Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The incident was 03rd March 2024 - and that was the only letter that I have received from MET 15th April 2024 The charge I paid was at the Stansted Airport exit gate (No real relevance now - I thought this charge was for that!!).   Here is the content of email to them (Yes I know I said I was the driver !!!!) as said above -  I thought this charge was for that!! "Stansted Airport" Dear “To whom it may concern” My name is ??  PCN:  ?? Veh Reg: Date of Incident: 03rd March 2024 I have just received a parking charge final reminder letter, dated 10th April 2024 - for an overstay.  This is the first to my knowledge of any overstay. I am aware that I am out of the 28 days, I don’t mean to be rude, this feels like it is a scam My movements on this day in question are, I pulled into what looked like a service station on my way to pick my daughter and family up from Stansted airport. The reason for me pulling into this area was to use a toilet, so I found Starbucks, and when into there, after the above, I then purchased a coffee. After which I then continued with my journey to pick my daughter up. (however after I sent this email I remember that Starbucks was closed so I then I walked over to Macdonalds) There was no signs about parking or any tickets machines to explains about the parking rules. Once at Stansted, I entered and then paid on exit.  So Im not show where I overstayed my welcome.. With gratitude    
    • Just to enlarge on Dave's great rundown of your case under Penalty. In the oft quoted case often seen on PCNs,  viz PE v Beavis while to Judges said there was a case for claiming that £100 was a penalty, this was overruled in this case because PE had a legitimate interest in keeping the car park free for other motorists which outweighed the penalty. Here there is no legitimate interest since the premises were closed. Therefore the charge is a penalty and the case should be thrown out for that reason alone.   The Appeals dept need informing about what and what isn't a valid PCN. Dummies. You should also mention that you were unable to pay by Iphone as there was no internet connection and there was a long  queue to pay on a very busy day . There was no facility for us to pay from the time of our arrival only the time from when we paid at the machine so we felt that was a bit of a scam since we were not parked until we paid. On top of that we had two children to load and unload in the car which should be taken into account since Consideration periods and Grace periods are minimum time. If you weren't the driver and PoFA isn't compliant you are off scot free since only the driver is liable and they are saying it was you. 
    • Thank you dx. I consider myself well and truly told :) x Thank you dx. I consider myself well and truly told :) x
    • Doubt the uneconomic write off would be registered, unless you agreed to accept write off settlement of the claim. It is just cosmetic damage. All that has happened, is that the car has been looked at and they realised the repair costs are going to exceed the value of the car. If the car is perfectly driveable with no upcoming normal work required to pass next MOT, your current Insurers will continue Insurance and you can accept an amount from third party Insurers to go towards you repairing the scratched bodywork.    
    • Peter McCormack says the huge investment by the twins will help Real Bedford build a new ground.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

Course Costs


Phiddius
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2099 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

Hi,

In Sept 2017 I enrolled on a course at University, at the induction day I signed an agreement for the course costs £2170 payable in 3 parts. I signed a Direct Debit form, and over the coming months all the money was taken from my bank successfully.

 

Job done in my opinion.

 

8 weeks ago, I received a threatening letter, not far off a screaming banchee coming in the room and demanding £320. "You agreed to accept responsibility for your course fee's and if you don't pay immediately we will pass this to an external debt collection agency"

 

I had no idea what this was about.

I called them, and they didn't either, so I was told that something was wrong but they were not sure what, and would look into it.

 

 

4 weeks later, Another letter arrived, even more angry than before with more threats. I have, demanded an explanation of why I being asked for £320.00 I feel this is not an unreasonable thing to ask.

 

They say, I was charged the wrong amount, and the correct amount is on the website, it's in the terms and conditions that they are allowed to charge for any mistakes they make, so pay up.

