Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Should this to be take into court with him or should he send something in earlier?
    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
  • 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

SWT-caught using husband season ticket


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2280 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 wont list all the details but i used my husband season ticket today and got caught.

 

I stated he was aware of me having his ticket but i only told him this as i was on the train in the morning and got caught on the return journey home.

 

Wish i was not so honest telling the truth but there i am, i shoulg have never took his ticket.

 

I dont think it would look good having made a false journey once already

plus it is a season ticket,

plus the owner was aware of this.

 

As you advised,

i will await for the letter from swt but sigh,,

, dont really wanting to end a year in this way

but read all the posts related to fare persecutions on this site which help..

.just waiting for the letter

Link to post
Share on other sites

well we've seen repeated use result in an out of court settlement.

 

so don't give up hope.

 

dx

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

Thank you dx.

 

Try not to think too much but as you can see, i am widely awake 4am in the morning!

 

I hope they would take a consideration that i was a season ticket holder up until the end of august.

 

I decided not to renew but managed to work from home twice a week.

 

Trains in august were just awful and now i got caught for using it as i rushed to get the morning train.

 

Never mind

Link to post
Share on other sites

as i was on the train in the morning and got caught on the return journey home.

..........

I dont think it would look good having made a false journey once already

plus it is a season ticket,

plus the owner was aware of this.

........

but read all the posts related to fare persecutions on this site which help..

 

 

Thank you dx. Try not to think too much but as you can see, i am widely awake 4am in the morning!

I hope they would take a consideration that i was a season ticket holder up until the end of august. I decided not to renew but managed to work from home twice a week. Trains in august were just awful and now i got caught for using it as i rushed to get the morning train. Never mind

 

Being a previous season ticket holder is irrelevant.

If anything it highlights that you knew you needed a ticket / to have paid your fare.

 

Working from home some of the time? Trains “awful” in August?

Again, they’ll just see these as looking for excuses.

 

“Rushing to get the train”: sounds like a perfect explanation. Yet, how come you had their season ticket: so, it still looks premeditated.

 

But: you need to get your story straight:

“ was on the train in the morning and got caught on the return journey home” doesn’t fit well with “ got caught for using it as i rushed to get the morning train“

Was this a night shift, and your return was in the morning?

 

Meanwhile, I know it is only a typo, but it is one a spell checker won’t pick up. I wouldn’t call them the” fare persecutions” team.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for putting me straight.

 

It was my normal day commute to london dashing to kids club and run to the station.

 

I knew i was going to miss 8:12 train if i buy tickets,

i just opened up my husband wallet and got on 8:12 train.

 

And then in the evening,

i was intending to use his ticket again to go home to be honest.

It worked in the morning.

Wish i just missed the train and got tickets.

 

No words can describe how i feel especially as a mum raising a 4year old trying to teach her what’s good and bad behaviour.

I dont deserve tell her to be a good girl for santa.

Edited by Apark
Link to post
Share on other sites

What’s done is done. You just have to deal with the aftermath now.

 

I’m all for honesty, but:

 

a) you don’t have to tell them about you using the season ticket in the morning unless they specifically ask

(as you don’t want to “get caught in a lie” if they did ask, but it isn’t likely they will ask unless they know you’ve used it a lot more repeatedly....)

 

b) the morning use isn’t relevant to your afternoon use :

I wouldn’t go down the

“I got away with it in the morning, so I thought I’d use it in the afternoon” route :

 

either way it looks pre-meditated (for the afternoon use),

so I wouldn’t try and make excuses

(they’ll have heard most of them before, anyhow!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know what, i was not on the train in the evening.

 

I went through and wanted to come out :

no idea why and the gate didnt open and i asked the gate keeper to let me out.

 

Technically i didnt use the ticket to get on the train.

 

Should I mention this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

so how did you get home?

 

and where did the ticket inspector think you'd come from?

 

if you didn't use it to board a train

you did nothing wrong other than have your OH's card on you and coughing to using it in the morning?

 

am I getting confused here??

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

If they didn’t board a train then they can’t have breached byelaw 18(1).

 

So, then : were they in a compulsory ticket area?

 

If not,

then have they breached 18(2)? (Since they handed over someone else’s ticket, not “their” ticket!).

 

Or S5(3)a of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 .....

by going through the barriers on to the platform are they “attempting to travel” (even if they then change their mind!).

 

The S5(3)a requires “intent to avoid their fare”, but using their spouse’s season ticket would suffice to show this.

