Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • no i meant the email from parcel2go which email address did they send it from and who signed it off (whos name is at the bottom)
    • I understand confusion with this thread.  I tried to keep threads separate because there have been so many angles.    But a team member merged them all.  This is why it's hard to keep track. This forum exists to help little people fight injustice - however big or small.  Im here to try get a decent resolution. Not to give in to the ' big boys'. My "matter' became complicated 'matters' simply because a lender refused to sell a property. What can I say?  I'll try in a nutshell to give an overview: There's a long lease property. I originally bought it short lease with a s.146 on it from original freeholder.  I had no concerns. So lender should have been able to sell a well-maintained lovely long lease property.  The property was great. The issue is not the property.  Economy, sdlt increases, elections, brexit, covid, interest hikes etc didn't help.  The issue is simple - the lender wanted to keep it.    Before repo I offered to clear my loan.  I was a bit short and lender refused.  They said (recorded) they thought the property was worth much more and they were happy to keep accruing interest (in their benefit) until it reached a point where they felt they could repo and still easily quickly sell to get their £s back.  This was a mistake.  The market was (and is) tough.   2y later the lender ceo bid the same sum to buy the property for himself. He'd rejected higher offers in the intervening period whilst accruing interest. I had the property under offer to a fantastic niche buyer but lender rushed to repo and buyer got spooked and walked.  It had taken a long time to find such a lucrative buyer.  A sale which would have resulted in £s and another asset for me. Post repo lender had 1 offer immediately.  But dragged out the process for >1y - allegedly trying to get other offers. But disclosure shows there was only one valid buyer. Lender appointed receiver (after 4 months) - simply to try acquire the freehold.  He used his powers as receiver to use me, as leaseholder, to serve notice on freeholders.  Legally that failed. Meanwhile lender failed to secure property - and squatters got in (3 times).  And they failed to maintain it.  So freeholders served a dilapidations notice (external) - on me as leaseholder (cc-ed to lender).   (That's how it works legally) I don't own the freehold.  But I am a trustee and have to do right by the freeholders.  This is where matters got/ get complicated.  And probably lose most caggers.   Lawyers got involved for the freeholders to firstly void the receiver enfranchisement notice. Secondly, to serve the dilapidations notice.  The lack of maintenance was in breach of lease and had to be served to protect fh asset. The lender did no repairs. They said a buyer would undertake them. Which was probably correct. If they had sold. After 1y lender finally agreed to sell to the 1st offeror and contracts went with lawyers.  Within 1 month lender reneged.  Lender tried to suggest buyer walked. Evidence shows he/ his lawyers continued trying to exchange (cash) for 4 months.  Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been to renege and for ceo to take control.   I still think that's their plan. Lender then stupidly chose to pretty much bulldoze the property.  Other stuff was going on in the background. After repo I was in touch by phone and email and lender knew post got to me.   Despite this, after about 10 months (before and then during covid), they deliberately sent SDs and eventually a B petition to an incorrect address and an obscure small court.  They never served me properly.  (In hindsight I understand they hoped to get a backdoor B - so they could keep the property that way.)  Eventually the random court told them to email me by way of service.  At this point their ruse to make me B failed.  I got a lawyer (friend paid). The B petition was struck out. They’d failed to include the property as an asset. They were in breach of insolvency rules. Simultaneously the receiver again appointed lawyers to act on my behalf as leaseholder. This time to serve notice on the freeholders for a lease extension.  He had hoped to try and vary the strict lease. Evidence shows the already long length of lease wasn't an issue.  The lender obviously hoped to get round their lack of permission to do works (which they were already doing) by hoping to remove the strict clauses that prevent leaseholder doing alterations.   The extension created a new legal angle for me to deal with.  I had to act as trustee for freeholders against me as leaseholder/ the receiver.  Inconsistencies and incompetence by receiver lawyers dragged this out 3y.  It still isn't properly resolved.  Meanwhile - going back to the the works the lender undertook. The works were consciously in breach of lease.  The lender hadn't remedied the breaches listed in the dilapidations notice.  They destroyed the property.  The trustees compiled all evidence.  The freeholders lawyers then served a forfeiture notice. This notice started a different legal battle. I was acting for the freeholders against what the lender had done on my behalf as leaseholder.  This legal battle took 3y to resolve. The simple exit would have been for lender to sell. A simple agreement to remedy the breaches and recompense the freeholders in compensation - and there's have been clean title to sell.  That option was proposed to them.   This happened by way of mediation for all parties 2y ago.  A resolution option was put forward and in principle agreed.  But immediately after the lender lawyers failed to engage.  A hard lesson to learn - mediation cannot be referred to in court. It's considered w/o prejudice. The steps they took have made no difference to their ability to sell the property.  Almost 3y since they finished works they still haven't sold. ** ** I followed up some leads myself.  A qualified cash buyer offered me a substantial sum.  The lender and receiver both refused it.   I found another offer in disclosure.  6 months later someone had apparently offered a substantial sum via an agent.  The receiver again rejected it.  The problem of course was that the agent had inflated the market price to get the business. But no-one was or is ever going to offer their list price.  Yet the receiver wanted/wants to hold out for the list price.  Which means 1y later not only has it not sold - disclosure shows few viewings and zero interest.  It's transparently over-priced.  And tarnished. For those asking why I don't give up - I couldn't/ can't.  Firstly I have fiduciary duties as a trustee. Secondly, legal advice indicates I (as leaseholder) could succeed with a large compensation claim v the lender.  Also - I started a claim v my old lawyer and the firm immediately reimbursed some £s. That was encouraging.  And a sign to continue.  So I'm going for compensation.  I had finance in place (via friend) to do a deal and take the property back off the lender - and that lawyer messed up bad.   He should have done a deal.  Instead further years have been wasted.   Maybe I only get back my lost savings - but that will be a result.   If I can add some kind of complaint/ claim v the receiver's conscious impropriety I will do so.   I have been left with nothing - so fighting for something is worth it. The lender wants to talk re a form of settlement.  Similar to my proposal 2y ago.  I have a pretty clear idea of what that means to me.  This is exactly why I do not give up.  And why I continue to ask for snippets of advice/ pointers on cag.  
    • It was all my own work based on my previous emails to P2G which Bank has seen.
    • I was referring to #415 where you wrote "I was forced to try to sell - and couldn't." . And nearer the start in #79 .. "I couldn't sell.  I had an incredibly valuable asset. Huge equity.  But the interest accrued / the property market suffered and I couldn't find a buyer even at a level just to clear the debt." In #194 you said you'd tried to sell for four years.  The reason for these points is that a lot of the claims against for example your surveyor, solicitor, broker, the lender and now the receiver are mainly founded in a belief that they should have been able to do something but did not. Things that might seem self evident to you but not necessarily to others. Pressing these claims may well need a bit more hard evidence, rather than an appeal to common sense. Can you show evidence of similar properties, with similar freehold issues, selling readily? And solid reasons why the lender should have been able to sell when you couldn't.
    • You can use a family's address.   The only caveat is for the final hearing you'd need to be there in person   HOWEVER i'd expect them to pay if its only £200 because costs of attending will be higher than that
  • 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

