Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Please post up their letter so we understand what they've asked. You need to cover up your name and address and their reference number. HB
    • Hello,  I received the standard letter.  I don't understand No. 3: If this is in relation to a ticket irregularity, then if you were unable to produce a pass because you did not have it with you or if your pass was withdrawn because you were unable to produce a valid photocard to accompany it, please enclose a photocopy of the pass/photocard with your reply. Question: do i enclose my photocard? my partner's freedom pass was confiscated.
    • LFI is spot on. In fact you could sue UKPC for breach of GDPR, as UKPC knew full well right from the start that their case was hopeless.  They should never have asked for your details from the DVLA. Take some time to think if that is a road you want to go down.  
  • 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

Rail prosecution letter - advice please


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4945 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

On 27th August, my son aged 17 and some friends travelled to Brighton for a concert gig. They got on at Upminster and he paid on his Oyster to London Bridge and then a seperate ticket to Brighton. The concert over ran and they missed the last train home that night. Not wanting to be stuck in Brighton for nearly 6 hours with no where to stay, they were told by the bus driver that they could get a bus to one of the London airports then wait for the next train to run and go back on several trains. This meant he had to buy a bus fare back to London (which took all his money) and then use what he had left on his Oyster to get home. The trouble is he had to get to Laindon which is out of the Zones and his Oyster had covered him to West Ham. Eventually at abour 6:45 the next day he called me to pick him up after travelling nearly 6 hours to get home.

 

An inspector stopped and asked for his ticket for which he explained what had happened and that he had paid all the way to West Ham but ran out of money to get the last leg of the journey as he had to pay for the bus. My son showed him the ticket for the previous part of the journey to prove his story. He took his details and statement.

 

Today 8th October, I get a letter saying that" he was travelling between the two stations without paying the correct fare. That Non payment ofrail fares is an ofence which may be prosecuted in a Youh Court. In order that I may close the report from our inspector, I request that the fare of £6.40 and an administrative fee should now be paid.

 

Payment should be for £51.40 which represents a £45.00 administration fee and £6.40 for the outstandign fare".

 

I acknowledge that this statement is correct in that he did not have a fare for the last part of the journey. Could someone please advise me if they are obliged to supply a copy of their report? This seems excessive considering the fare. Do I have any rights to challenge this?

 

Any help please much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If he was summonsed to court you/he would have seen a copy of the statement I believe, as this is staying out of court, I don't believe the Train Operating Company has to provide a copy of the statement. This is the best and most cost effective way to settle the matter unfortunately. Going to a youth court is a rarity for any train company, so these might be scare tactics. In my experience the only time a TOC goes to a youth court is if the offender is persistant. If your son is nearer 18 than 17 then I believe it's acceptable to go to a Magistrate's Court so long as he is 18 when the appearance is held.

 

Although it may seem harsh to you, your son didn't have a valid ticket for his journey, and had no money to pay for one. At best he's got some mitigating circumstances I'd imagine, should the matter end up in court. If he was 18-years of age he could have been charged with 5.3(a) Regulation of Railways Act, which is a Recordable offence. I'm sure you appreciate that RPI's hear alot of different stories as to how people have become stranded etc, but the fact remains that the ticket your son had was valid on the day of purchase only I'm afraid.

 

I recomend calling the TOC, probably Southern, unless your son was caught further up the line!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. Thanks for your reply, You say it is not going to court but as mentioned above, their letter suggests it may.

 

Whilst I agree completely with what you say about him not having a ticket for that part of the journey, I am confused as there is no mention of a penalty in the letter. So whilst the fare mentioned is fair enough, how can they charge this for an administration fee?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The admin costs will be broken down into things such as the Inspectors time on the day and time to write report etc,

the prosecutors time etc etc

Views expressed in this forum by me are my own personal opinion and you take it on face value! I make any comments to the best of my knowledge but you take my advice at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I have read this right, the part of the journey in dispute is from London to Laindon, which is on the c2c route.

 

It seems true that prosecution in Youth Courts for this type of offence is 'rare', but not unknown. Railways are not obliged to get 'stranded' people home, and there are arrangements through which they could, and should, have got a ticket before boarding the train.

 

The cheapest way to make this matter 'go away' is for him/you to pay the admin fee & fare.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. Thanks for your reply, You say it is not going to court but as mentioned above, their letter suggests it may.

 

Whilst I agree completely with what you say about him not having a ticket for that part of the journey, I am confused as there is no mention of a penalty in the letter. So whilst the fare mentioned is fair enough, how can they charge this for an administration fee?

There was a reletive threat about court, not a letter staing their intention to prosecute your son, therefore, at this stage there's no need to see the statement. Hope that makes sense! Who mentioned a penalty?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...