Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx for your feedback. That is the reason I posted my opinion, because I am trying to learn more and this is one of the ways to learn, by posting my opinions and if I am incorrect then being advised of the reasons I am incorrect. I am not sure if you have educated me on the points in my post that would be incorrect. However, you are correct on one point, I shall refrain from posting on any other thread other than my own going forward and if you think my post here is unhelpful, misleading or in any other way inappropriate, then please do feel obliged to delete it but educate me on the reason why. To help my learning process, it would be helpful to know what I got wrong other than it goes against established advice considering the outcome of a recent court case on this topic that seemed to suggest it was dismissed due to an appeal not being made at the first stage. Thank-you.   EDIT:  Just to be clear, I am not intending to go against established advice by suggesting that appeals should ALWAYS be made, just my thoughts on the particular case of paying for parking and entering an incorrect VRN. Should this ever happen to me, I will make an appeal at the first stage to avoid any problems that may occur at a later stage. Although, any individual in a similar position should decide for themselves what they think is an appropriate course of action. Also, I continue to be grateful for any advice you give on my own particular case.  
    • you can have your humble opinion.... You are very new to all this private parking speculative invoice game you have very quickly taken it upon yourself to be all over this forum, now to the extent of moving away from your initial thread with your own issue that you knew little about handling to littering the forum and posting on numerous established and existing threads, where advice has already been given or a conclusion has already resulted, with your theories conclusions and observations which of course are very welcomed. BUT... in some instances, like this one...you dont quite match the advice that the forum and it's members have gathered over a very long consensual period given in a tried and trusted consistent mannered thoughtful approach. one could even call it forum hi-jacking and that is becoming somewhat worrying . dx
    • 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 !!!  🖕 The more I read this forum and the more I engage with it's incredible users, the more I learn and the more my knowledge expands. If my case gets to court, the Judge will dismiss it after I utter my first sentence, and you DCBL and Highview don't even know why .... OMG! .... So excited to get to court!
    • 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.
  • 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 2284 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

There’s nothing to add or hide. Snap silly decision in the morning trying to save 15 mins..i didnt tell him why i took someone else ticket as he didn’t ask me but just said it is his ticket and i used it in the morning and intended to use it again

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, why are you worried about what is in the RPO/RPI’s notes?

 

I should not. But i do think of that moment all the time and wondering why i did it etc. Doesn’t make any difference now anyway

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

 

 

Yes, the inspector's account will be assessed against your account.

 

If as you say you admitted having used your husband's season ticket in the morning and did intend to use it again that evening at the time you were questioned, the allegation and your admission will match, because the notes will reflect both what you did and what you said

 

I suggest this has parallel with the occasion of delivering a verdict at the Appeal Court when Lord Denning once said 'a man will be judged on his words and actions'.

 

The description that you have given suggests sufficient evidence for a prosecutor to consider two charges, both offences contrary to Section 5(3)(a) of the Regulation of Railways Act [1889].

 

Talk of using the National Railway Byelaws in this case is largely irrelevant

 

That said,

 

i) Did travel without having previously paid her fare and did use a season ticket issued for the sole use of another identified person with intent to avoid her fare

ii) Did attempt to travel without having previously paid her fare and did attempt to use a season ticket issued for the sole use of another identified person with intent to avoid her fare

 

In practice, they may decide only to raise one Summons

 

As Ford says, try not to worry at present, wait and see what the letter you receive says and respond truthfully, but when replying, do not expand beyond the facts alleged in that letter

 

These letters can take several weeks to arrive at times as all TOCs prosecutors offices are very busy.

 

For now, enjoy Christmas and try to put this out of mind until you need to respond to correspondence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Hello all,

An update:

i received a letter from south western railway.

They decided that on this occasion to deal with this matrer by reminding you of the following.

It is an offence to board a train without a full and valid ticket appropriate for your journey.

X

 

I am relieved of course!

But they ask the season ticket holder to contact the fraud investigation and duplicate office.

 

My husband actually renew his season ticket as the old one was expired at the end of dec 2017. He just bought a new one rather than renewing the ticket as he didn't want getting a discount; apparently 5% off (£200+) and 10 free travel days would cause an extra issue.

 

Why would they want him to contact him and what shall he say?

 

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

no its not that

it will be about returning his pass

but as its expired

I wouldn't worry about it.

 

glad you got it sorted

well done CAG..

 

a small donation will keep us here.

 

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

oh dear. I was expecting to write a letter admitting my fault.

Should he do the same something like i would keep my ticket probably etc?

no, you don't have to write/do anything now.

as dx, prob nothing for ticket holder to do now.

don't worry.

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...