 

So, the OP changed their mind, but a prosecutor could ask “what was the intent for going through the barriers, up until the point they changed their mind”.

Link to post
Share on other sites

from OP's statement

I stated he was aware of me having his ticket
could byelaw 21(2) also be applicable re receiving and intent?

on what are they being 'prosecuted' (threatened with)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

When i arrived waterloo,

i was planning to take 5;45 train then there’s a train home leaving in one minute.

I just dashed to the platform but missed the train.

 

Then I decided to leave the platform to see where the next train is and got stuck at the gate.

Walked up the inspector and asked them to open the gate.

 

My husband couldn’t believe how stupid i was and ended up telling them what happened all.

But I cannot lie or you can put it i am stupid.

 

I honestly didn’t think I would end up putting myself in this mess for being brutally honest.

The inspector took all the details down and showed me the way out.

There’s I bought my ticket home

 

I said to the inspector my husband was aware of me having his ticket but i took his ticket without his consent.

Only told him once i was on the train.

 

It was my work Christmas party but I didn’t feel well ended up leaving work early.

Wish i just went to the party but i have a nora virus now... arghhh

Edited by Apark
Link to post
Share on other sites

ok,

i was just wondering on what they are going on, given the posts and you saying that you actually told them you took your halfs ticket (with knowledge) and had used it earlier (intent?).

what have they said you are actually being pursued on, ie on what grounds?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I told him my husband knew i have his ticket but didn’t mean he gave it to me.

I have a text to prove if they are interested..

 

.i am not a native English speaker so I interpreted his question was asking me if he knew if i have his ticket and the answer was yes.

 

He didn’t ask me many questions and didn’t give me any chance to say anything either

Link to post
Share on other sites

on what grounds/reason did they formally say that they are/will be pursuing you on.

or is it just still in the air at the moment, awaiting something formal to happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He said it is not his job telling me what will happen...but gave me a card with his id with revenue protection written on it.

He took all my details and took my husband season ticket.

It has only one week left but he is wondering if he can renew...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think id be awaiting their letter IF one comes they have 6mts.

 

he can renew at any time.

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

The case in this thread has clear parallels with the Appeal Court case of Arthur Browning (1946). Convicted of attempting to avoid payment of his fare by using his spouse's season ticket contrary to Section 5(3)(a) of The Regulation of Railways Act [1889].

 

Appealed, and appeal rejected.

 

The Appeal Court decided that whilst the rail company may not have lost any money, the traveller had not paid THEIR fare

Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you.

As much as i hope for the best, I would not be surprised to see a correspondent from swt summons me to the court. I know what i did was wrong. Just wait and ser what they say. Will keep you posted

Link to post
Share on other sites

no you always get a tell us your side of the story letter first.

 

dx

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

no you always get a tell us your side of the story letter first.

 

dx

 

Yes, dx100uk is right, the first thing you will get normally is a 'verification letter'.

 

If an offence is evidenced they can move straight to Summons, but it is never really in anyone's interest to do so.

 

You'll get a letter seeking your version of events and although this is serious, it is not completely beyond the realms of possibility that you may be able to avoid a Court appearance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will they compare the note from the inspector with my story?

I didn’t tell him anything but only facts, ie it is my husband ticket and i used it in the morning and intended to use in the evening by entering the platform using the ticket. I knew i did wrong and didn’t see the point of telling him excuses. I didn’t see what the inspector wrote

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm i wish i read it but just wanted to leave the area asap.

An excuse but i have had a nora virus and just wanted to get home asap. I wont state this in the letter. Just hope the inspector only wrote down facts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just hope the inspector only wrote down facts.

 

What do you expect them to write down?. Of course they write down the facts. If it goes to court and it can be shown they have written down falsehoods, it would look very bad for them.

Facts could include "the passenger stated to me that "blah, blah", or "When questioned if they intended to travel without having paid their fare, the passenger replied "'blah, blah'".

 

If those are truthful statements, they are facts .............

 

Will they compare the note from the inspector with my story?

I didn’t tell him anything but only facts, ie it is my husband ticket and i used it in the morning and intended to use in the evening by entering the platform using the ticket. I knew i did wrong and didn’t see the point of telling him excuses. I didn’t see what the inspector wrote

 

Well, if you only told the inspector the truth, and only tell the truth in your "story", you won't have to worry when they compare them, as there won't be contradictions. There may be more detail in your written reply, but it still won't contradict, if both times you stick / stuck to the facts ......

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...