This would work unless he had driven an hgv that comes under the tacho regs in the same week. If that’s so then even if he had driven a vehicle without a tacho, he would still need to take the regulated breaks.

If my comments have been helpful please click my scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think that if the time restraints were so tight that speeding was involved or regulated breaks could not be taken, then the employer would have given him a vehicle without a taco.

Knowing you have a taco means that you cannot be forced to do something that is not allowed as everything is recorded, so the driver will have to take the full concequences.

But virtually all work in vehicles over 3.5 tonnes needs a tacho (few exceptions, recovery etc).

Link to post
Share on other sites

This would work unless he had driven an hgv that comes under the tacho regs in the same week. If that’s so then even if he had driven a vehicle without a tacho, he would still need to take the regulated breaks.

 

Can you correct your post please. I believe there was a court case than confirmed that any private driving or commuting the employee did in his own car cannot count towards his driving hours. I'm not quite sure what your point was supposed to be.

 

Also he could quite legitimately drive a vintage lorry (25 years old or over)to a show at a weekend, and this also wouldn't count in his driving hours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you drive a non tacho fitted vehicle as part of your job in the same week as a vehicle fitting with one you come under the tacho regs for that whole week.

 

Also there has been a case that where a driver uses a private car to drive to meet a vehicle to take over duty which is away from its normal base, then it has to count as duty time and be recorded.You are correct that commuting to work does not count unless as above.

 

My point was, that a poster said”

 

I would think that if the time restraints were so tight that speeding was involved or regulated breaks could not be taken, then the employer would have given him a vehicle without a taco."

 

Meaning as part of work so my post is 100% correct.You are mixing driving hours with duty hours.

 

Also if the person driving a show truck at the weekend gets paid to do this then it forms part of his working week and must be recorded.

If my comments have been helpful please click my scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cal,

 

The time driving in a car to take over a truck would count as duty time (in tachograph terms, as "other work") - in my opinion, driving a transit van for work one day would also count as "other work" rather than as "driving" - simply because the vehicle is out of scope (as far as the new tachograph regulations are concerned).

 

Isn't it the fortnight that matters, not the week?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Advisee,

 

If you drive an out of scope vehicle in the same week as an in scope vehicle then you must follow UK Domestic driving rules while driving the out of scope vehicle.

 

(A driver must not drive for more than 10 hours in a day. The daily driving limit applies to time spent at the wheel, actually driving. Off-road driving for the purpose of agriculture, quarrying, forestry, building work or civil engineering counts as duty rather than driving time. Daily duty limit a driver must not be on duty for more than 11 hours on any working day. A driver is exempt from the daily duty limit on any working day when he does not drive. A driver who does not drive for more than 4 hours on each day of the week is exempt from the daily duty limit. )

 

This is where the law gets complex, if you drive an out of scope vehicle in the same week as an in scope vehicle then under EC driving rules,you must record the work ( driving and other work), staying within the EC regs. So which laws do you follow? Who knows really but the intelligence officer at VOSA I spoke too advised to record all work and keep within both UK domestic and EC hours to be sure.

 

Its very complex and many drivers and employers have come foul of the law but basically, if you get paid for it then record it. There are a few exceptions i.e.: retained firemen, TA soldiers etc but people involved in these will be well aware of their exceptions.

 

This site gives some advice FTA - Information on Key Issues - Member Briefing Notes Digital tachographs and GB domestic hours' rules guide

 

This one too Page 3 rules

 

And this one DVTA Compliance: FAQs: Tachographs

 

It’s all a minefield and the Haulage industry is the most heavily regulated industry in the UK. I have been involved in the industry since before I could walk, my father owned before his death a company running 71 tractor units and 140 trailers my brother still runs it today. Although I made a career change 5 years ago I’m still very much involved with the family business and in fact own 49 % of it :)

 

Over the years I have seen the rules change over and over again and in fact one traffic area might interpret a law differently than another traffic area ( i won`t even go into other EC states ).

 

We are not really dealing with the courts (or they are not what worries us) but dealing with the traffic commissioners, these can end your business at a click of their fingers.

 

Just to make a point, you can only be fined for speeding if caught by a policeman or a camera yes? well 6 months back the family business was before the traffic commissioners because tacho records of 5 drivers showed that they regularly speeded when leaving the operating centre doing 56 MPH ( there are no motorways within 20 miles ), the traffic commissioners put a temporary licence restriction on us, reducing our licence by 10 trucks for one month.

 

The drivers had their HGV ( or LGV if you’re a young one) suspended for one month. All this without a single court case.

 

You see even if a driver was banned by court say for drink driving and after 12 months gets it back, they still have to go before the traffic commissioners and they might not give back the HGV licence at all effectively ending his/hers career.

 

Let’s not even get onto the working time directive, they can conflict and ever counteract each other.:confused:

If my comments have been helpful please click my scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

The drivers had their HGV ( or LGV if you’re a young one) suspended for one month. All this without a single court case.

That was a fascinating post. Your paragraph above concerns me, however.

 

Presumably it was just the HGV part of these peoples' licences that was suspended? How did they know which peoples' licence to suspend? What about people who were casual with you and had a main job elsewhere?

 

What if anyone had both bus and truck entitlement - would they have their whole licence suspended?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it was just the HGV or more correctly their vocational licence that was suspended. The traffic commissioners have the power to suspend / revoke or even refuse an application for a provisional vocational licence.

 

If they had both Truck and Bus the both would be suspended, when a person gets banned for drink driving say, then their drivers licence is suspended To hold a HGV or PSV licence you must hold a full car licence too. The HGV part is not suspended in that case but they can not drive a truck because their full car licence has been suspended by the ban.

 

When a traffic commissioner suspends a HGV licence he does not suspend (nor has the power too) a car licence, so you can still drive a car.

 

They suspended the 5 drivers who’s tacho`s had shown them speeding. Personally we do not employ casual drivers but even if we did, we would have to provide the tachos for the trucks they drove.

If my comments have been helpful please click my scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, so it was just the errant drivers, rather than all your drivers? I misread your previous post.

 

 

Yes thats corect, sorry if the post was not clear.

If my comments have been helpful please click my scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...