Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • 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

Motorway temp speed limit - unclear photgraphs


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2252 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 received an NIP for "speeding" on the motorway in a speed restricted area.

The signage was very unclear and when I sped up it was because I thought the speed restricted zone had ended as there was no signage to suggest otherwise and other motorists sped up too making it unsafe for me to continue at the restricted speed.

I was recorded as going 9 miles over the speed limit

 

when I called to ask about this they told me that it was an average taken from when I entered the zone and when I left.

Does anybody know anything about how they work this out?

And how I could challenge this?

 

The Police have sent me photographic evidence of my car but the photos do not show the context and thus you can't see that there were no signs around telling drivers to maintain the restricted speed.

 

Is there a requirement to provide photographic evidence of the context?

Can I do a freedom of information request?

 

Many thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

How was the signage unclear?

You were in a temp speed limit,

Now ill take this as a maintenance zone or a temp restriction from overhead signage displaying 50mph.

So at what point did you pass a national speed limit sign ?

You sped up because cars around you did and it was unsafe???

Poppycock.

 

Wagons are restricted to 56, some even 52 mph

 

Your looking for an excuse to get off a speeding ticket when you've made a large error in judgment.

Not obeying speed limit signs.

 

Edit

There are huge signs before an average zone saying just that.

 

AVERAGE SPEED CHECK

And they have repeater signs of the actual limit

 

Average speed limit zones are the average speed between two or more points. They know the time it takes between the points at the speed limit so anything faster means your speeding.

 

So if at 50mph speed limit it takes 2 mins to get from check point A to check point B and you do it in 1min 30, your speeding.

Time over distance equals speed I think it is.

 

If you feel you can challenge the laws of physics then appeal and take it to court.

If not id hope for a speed awareness course at best, 3 points and £100 quid lighter at worst

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply sgtbush.

 

Could you clarify for me that the law is that you must travel at the temporary restricted speed (in this case 50mph) until you see a sign with the national speed limit of 70 mph?

 

In this case the speed restriction took place within 6.2 miles,

there was no signage upon the exit to say that the temporary speed limit was lifted.

I travel along this particular route fairly often and was able to check the next time I drove along this stretch of motorway.

 

I mentioned going at the speed of the other drivers only because I was once pulled over for driving too slowly and the PC told me that I should maintain the speed of the other drivers in order to be safe.

I have used this as a rule of thumb ever since, but I take your point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was recorded as going 9 miles over the speed limit and when I called to ask about this they told me that it was an average taken from when I entered the zone and when I left. Does anybody know anything about how they work this out? And how I could challenge this?

 

An average speed is calculated between 2 known fixed points. Speed = time over distance.

 

SPECS (average speed) cameras are placed a known (measured) distance apart and have a fixed focal point, so that it is known (within a few cm) where on the road surface the camera is 'reading' a vehicle number plate. At the point of the 'read' a clock is started.

When a camera further along the road, again focused on a known fixed point 'reads' the number plate, the clock is stopped.

 

As an example, If the camera focal points are 500M apart and the speed limit is 50mph, it must take 22.36 seconds to travel from point 1 to point 2. If it takes longer than that, the vehicle was travelling below the speed limit, it it takes less time than that, the vehicle was travelling above the speed limit.

 

Now, bearing in mind the guidance as regards speeding, in a 50mph area you'd (probably) get away with 55mph, so the time is reduced to 20.33 seconds. Do it in 20.32 seconds or less and you're going to be getting a ticket.

 

As for how you can challenge it. That's easy. All you have to do is prove that physics is wrong! Good luck :thumb:

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Average speed check zones are common place.

You dont have to travel at the restricted speed as you state. You can go slower.

Its a limit not a target.

If the limit on the road is 50, you do a maximum of 50.

If you pass a sign saying 30, you do up to 30. Likewise if your in a 50 and you pass a national speed limit sign you can do up to 70 on a duel carriage way or 60 normal road. (asuming your in a car)

 

There does not have to be a sign saying end of average speed check area. You shouldn't be doing over Te posted limit anyways.

 

The constable is wrong.

The only time you can be done for going too slowly is on a motorway.

I believe you must do at least 40mph if memory serves.

Unless your escorted by a separate vehicle with the relevant warning signs and flashing lights.

 

Remember speed limits are just that. A limit, not a target

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The constable is wrong.

The only time you can be done for going too slowly is on a motorway.

I believe you must do at least 40mph if memory serves.

Unless your escorted by a separate vehicle with the relevant warning signs and flashing lights.

 

There are no minimum speed "limits" on the UK road network save in a few places. The Dartford tunnel is one which has a minimum speed of 30mph IIRC. Minimum speed areas are signposted with a blue sign showing the speed limit, and the end of the zones with a blue sign showing the speed limit with a red diagonal line through it.

 

Driving too slowly on any road is likely to get you stopped and asked why, and may see you charged with driving without due care, but for 99% of roads there is no actual minimum speed.

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

arguing you didnt see the signs may well get you clobbered for driving without due care and attention or careless driving.

 

as an aside, you can be done fro driving too slowly, again it is careless driving so doing 30mph on a motorway in normal driving conditions may well get you 3 points. The threshold for careless driving was changed about 3 years ago partly to deal with old people driving within the speed limits but very badly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An Average Speed Check is just that, you must maintain an average speed not above the posted limit until you are told otherwise, i.e: by a NSL sign or other speed limit sign.

 

You are within your rights to travel at upto 70mph, not withstanding other speed limits or cameras in force, but you must ensure your average over the measured distance is not above the posted average limit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...