Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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!
    • 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.
    • Regarding a driver, that HAS paid for parking but input an incorrect Vehicle Registration Number.   This is an easy mistake to make, especially if a driver has access to more than one vehicle. First of all, upon receiving an NTK/PCN it is important to check that the Notice fully complies with PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 before deciding how to respond of course. The general advice is NOT to appeal to the Private Parking Company as, for example, you may identify yourself as driver and in certain circumstances that could harm your defence at a later stage. However, after following a recent thread on this subject, I have come to the conclusion that, in the case of inputting an incorrect Vehicle Registration Number, which is covered by “de minimis” it may actually HARM your defence at a later stage if you have not appealed to the PPC at the first appeal stage and explained that you DID pay for parking and CAN provide proof of parking, it was just that an incorrect VRN was input in error. Now, we all know that the BPA Code of Practice are guidelines from one bunch of charlatans for another bunch of charlatans to follow, but my thoughts are that there could be problems in court if a judge decides that a motorist has not followed these guidelines and has not made an appeal at the first appeal stage, therefore attempting to resolve the situation before it reaches court. From BPA Code of Practice: Section 17:  Keying Errors B) Major Keying Errors Examples of a major keying error could include: • Motorist entered their spouse’s car registration • Motorist entered something completely unrelated to their registration • Motorist made multiple keying errors (beyond one character being entered incorrectly) • Motorist has only entered a small part of their VRM, for example the first three digits In these instances we would expect that such errors are dealt with appropriately at the first appeal stage, especially if it can be proven that the motorist has paid for the parking event or that the motorist attempted to enter their VRM or were a legitimate user of the car park (eg a hospital patient or a patron of a restaurant). It is appreciated that in issuing a PCN in these instances, the operator will have incurred charges including but not limited to the DVLA fee and other processing costs therefore we believe that it is reasonable to seek to recover some of these costs by making a modest charge to the motorist of no more than £20 for a 14-day period from when the keying error was identified before reverting to the charge amount at the point of appeal. Now, we know that the "modest charge" is unenforceable in law, however, it would be up to the individual if they wanted to pay and make the problem go away or in fact if they wanted to contest the issue in court. If the motorist DOES appeal to the PPC explaining the error and the PPC rejects the appeal and the appeal fails, the motorist can use that in his favour at court.   Defence: "I entered the wrong VRN by mistake Judge, I explained this and I also submitted proof of payment for the relevant parking period in my appeal but the PPC wouldn't accept that"   If the motorist DOES NOT appeal to the PPC in the first instance the judge may well use that as a reason to dismiss the case in the claimant's favour because they may decide that they had the opportunity to resolve the matter at a much earlier stage in the proceedings. It is my humble opinion that a motorist, having paid and having proof of payment but entering the wrong VRN, should make an appeal at the first appeal stage in order to prevent problems at a later stage. In this instance, I think there is nothing to be gained by concealing the identity of the driver, especially if at a later stage, perhaps in court, it is said: “I (the driver) entered the wrong VRN.” Whether you agree or not, it is up to the individual to decide …. but worth thinking about. Any feedback, especially if you can prove to the contrary, gratefully received.
    • Women-only co-working spaces are part of the new hybrid working landscape, but they divide opinion.View the full article
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2211 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

This is a long story, so I'll try and cut to the chase.

 

Back in 2013 we moved into a property.

The landlady who we were renting off asked if she could continue to be registered at the address.

She agreed that she would cover all the council tax bills for the property.

 

Two years later we received a letter from the council to "the occupiers" asking us when we moved into the property.

We truthfully told them the date.

Two months later, we received a massive bill from the council for two years worth of council tax, backdated to the date we moved in.

We got in touch with the landlady who admitted she had not paid the council tax.

We were now stuck with a £2300 debt when in fact it wasn't our debt.

 

To add to our problem, the landlady admitted she had been illegally claiming benefits from the property whilst we were living there and she could not admit that she was due to pay the council tax as that would lay her wide open to prosecution.

 

We contacted the council and explained the situation, but they wouldn't discuss it.

As far as they ( capita ) were concerned, we were liable and they had passed the debt onto Ross and Roberts for collection.

We rang Ross and Roberts, who were in fairness understanding, and they agreed a repayment plan which we stuck to like glue.

