Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • what solicitor is the PAPLOC from? then just search xxxx snotty letter dx  
    • moved to the debt self help forum. plenty of like threads here to read along with the ones you've done so far..good work. last thing you ever want to do is look at any kind of IVO/BK or anything alike concerning consumer debt, never do that, turns unsecured debts into secured ones in many instances. your best bet for now is p'haps looks at  Options for dealing with your debts: Breathing Space (Debt Respite Scheme) - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) sadly you have to go thru one of the free debt charities to invoke that but DON'T be tempted to also open up a DMP with them, just get the Breathing Space done. get that in place that gives you at leasy 60 days buffer you've also goto to realise you'll probably get a default once breathing space is in place, bit if not it might pay you to withhold payments even after BS then p'haps re start payments once a DN for each debt is issued and registered. at least that way, whatever happens in 6yrs the debt will drop off dx  
    • Hello, I am a private seller and recently sold a pair of trainers on eBay.  Everything seemed fine until just after the eBay 30 day mbg had expired.  The buyer contacted me with photos showing me that both shoes had ripped.  He wanted his money back, and after refusing to refund him, he then left me retaliatory and defamatory feedback on my profile to the effect that I had sold him fake trainers (this was removed by eBay).  He then initiated a chargeback via Paypal.  Invariably, the outcome was in his favour, and I have now been charged for the cost of the trainers.  I would have also been stung for the chargeback fee, but eBay refunded this.  Incidentally, I do have the email receipt of the trainers from when I bought them from a well-established and bona fide online retailer.  The susbequent conversation with eBay followed its predictable course, i.e. the chargeback is out of their hands etc. I have been in contact with citizens advice, and my bank.  Citizens advice told me that as a private seller I'm responsible for the "Title and description" of the goods, but not the performance, or the fitness for purpose.  To me it is clear; if you receive something that's not as described, you don't then use the goods, and more than 30 days later claim 'not as described'.  In my mind, this makes the claim fraudulent.  He's used the 'they're fake' card to give credence to a 'not as described' claim here, obviously, without any evidence.  My understanding is that the chargeback is unlawful, because the trainers were shipped as described.  However, I read something on an eBay forum regarding sellers having no statutory rights, i.e. no right to appeal against a chargeback decision, or to complain to the financial ombudsman.  Does this mean that if my bank disputes the charge on my behalf, it will be to no avail, even if it's recognisably a fraudulent chargeback?  I have reported it via the Action fraud website. Any advice, anyone?  Would be most grateful!
    • Thank you, I have drafted my letters and started to complete the reply form, printed from this site and not using the one they provided.    2 questions, on the forum link it says to tick box D & I, the reason for box D will be given on my thread, what would my answer be to "I dispute the debt"?  Do I send anything for the Vodafone debt they have included?  I've only done 118 loan s. 77 & capital one credit cards so. 78    Thank you  
  • 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

Single Yellow Line and Double Blips ticket **CANCELLED**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1920 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 live on the High Street in the London Borough of Sutton.

 

Recently a visitor received a PCN while parked on the single yellow line outside my house shortly before 8pm.

 

All the nearest (under 100m) yellow control signs for single yellows nearby show restricted times of Mon-Sat 08:00 to 18:30, however there is not a yellow sign directly at this location. Seeing the single yellow line, and the time, my visitor thought parking would be fine.

 

At the location there is also double yellow blips, controlled by a No Loading sign.

To compound the confusion, at this location there is a newly installed sign stating 'no idling, turn engine off while waiting'.

 

She submitted an appeal expecting the ticket to have been issued in error by an over-exuberant TCO over the xmas period and to be overturned, unfortunately the appeal was rejected on the basis of no loading at any time.

 

My question is,

is there any point in continuing the appeals process on the basis that the single yellow would have reasonably considered to have been in force, on confusing signage / markings, was waiting/parked not loading, or possible other basis, or, to pay the discounted penalty before they remove the option.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

The contravention on the PCN -

02 - Parked or loading/unloading in a restricted street where waiting and loading/unloading restrictions are in force.

 

Location postcode (for Google mappers!) - SM1 1LD

Edited by dx100uk
Merge/space
Link to post
Share on other sites

There doesnt have to be a sign exactly at that location. If there was a prohibitive sign along the road, or repeaters along the same yellow line, then it counts. Can you give more of an exact location please as that post code is for a fairly long stretch of road

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

The car was parked directly outside the Betfred / 'Lesna Chata' shops. The empty pole at that location (and in these pictures) has since had added to it the signs mentioned above ('No loading at any time' and 'turn off engine when waiting'). The blips which are extremely faded in the google images have been repainted, though now more visible have already started fading, not enough to be an issue. Everything else appears to be the same as now.

 

There are yellow restricted time signs, within 100m along the road, both before and after this point. As with all other single yellow signs in sutton, these have the Mon-Sat 08:00 - 18:30.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That stretch of yellow line between the zig-zags at one end and the loading bay (outside Lycamobile) must have its own sign. The council cannot rely on signs governing other lengths of yellow line, even in the same street.

 

You say the sign saying "no loading" has been erected since the Google photo - but was it there on the day the car was parked?

 

Either way, you may have a case. First thing, ASAP, it to ask the Council for a copy of the Traffic Order for that location. This will state what the restriction should be.

 

Then, the question is, was that restriction correctly and adequately signed? I can't see why they would put a single yellow line down on a 24/7 no-loading restiction, and in any case, the chevrons on the kerb are almost invisible in the photo, so there could be genuine confusion.

 

Can you look into the Traffic Order and let us know what it says - also what sign was there on the day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply. I will ask for a copy of the Traffic Order for this stretch first thing on Monday.

 

The no loading at any time and the turn off engine while waiting signs were in place on the day. Also, as mentioned above, the yellow blips are more evident now than in the google image. The single yellow line has been in place all of the 10 years i've lived here, with vehicles parking along that stretch of yellow line all of that time during the 'apparently' unrestricted time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the thing prescribing the parking isnt the single yellow line but the no loading so that is what you need to look at. You havent been accused of parking within restricted hours so unless the traffic order is somehow applied to other activites then it is incorrectly issued.

 

as an aside a couple of Sutton's enforcement officers believe that parking is prohibited everywhere unless it is specifically indicated otherwise and issue tickets accordingly. I think that an appeal will be successful but follow the yellow line in each direction to see where it terminates and what the signs say along its length.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Quick update on this. I have been chasing this tco several times but have still never received a copy of the documentation. That said, on the most recent call, they did decide to cancel the ticket as a 'goodwill gesture'. Whilst it doesn't answer the question it is a good outcome on the ticket.

 

Can anyone recommend any good reading on the status of these markings. In particular, I'm confused as to the single yellow line, and its meaning. In Sutton, ALL other single yellow lines have the same restrictions of Mon-Sat 08:00-18:30, and none have double blips. Every other location with double blips is also marked with double yellow lines.

 

The reading i've found elsewhere seems to indicate that yellow lines restrict waiting, with blips separately designating any restrictions on loading. The markings at this location certainly confuse me (and clearly the dozens of other people who park at this location every single day, and all of the 10 years i've lived here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the markings are probably wrong. If it's 24/7 it should be double yellows - single yellows are for restrictions which only apply during certain hours - and they need a sign next to them.

 

The Traffic Order would reveal what the actual restriction is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...