Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeah, sorry, that's what I meant .... I said DCBL because I was reading a few threads about them discontinuing claims and getting spanked in court! Meant  YOU  Highview !!!  🖕
    • Though it would be Highview you would  pursue. DCBL are nonentities-on their best day,
    • Yep, I read that and thought about trying to find out what the consideration and grace period is at Riverside but not sure I can. I know they say "You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is"  but I doubt they would disclose it to the public, maybe I should have asked in my CPR 31.14 letter? Yes, I think I can get rid of 5 minutes. I am also going to include a point about BPA CoP: 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place. I think that is Deception .... They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other! One other point to note, the more I read, the more I study, the more proficient I feel I am becoming in this area. Make no mistake DBCL if you are reading this, when I win in court, if I have the grounds to make any claims against you, such as breach of GDPR, I shall be doing so.
    • Six months of conflict have also taken a heavy economic toll.View the full article
    • the Town and Country [advertisments ] Regulations 2007 are not easy to understand. Most Council planing officials don't so it's good that you found one who knows. Although he may not have been right if the rogues have not been "controlling" in the car park for that long. The time only starts when the ANPR signs go up, not how long the area has been used as a car park.   Sadly I have checked Highview out and they have been there since at least 2014 . I have looked at the BPA Code of Practice version 8 which covers 2023 and that states Re Consideration and Grace Periods 13.3 Where a parking location is one where a limited period of parking is permitted, or where drivers contract to park for a defined period and pay for that service in advance (Pay & Display), this would be considered as a parking event and a Grace Period of at least 10 minutes must be added to the end of a parking event before you issue a PCN. It then goes on to explain a bit more further down 13.5 You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is. 13.6 Neither a consideration period or a grace period are periods of free parking and there is no requirement for you to offer an additional allowance on top of a consideration or grace period. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________So you have  now only overstayed 5 minutes maximum since BPA quote a minimum of 10 minutes. And it may be that the Riverside does have a longer period perhaps because of the size of the car park? So it becomes even more incumbent on you to remember where the extra 5 minutes could be.  Were you travelling as a family with children or a disabled person where getting them in and out of the car would take longer. Was there difficulty finding a space, or having to queue to get out of the car park . Or anything else that could account for another 5 minutes  without having to claim the difference between the ANPR times and the actual times.
  • 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

JP Morgan/Rooftop Arrears fees- The saga continues.


jotty
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1551 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

yes court its detailed earlier here by BF I think

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes DX thanks, I have read many of the threads on this but can’t find any that reach an actual conclusion good or bad so am a little concerned I may be taking on something that I am not going to win or that may end up with a big costs bill if it goes wrong. Court itself isn’t an issue for me having been through the original bank charges successes but this seems to be something not many have succeeded with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Sent a SAR to Rooftop mortgages before Christmas but was returned saying they wanted a fee of £2.20, so sent a 2nd request and th fee last week but they have refused again citing that “they are unable to verify identity”.

 

we have lived at the same address for 20yrs, they send me a lovely veiled threat letter every month about my account as well as statements and even sent round one of those “debt counsellor” types whilst we were on holiday last October so I fail to see how they can’t verify who we are from the signed SAR.

 

Thoroughly fed up and hacked off with this bunch of crooks now so can some kind person please advise what to do next?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please will you post up a copy of your SAR request in PDF format and also a copy of their response in PDF format.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thoroughly fed up and hacked off with this bunch of crooks now so can some kind person please advise what to do next?

 

Obviously not fed up or hacked off enough or else you would engage with this thread and respond to the questions which have been asked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously not fed up or hacked off enough or else you would engage with this thread and respond to the questions which have been asked.

Whilst I will of course value and appreciate your advice, I feel this kind of comment from such a prominent member of the forum is beneath you. I am not ignoring the comments but sadly don’t have the letter to hand at this moment, but will scan them up as soon as I get back home.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they wont send the sar despite knowing who you are etc, file a court claim to force them to send it.

 

And why did they want that 2.20?

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst I will of course value and appreciate your advice, I feel this kind of comment from such a prominent member of the forum is beneath you. I am not ignoring the comments but sadly don’t have the letter to hand at this moment, but will scan them up as soon as I get back home.

 

Then you only had to tell us.

 

Please scan the letters up in PDF format as soon as you can because it will influence the advice that we will give you.

 

You might also like to give some response or acknowledgement to the question which was asked by the other site team member.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit of a long story and connected to another thread on here where I took a complaint to the Ombudsman re charges that is still in limbo pending advice re court for charges, however the SAR this time was to see what had been done without account over the last few years to assist in a potential mis-selling claim. We did ask one of those claim companies to act (because I didn’t have the will for another round of letters etc) but have heard little and they would have submitted a SAR early last year but we have never had a copy of this.

