Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

GTR prosecutions slip


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2105 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

PLEASEEE HELP ME

 

Recently I was Travelling from london victoria to brighton... got stopped at brighton barrier

 

Inspector asked for my railcard and i stood to the side looked at the ticket and said i do not have one all i have is my student card.

 

She told me she would have to write a fail to carry ticket and started up convo about why i was in Brighton started askin about my uni and what i study even suggested i work for sourthern rail lol.

She was very nice

 

The ticket was a single w 16/25 rail discount

 

She told me all i needed to do was produce a railcard and scan it to the email she went me within 14 days which i have done....

 

I wasnt offered a penalty fare

 

The reason the discount was on there in tbe first place was bc i’d used my trainline account to book a ticket for my friend who had a railcard then i forgot to remove it for myself as i was in a rush, my mistake completely, i travel a sourthern rail a lot of typically buy full priced tickets. Altho i have now bought a railcard It was purchased on the day of the incident

 

The whole conversation was brief and i was not questioned and i believe there was some confusion ...

 

Now i am wondering whether i should send them a. Email before they send me a letter (if they do which i think they will)

 

Dear sir/madam,

 

I am writing you regarding my previous email and an event that took place on the 5th June 2018 at Brighton station.

 

Upon getting to the barriers I was stopped by an officer who looked at my ticket and asked to see my 16-25 railcard.

 

I stood to the side and was confused for a moment and I told her I did not have one, I only had my student card, she took me to the side further and said she would have to write a fail to carry slip, she did not caution me or ask me any questions, only asked for ID which I gave and told me to produce a railcard and scan it to this address.

Afterwards she pointed me towards a man who let me out.

 

However, I believe a mistake was made as I told her I did not have a railcard only a student card.

 

Initially when I went to book my ticket to brighton I booked it online however having previously used my account to book my friend a ticket who has a railcard, the discount was still there but I did not realise.

 

This is because you have to manually remove the discount and at the time I was in a rush and must have overlooked it. It was my mistake and I sincerely sincerely apologise.

 

I have never had any ultercations with ticket inspectors previously, always having valid tickets. I done what the woman told me however and bought a railcard and scanned it.

 

However, since I was still confused I went online and after looking at sourthern’s website I realise that usually a £20 penalty fare is issued for such an incident.

 

I was not given the choice of a penalty fare and I am not sure if the inspector misheard me or if there was general mis communication as the whole conversation was very brief.

 

I must stress that I am sincerely sorry for what has occured and I take full responsibility for my mistake.

 

I understand that I need to be more vigilant and have since purchased a railcard to avoid myself ever making the same mistake.

 

I am willing to pay the full price of the original fare and any additional admin costs.

I have just completed a degree in Psychology and do not want this to effect anything in the future.

 

I understand the seriousness of this incident but it was a genuine mistake I respect and appreciate the services offered by sourthern and GTR and hope you accept my sincerest apologies.

 

Is this okay? Should I mail it also?

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

that will do

though I wold not be using text speak.

 

proper English might be better

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

or BC but that s not par of your replt

its in polite to use the words 'that woman' or akin.

inspector.. p'haps?

 

red above

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 you've received their letter asking for your side of the story then send it 1st class royal mail

no need for email...

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

Hi. Don't write until you hear from them with a case reference, they won't be able to match up your letter with their file before that.

 

 

A couple of things from me about your letter. Towards the end of it, you mention 'effect anything in the future'. It's affect and I would go into more detail about how this could be detrimental to you. I'm not sure you should be criticising their procedures over not offering you a penalty fare, this rarely ends well.

 

 

HB

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The rail company is Southern, not sourthern.

 

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes sit on you hands till we know what they are intending to charge you with

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

  • 1 month later...

hows this doing?

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...