Asda Car park


Guest Gertie100
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5889 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

Guest Gertie100

Anyone listen to radio 5 approx 5.30pm yesterday?

Apparently Asda are going to start ticketing / clamping people who abuse the disabled / parent & child parking spaces (and I don't mean standing there and shouting at the space :-D :-D )

 

The presenter clearly asked if they had the right to do this, and the answer was yes, because the car parks were private and run by a management firm who are registered with the DVLA.

The pilot scheme ran in Liverpool, and is just about to be rolled out in London before it hits all asda stores.

 

I shop in Asda, but do not park in disabled or parent/child (unless my girl is with me). However there are rumblings in our local town that Asda are going to put a limit on the time in which you can park in their car park. The shop is in the middle of the town centre and people park there regardless of whether or not they are visiting the shop because as far as Joe Public is concerned it is simply another town centre car park.

So it wouldn't surprise if eventually they also tagged this restriction to the abuse of restricted spaces.

 

Question is in a nutshell:

Do Asda have any rights at all to apply charges for any of the above.

Currently the car park is free - as are all the car parks in my town.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 155
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I am totally support Asda and would gladly provide my services free of charge to issue tickets to people who have no consideration for others.

I have noticed that most abusers drive very expensive cars or 4x4`s

which they can`t park due to there inability to control the vehicle.

I would also clamp the vehicles and get immediate payment thus saving paper work appeals etc.

Good make the fine £500 £400 for charity

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Gertie100

So they can not ticket / clamp people who park in spaces they shouldn't?

 

IIIuminate - I'm going to ignore your post as that is not what the question was about. Go start your own thread instead of hi jacking everyone elses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The land belongs to Asda and by using there land you are entering into a contract.

 

Very unlikely. The land will belong to ASDA's landlord in most cases. And it will be their land.

 

You cannot enter into a contract (implied or otherwise) merely by being present on the land. There must be adequate, legal and enforceable, signage to provide the terms of any implied contract and these should be available to the driver before they park. It could then be held that the driver, by parking, has made an informed acceptance of the implied contract. Note than any such contract can only be with the driver and not the RK as RK.

 

I suggest that you read up on private parking on the forum before posting. That way you will have a much better understanding of what can and what can't be done about parking on private land.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Naturally the owner of the land can try to do anything they want within reason, but noticed this article today and PMSL.

 

Whoops!

 

ASDA to fine drivers in wrong parking bay

 

ASDA is to fine drivers for the misuse of disabled and parent and child parking bays in its car park at the Crumbles Retail Park.

 

All profits generated from the fines will go back to baby charity Tommy's and Motability, the leading car scheme for disabled people.

 

The move, which is part of a national policy from the group, will see abusers fined £60 for parking in parent and child and disabled spaces and comes into force over the next few weeks.