This time they wanted £2.20 to cover costs of preparing the info as they stated one had been requested last year by the claim company and the charge was to cover exrtra work, I submitted the one from this great site, edited of course, but they have refused to supply.

When you say court, what would that involve and what are the grounds for a claim please, and I am in the process of scanning up their brief reply received today.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

 

when we see the sar that you send them then we can understand more fully exactly what they have responded to.

 

I'm not too sure how a claims management company could submit an sar on your behalf. Have you got a copy of the request that was submitted by the claims management company?

 

I think it may be useful to get a full bullet pointed chronology from you on this.

 

I certainly do think that if you have submitted a valid sar and they haven't responded then you should move very quickly to a claim for breach of statutory duty and we will be happy to help you with this. However we need to be sure of our ground and make sure that all our ducks are in a row first of all

 

if you don't have copies of the correspondence sent by the claims management company then you should also send an sar to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has this problem been resolved to tour? Or is there any movement on it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is dated 4th of January so they are still within the 30-day deadline. what date was the previous sar when they said that they wanted the money

Link to post
Share on other sites

well let's see the other letter anyway and monitor this thread for a fuller reply tomorrow.

 

We will have to do a response to the letter which you have posted above

Link to post
Share on other sites

If we can go through this and check the statutory request which you have made and decide that they do in fact comply with the statute, then if the requests had been breached then I would suggest that you bring a claim for breach of statutory duty under the DPA. In order to do this you would claim for a very modest amount – say £50 – with the intention not of accepting any settlement but of proceeding to judgement.

 

You can get an idea from this post here https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?492106-Npower-2-year-nightmare-Please-help&p=5170199&viewfull=1#post5170199

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to start having a look at this problem but this thread has started to become a little bit strung out.

 

Would you mind starting a new thread and laying out a chronology of events in bullet pointed fashion in an attempt to pull together what you have discovered so far in one easily digestible chunk. Then we can have a look at the possibilities.

 

I'm going to close this thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

So this is the brief timeline,

 

12th December we sent the SAR using the template from the site.

19th December we received a response letter from Rooftop which said they could not supply details because :-

 

1- In October they had sent a similar response to a company called Mortgage Claims, this was the ambulance chasers we had asked back in July to look into possible mis-selling and was only done out of frustration and not having time to go through everything myself. I have heard nothing from them since and have requested a response.

2- Because the SAR had been requested in October, Rooftop said that to do another would incur a charge of £2.20.

3- They had been unable to verify my authority for the one requested on the 12th.

 

As it was Christmas I put this to one side and didn't respond, I am trying to find the letter but the content was as above and very brief.

 

On the 4th January I sent off a second request, this time enclosing the fee and making sure both me and my wife signed it to prevent any other spurious delays.

 

The letter in the above post was received yesterday again saying that they could not supply the info because they where "Unable to Verify Authority" but nothing else to explain why.

 

In the meantime as mentioned on another thread, they continue to send me statements, and threatening letters about the apparent arrears so must be satisfied I live at the same address as on the SAR.

 

The main reason for the request is that I have a complaint with the FOS, which is coming to a conclusion and need information only a SAR can provide before I seek to take the issue further.

 

So do we send another request or wait till the 40 days is up and then take further action. ?

rtopsar040119a.doc

rtopsar1212o18.doc

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see the letter from the claims company to see if it was a valid sar.

 

Also, where are their responses? Can you post up in pdf format please

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was the response to the 2nd request, still struggling to find the first one but it said exactly the same apart from, as explained, saying that there had been a request for info in October from Mortgage Claims which thinking about it wasn't most likely a SAR but just request based on my signing an authority for them to request info. The first letter also asked for a fee of £2.20 to cover their costs.

rtres.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

They still cant charge anything. A SAR is free no matter if you request it a dozen times. And what costs? If they complied with the other SAR, as they said they had, theyd have all info on hand. So should just copy it.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was the response to the 2nd request, still struggling to find the first one but it said exactly the same apart from, as explained, saying that there had been a request for info in October from Mortgage Claims which thinking about it wasn't most likely a SAR but just request based on my signing an authority for them to request info. The first letter also asked for a fee of £2.20 to cover their costs.

 

I expect that you are correct that it wasn't a true SAR – but I would prefer to be certain about it before using it as a basis for litigation. I think it would be a very good idea to send an SAR to your claims management company and see if you can get a copy from them of what they sent.

 

I think that it is worth taking time to stack up the evidence and load the dice against them if at all possible. I don't see that there is a huge rush on this at the moment. Send the SAR to the claims company immediately. You have about 14 days to wait for the expiry of your SAR of the fourth January so there will only be about another 14 days after that for the CMC to produce their disclosure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...