Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I hope Lord Frost is OK. Islamists and the woke Left are uniting to topple the West ARCHIVE.PH archived 18 Apr 2024 19:12:37 UTC  
    • Ok you are in the clear. The PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 for two reasons. The first is that in Section 9 [2][e]  says the PCN must "state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper— (i)to pay the unpaid parking charges ". It does not say that even though it continues correctly with blurb about the driver. The other fault is that there is no parking period mentioned. Their ANPR cameras do show your arrival and departure times but as that at the very least includes driving from the entrance to the parking space then later leaving the parking space and driving to the exit. It also doesn't allow for finding a parking spot: manoeuvering into it avoiding parking on the lines: possibly having to stop to allow pedestrians/other cars to pass in front of you; returning the trolley after finishing shopping; loading children disabled people in and out of the car, etc etc.  All of that could easily add five, ten or even 15 minutes to your time which the ANPR cameras cannot take into account. So even if it was only two hours free time you could  still have been within the  time since there is a MINIMUM of 15 minutes Grace period when you leave the car park. However as they cannot even manage to get their PCN to comply with the Act you as keeper cannot be pursued. Only the driver is now liable and they do not know who was driving as you have not appealed and perhaps unwittingly given away who was driving. So you do not owe them a penny. No need to appeal. Let them waste their money pursuing you . 
    • If Labour are elected I hope they go after everyone who made huge amounts of money out of this, by loading the company with debt. The sad thing is that some pension schemes, including the universities one, USS, will lose money along with customers.
    • What's the reason for not wanting a smart meter? Personally I'm saving a pile on a tariff only available with one. Today electricity is 17.17p/kWh. If the meter is truly past its certification date the supplier is obliged to replace it. If you refuse to allow this then eventually they'll get warrant and do so by force. Certified life varies between models and generations, some only 10 or 15 years, some older types as long as 40 years or maybe even more. Your meter should have its certified start date marked somewhere so if you doubt the supplier you can look up the certified life and cross check.
    • No I'm not. Even if I was then comments on this forum wouldn't constitute legal advice in the formal sense. Now you've engaged a lawyer directly can I just make couple of final suggestions? Firstly make sure he is fully aware of the facts. And don't mix and match by taking his advice on one aspect while ploughing your own furrow on others.  Let us know how you get on now you have a solicitor acting for you.
  • 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

Peacock Insurance Services


rijohughes
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2190 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

I took a motor trades policy with Peacock insurance in December 2012,

I paid the deposit and the first months payment was paid,

I was asked to send paperwork in and the insurance was done,

I did this and happily drove round.

 

I then received a letter from the underwriters stating the policy had been cancelled.

 

I phoned my brokers who told me it was cancelled as I had not returned the paperwork,

I argued that I had and the lady "found" it, she could not explain why it had been cancelled but told me someone would get back to me,

 

I spent the day phoning and phoning until at 5 pm

I got through to someone who had been told to "sort it".

 

He set up a new policy and after asking for MORE money which I explained there would be no more money as this was not my fault, he eventually finalised the policy.

Then when the paperwork arrived they "asked" for a full payment which was more than I had agreed, and the paperwork was in the wrong name.

 

Since then I have written to Rachel Gow the director of the company and after a lot of twoing and froing

I have received an "offer" of £50, together with an apology for the companies error in not forwarding the paperwork correctly,

 

I have told her I am not accepting this as the FSA have stated a compensation of £750 minimum is due when a case of maladminstration is found.

 

I have written and asked for £524 as this is the total amount due with letters time wasted etc is taken into account.

to date I have not received a reply and have waited four weeks.

 

I am wanting to know if I should bother with the FSA as was or should I take Rachel Gow to court? as I need this matter sorting quickly.

Any help is much appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the FSA website, I know they have changed that's why I am asking whether to go straight to court, don't know what the ombudsman would say. Rachel has written 3 letters apologising at the companies error but have had no reply to the last letter I sent four weeks ago.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not asking for distress, inconvenience etc, I have asked for the £40 per letter (stated in the paperwork I received as a charge if they had to write to me),

 

I have had to write to the company (6 in total), telephone calls, time away from running my business to sort out problems

that would not have arisen if they had done their job in the first place,

 

I would have thought that as they have agreed £50 to "shut me up and make me go away"

also the apology letters for their mistakes was justification to take the matter further.

 

I will find the compensation amount I have read and will try to put a link on here.

 

Thanks for taking an interest

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
  • 1 year later...

Hi

I have been with Peacock Insurance for over 7 years ( public liability Insurance ), never had a problem.

 

My accountant has set up a new limited company for me as i will be changing jobs within a year as manual working I cannot do anymore, every word i said to the guy at peacocks I was told to stay on the line, I will be back, I was treated like a common thief.

 

I explained to the guy at peacocks I can have 500 limited companies Its not against the law, I just want insurance! I WOULD NEVER TOUCH THIS COMPANY AGAIN.

Anyone can close down a limited company and set up a new one, I pay heavy taxes and my accounts are up to date.

 

Kind Regards

Neil Allen

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...