Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Many thanks for the replies and advice!   I what to send this email to the Starbucks CEO and the area manager. Your thoughts would be appreciated.   [email protected] [email protected]   Re: MET Parking PNC at your Starbucks Southgate site   Dear Ms Rayner, / Dear Heather Christie,   I have received a Notice to Keeper regarding a Parking Charge Notice of £100 for the driver parking in the Southgate Park Car Park, otherwise infamously known as the Stanstead Starbucks/McDonalds car park(s).   Issued by: MET Parking Services Ltd Parking Charge Notice Number: XXXXXXXXX Vehicle Registration Number: XXXX XXX Date of Contravention: XX.XX.XXXX Time: XX:XX - XX:XX   After a little research it apears that the driver is not alone in being caught in what is commonly described as a scam, and has featured in the national press and on the mainstream television.   It is a shame that the reputation of Starbucks is being tarnished by this, with your customers leaving the lowest possible reviews on Trustpilot and Trip Advisor at this location, and to be associated with what on the face of it appears to be a doubious and predatory car park management company.   In this instance, during the early hours of the morning the driver required a coffee and parked up outside Starbucks with the intention of purchasing one from yourselves. Unfortunately, you were closed so the driver walked to McDonalds next door and ordered a coffee, and for this I have received the Notice to Keeper.   It is claimed that the car park is two separate car parks (Starbucks/McDonalds). However, there is no barrier or road markings to identity a boundary, and the signage in the car park(s) and outside your property is ambiguous, as such the terms would most likely be deemed unfair and unenforcable under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   I understand that Starbucks-Euro Garages neither operate or benefit from the charges imposed by MET Parking. However, MET Parking is your client.   Additionally, I understand that the charge amount of £100 had previously been upheld in court due to a ‘legitimate interest in making sure that a car park was run as efficiently as possible to benefit other drivers as well as the local stores, keeping cars from overstaying’.   However, this is not applicable when the shop or store is closed (as was the case here), as there is no legitimate interest. Therefore, the amount demanded is a penalty and is punitive, again contravening the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   As the driver’s intention of the visit was genuine, I would be grateful if you could please instruct your client to cancel this Notice to Keeper/Parking Charge Notice.   Kind regards
    • I received the promised call back from the Saga man today who informed me that the undertakers have decreed it IS a modification and they will need to recalculate a quote individually for me. However it all sounds very arbitrary. The more I think about it, and with help from forum replies, the more I am sure that it is not a modification. If for example the original seatback had become damaged by a spillage or a tear, I would be entitled to replace it with the nearest available part. The problem is when it comes to a payout after an accident, there is no telling what an individual insurer will decide when he notices the change. I am still undecided which of the two best routes to go with, either don't mention the replacement at all, or fill in the quote form without mentioning, and when it comes to buying the insurance over the phone, mention it at the time.
    • Please post up their letter so we understand what they've asked. You need to cover up your name and address and their reference number. HB
    • Hello,  I received the standard letter.  I don't understand No. 3: If this is in relation to a ticket irregularity, then if you were unable to produce a pass because you did not have it with you or if your pass was withdrawn because you were unable to produce a valid photocard to accompany it, please enclose a photocopy of the pass/photocard with your reply. Question: do i enclose my photocard? my partner's freedom pass was confiscated.
    • LFI is spot on. In fact you could sue UKPC for breach of GDPR, as UKPC knew full well right from the start that their case was hopeless.  They should never have asked for your details from the DVLA. Take some time to think if that is a road you want to go down.  
  • 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

Parcel Monkey never delivered my parcel


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2176 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 sent 6 parcels, 5 arrived and one was missing.

I went through several PM messages.

They sent me after 30 days a comfirmation that the bag was lost and they would give me 34 pounds back .

This does not cover even the bag price!

 

i had at least 500 pounds in clothes more another 500 in medication .

Well, the whole thing was worthed around 1,500 pounds.

I did not take extra insurance ( it was the 1st time i was using a service like this, and the last one too).

As they say in the small print they are not responsable for anything and DPD does not respond to my issue as its customer is Parcel Monkey and not me.

 

I already sent a formal complain almost a month ago when i try to do an online mediation ( which was not possible as parcel monkey does not have a direct email).