 

"The 2017/18 Tuition Fee Regulations state ‘1.10 The University reserves the right to correct administrative errors identified during invoicing and take action to recover any shortfall in fees in accordance with the published tuition fee listing for the appropriate academic session.’ Our Regulations are published externally in advance of the application cycle"

 

I think I have to pay them, even though its not the amount I agreed to pay, I just think their approach is awful, what if this was a more vulnerable person (as some students can be), they were very iron fist in their approach.

 

Can I legally demand an invoice from them in advance of the £320 payment, as I have asked for them to issue an invoice and they say its only a correction.

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't regard administrative errors one and the same as a contract stating the costs of the course which you signed and agreed to and paid by DD...end of.

 

Now if they issued a new credit agreement explaining that the credit agreement you accepted was quoted incorrectly and ask you sign the new one to replace the previous...that could be possibly accepted.

 

You cant use administrative errors to correct credit agreements....because if it ever went to court the first thing a Judge will want to see is the agreement and price and if you paid in full.

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

according to themselves they must correct the mistake during the invoice period, not a year later. It may be a moot point if you are continuing the couse beyond the 17/18 academic year as they just wont accept you on it next year if you have a debt to the uni.

I agree with you about the unneccessary manner they have used in correcting their error, use the college grievance procedure to get an apology for the way they have behaved. Your senior tutor will most likely be the first port of call and generally academics who take that role have the students interest as heart because they delay their promotion by doing so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

"The 2017/18 Tuition Fee Regulations state ‘1.10 The University reserves the right to correct administrative errors identified during invoicing and take action to recover any shortfall in fees in accordance with the published tuition fee listing for the appropriate academic session.’ Our Regulations are published externally in advance of the application cycle"

 

 

 

 

Have you checked what "the published tuition fee listing" for 2017/18 actually says?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thank you for some good advice, appreciated.

 

> Ethel Street

"Have you checked what "the published tuition fee listing" for 2017/18 actually says?"

Actually, I couldn't find it anywhere, and so I have demanded that they send me a link to that published fee...

 

> ericsbrother

along with the unnecessary approach and demanded an apology ...

 

> Andyorch

followed by - saying if I do find the published fee online then I may consider paying this additional fee ie produce a new agreement accompanied by an explanation.

 

plus raised a complaint in the hope of protecting people in future who may be frightened by this kind of approach.

 

so thank you, I'll let you know how that goes

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its irrelevant what you find on line.....as it may have been updated and "someone " error corrected since you signed the agreement.....as it stands they are making you correct someone else error.

 

 

" at the induction day I signed an agreement for the course costs £2170 payable in 3 parts. I signed a direct debit form, and over the coming months all the money was taken from my bank successfully. "

 

You have kept to your part of the agreement and fulfilled your liabilities.

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Andyorch, thanks for your reply,

 

They have responded to me by sending me a brochure showing the full price last year for the full time study, £4'860, no indication of the part time course costs.

 

I agreed my contract on 6.9.17 for £2'110 part time, then paid it as you are aware.

 

They sent me a copy of an advisory note they sent on 6.9.17, showing cost of the full time course, obviously I didn't see it then as I was not at home, I was in the university signing their agreement and didn't associate the full price with anything I was doing.

 

They also sent me a copy of a new invoice, they claim was sent to me on 7.2.18 showing a new figure of £2'430 and giving me 30 days to pay it. No explanation of any error. Anyway, I have never seen it until a few days ago.

 

I checked online and this years costs actually show the part time fee, which is now £2'140. I asked about that and they say that the university exercised its right to revise the fees for new entrants joining in 18-19

 

So basically they made a mistake charging me and want the missing pennies, and say they have the right to do so, even though this years fees are almost what I paid.

 

 

Thanks gain for any advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They should have sent the corrected invoice after Sept 2017...not in Feb 2018......they should have examined the agreement signed in Sept 2017.

 

Given its their error why not suggest a monthly payment plan of say £30 PM as its their error...your not in a position to pay in full to balance their errors and they should agree to meet you half way ?

 

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...