 

In December 2015 I contacted them to make a payment and they gave us a figure which they said was the amount needed to clear off the debt.

I then paid that amount and was told by the lady on the phone that the debt was now paid and we owed nothing more.

They would cease any action against us. We didn't think any more about it

 

We got a letter from the council saying we were in arrears with our council tax and they were taking us to court.

I went into the offices to talk to them

 

they told me that there was still £470 owing from the previous liability order and that they'd used my council tax payments for that year to clear this off.

I explained everything about Ross and Roberts, how they said we'd paid it all off, but the woman insisted that they hadn't collected the full amount and had left £470 uncollected. That was why they were using 2016s council tax payments to clear off those arrears first.

 

After much arguing, they agreed to cease the court action and use the money we had paid for the current years council tax. As for the £470 owing they would simply add it onto the bill and we could repay that on top of the current years council tax over the year.

 

Owing to financial problems we fell into arrears with the council tax, and because as they put it "you have a bad history of paying" they just sent the matter to the courts and we were given another LO.

 

When we contacted Ross and Roberts to sort out payments, they told us that there was still a LO for £470 owing which they were treating seperately, and had added £310 costs onto that bill. Not only that, they added £310 onto the amount for that current year as well.

 

Had Ross and Roberts not told us that we had paid off the full bill, back in 2015, then we would have carried on making all the payments as planned and we wouldn't have been hit with a huge amount of fees, not only for the £470 that they incorrectly didn't collect, but also because that then had a knock on effect for the current year, and owing to us owing the grand sum of £110 for the current year, they whammed us with £310 charges for that.

 

So if you can understand it,

we ended up paying £620 in bailliff fees for two liability orders.

One for £110 which I accept we owed,

and £470 which Ross and Roberts had themselves told us we didn't owe

 

it was their mistake when they didn't collect it as they should have done back when we were willingly making payments to clear off a debt that wasn't even ours in the first place as the landlady should have paid it.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to go and speak to the council in person, and the CEO. By calling, you are automatically put through to capita, who dont care about your circumstances. They want the money.

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

Also, did you get anything in writing from your landlady saying she would pay the Council tax?

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

Also, did you get anything in writing from your landlady saying she would pay the Council tax?

 

Rather foolishly no.

 

What we cannot understand though, is if she was claiming benefits at the house, that would include Council Tax benefit. That would mean the council tax for the property for the two year period would have been paid by the benefits office. We surely then wouldn't have had to pay because the council tax was covered for that period.

 

If however, she wasn't claiming council tax benefit but was registered at that address, then as the property owner, and still residing at the house, she would have been liable for the council tax anyway, not us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

personally I would drop her in it as well , there is a anonymous telephone number you can call

 

We explained all that to Capita, who being honest, didn't give a flying duck. They just expected us to pay saying that we'd lived there, and therefore we were liable.

 

What I cannot understand either, is that when it all blew up, within 8 weeks of us being told we owed the money, they had the debt with the Bailiffs.

 

During the entire 2 years that we were living there and she was supposed to pay the council tax, there wasn't one letter addressed to her from Mendip Council, and not one bailliff showed their face.

 

How come for 2 years they didn't give a damn, but suddenly when we were truthful and told them we'd been living at the property, they made every effort to get paid.

 

My suspicion is that the landlady had been claiming housing benefit for 2 years, and rather than do the correct thing and prosecute her, they simply just came after us to get the money back.

 

What I would like to know, is if she was registered at the property during the two years.

If she was, then we never should have been liable for the council tax anyway because we would have been simply lodgers as she would be the lead name on the council tax bill. We would not have been liable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so you know, Crapita own Ross & Roberts aka Ross 'n Robbers, that's why the the debt was with bailiffs so quickly.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so you know, Crapita own Ross & Roberts aka Ross 'n Robbers, that's why the the debt was with bailiffs so quickly.

 

Yes I knew that. Its a money making [problem] that unfortunately no one can do anything about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh you can if you complain and complain to the right people in the council.

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

Do you have a tenancy agreement since that stipulates what the tenant is liable for -eg rates, telephone, electricity, tv and wifi. If the rates not in the agreement then the landlord is liable to pay them.

If you cannot find the agreement, then the estate agents who arranged the lease will have a copy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...