 

I came here to ask the opnion if i should enter in the small claim court not for the refund of my goods but for the lack of service performed and the lack of support and care of DPD and PArcel Monkey. Would any one be able to advise me ? If yes,what would be the fair amount for this claim.

 

I am 2 months without my clothes and medicies :-(

 

Thanks

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please can you tell us a bit more how it works. Presumably you contracted with and paid Parcel Monkey and they then selected the best courier Which turned out to be DPD.

Did you disclose any of the contents or give any indication of the value? Presumably they ask for a value.

 

You say that there is some small print. Please can you post it up here in PDF format – or if it is on their website can you post a link to it

Link to post
Share on other sites

I put 20 pounds as i did not want to pay insurance. However, it was not states that this would be the whle amount if they lost my bag.

 

The small print is just related to the fact that if you did not an insurance you dont have any rights for a refund.I would have to attache the whole terms and coditions.

 

However, i bought a service which was not done and i had the lost of goods, time,etc.

 

The issue is that is not make explicit that if you dont have insurance you wont get paid a compesation even though the lost your goods.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree completely with the principles of everything that you are saying – that you pay for service and they should carried out and they shouldn't have any way to wriggle. However, you have caused yourself a difficulty in that you have told Porky on their form and that you have misrepresented the value. That is unhelpful and if you have to take this to court, it will be a point of vulnerability in your argument.

 

I certainly think that there term that if you don't have insurance then you are not entitled to any refund is an unfair term. Essentially what they are saying is that you must pay the contract price and then if you don't pay something extra, if they fail in their contractual duty you have no comeback. This must be an unfair term.

 

You have indicated that there is a term that you lose your rights for refund if you don't have insurance. Later on you say that the issue is that this information wasn't made explicit – despite the fact that you seem to know about it. Please can you explain.

 

If you had correctly declared the value then I would say that your chances that a County Court claim would be better than 95%. Not only that, although they would initially file a defence, I would predict that they would put their hands up and pay you out rather than to go to the time and trouble and expense and risk of going to court. However, the fact that you have misled them on the form will give them a certain amount of hope and this means that they might be prepared to go all the way.

 

If you did take this to court, then you would certainly be in with a chance. However, a judge might feel uncomfortable about upholding your claim in the face of an obvious deception as to the value – even in the face of an unfair term. I'm very uncertain as to how this would go.

 

Another problem is that I expect you might have difficulty proving what the contents of the missing parcel were. You would have to list out the items and then give a basis for the value that you are estimating.

 

Is the value of the clothing the as new value? I suppose that they were all used items of clothing so what would be their second-hand value?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I actually have tthe value in my bank statement because most of them were brand new. The problem is as you say prove the content of the bag. I did sent them an invoice when they did a bag investigation.

 

I dont might to not get a full compensation as i know my decision were not very smart. However, i did booked a service that was not done which is an evidence that the contract was broken and they have such unfair terms .

 

I want the court to judge them not for my material goods but for the lack of care and service.

 

Any advice for that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Parcel Monkey Limited

 

Terms & Conditions link: https://www.parcelmonkey.co.uk/terms-and-conditions

 

Mr Navin Ramiah Chief Executive Officer

Email: [email protected] (no spaces)

ceoemail: https://ceoemail.com/

 

Registered Office Address:

21 Tollgate 21 Tollgate

Chandlers Ford

Eastleigh

Hants

SO53 3TG

 

Company Number: 07097496

 

Company Type: Private Limited Company

 

Companies House: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/07097496

Endole: https://suite.endole.co.uk/insight/company/07097496-parcel-monkey-limited

BizDb: http://www.bizdb.co.uk/company/parcel-monkey-limited-07097496/

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well all I can say is that you should claim for the value of the lost items on the basis that you paid for a delivery and it did not happen. As you have already appreciated, if they came back with a defence then you would need to say that their term is unfair and therefore unenforceable.

 

It's up to you if you want to go to the expense of being the claim. I'm not sure the fee is for a claim of £1500. Your chances of success are probably better than 60%. Had there not been the complicating factor of misrepresenting of the value, then your chances of would have been better than 95%. I'm pretty certain that they would still have resisted your claim that it simply that you have given them a bit of leverage.

 

I volunteer the fact that you misrepresented the value – but if they bring it up – as they certainly will, then you will need to respond that the item was lost regardless of value and that in any event the term is unfair. We will certainly help you if you want.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...