 

The scheme was trialled in the north, and when surveyed four out of five ASDA customers supported rolling out the scheme nationwide.

 

The trial, which lasted three months' operated in six stores in Liverpool. As a result the number of free parking spaces increased by more than 60 per cent for disabled drivers and parents with young children.

 

A spokesman said, "At ASDA we have decided to take a stand to keep specialised parking spaces available to those customers that need them.

 

"Most customers using these bays without good reason don't realise their actions impact on people who rely on them to do their weekly shop.

 

"We are not handing out tickets to make a profit as money raised will go back to charity.

 

"Signs in all stores will clearly state that you will get a fine if you park here unnecessarily.

 

"We would encourage anyone who manages a car park to take our lead."

 

Jane Brewin, chief executive of Tommy's, the baby charity, said, "A routine trip to the shops can turn into a nightmare for some parents — especially when they don't have adequate parking spaces and other much-needed parent and baby services made available to them.

 

"Tommy's believes that organisations that claim to put the needs of parents first should seriously look at their parking policy for parents to uncover whether their schemes actually work in practice.

 

"ASDA is setting a great example by ensuring that supermarkets are as accessible for parents as possible, by penalising those who exploit bays specifically reserved for parents with young children.

 

"Putting fines in place for parking misuse is a bold move by ASDA but is the right one for giving parents with young children a helping hand."

 

From the Eastbourne Herald 11/1/08

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This

parent and child
and this

parents with young children.
are not synonymous.

 

Parent/child spaces have no parallel in highway parking - unlike disabled spaces.

 

If I take my 86 year-old mother or my 22 year-old son shopping, I presume that I can use a parent and child space?

 

At what point does a child cease to be 'young'; by definition a child nust be younger than the (natural) parent?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am totally support Asda and would gladly provide my services free of charge to issue tickets to people who have no consideration for others.

I have noticed that most abusers drive very expensive cars or 4x4`s

which they can`t park due to there inability to control the vehicle.

I would also clamp the vehicles and get immediate payment thus saving paper work appeals etc.

Good make the fine £500 £400 for charity

 

I have never heard such a load of bowlarks in all my life :shock:

Tip us a wink on my scales if you think I may have helped at all;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I take my 86 year-old mother or my 22 year-old son shopping, I presume that I can use a parent and child space?

 

At what point does a child cease to be 'young'; by definition a child nust be younger than the (natural) parent?

 

Absolutely.

 

I have no qualms about using parent and child parking spaces when visiting a supermarket with my 9 year old and where there are no unmarked bays available. I am a customer, spending money in their store and profiting them by doing so. They earn no less from me than they would from somebody with a smaller child so I am not depriving the store of money, nor greatly inconveniencing anybody else, and there is no signage to suggest any age limit for use of such spaces.

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The presenter clearly asked if they had the right to do this, and the answer was yes, because the car parks were private and run by a management firm who are registered with the DVLA.

 

Registered with the DVLA - thats nice. That means they can get the RK details from the DVLA.

 

I wonder if they are registered with the SIA? They need to be if they are going to clamp people.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Supermarkets are very sensitive to prices and profit margins, which is why they are continually having price wars with each other through the press.All it needs for every one to write to their local newspaper saying they will take their custom elsewhere for this nonsense to be stopped'

I wonder if Asda will in future include in their newspaper adverts that their 'fines' for parking and shopping with them are cheaper than Tesco's.:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

ASDA's have a store in Bedminster Bristol right in the middle of the Bedminster shopping area. This of course is very attractive to other shoppers. ASDA's deal with this by charging, unless you have a receipt for making a purchase in their store at that time. Incidently this was common practice in some car parks in the U S where the car park had agreements with local businesses. An idea that shoul be adopted in this country perhaps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is asda simply being led by the reaction to the introduction by Tesco of ANPR cameras into 99% of their car parks, IE no real adverse reaction !.

 

My local asda is in a town centre, and has had ticketing or a 'civil car parking charge' as they like to call it for about 3 years now.

 

First Tesco, now Asda - only a matter of time until Sainsburys decides to go the same way. At least they seem to be donating it to charity rather than using it to line their pockets.

All opinions & information are the personal view of the poster, and are not that of any organisation, company or employer. Any information disclosed by the poster is for personal use only. Permission to process this data under the Data Protection act is NOT GIVEN to any company, only personal readers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First Tesco, now Asda - only a matter of time until Sainsburys decides to go the same way. At least they seem to be donating it to charity rather than using it to line their pockets.

 

I am very cynical about this statement.Asda say the Profits will go to charity; i.e what is left after expenses are paid. These could be anything up to 99% of the penalty charges, leaving 1% to charity.I would be much happier if they said ALL charges collected would go to charity; and finance the policing of their car parks themselves - after all it is nominally their property.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can ALL free customer parking in areas of high demand for parking being phased out soon. Whilst I realise these companies make large profits once all the parking spaces end up being used for the entire day by commuters parking and catching the train/tube they will start charging. Why should B&Q pay for a huge car park for it to be filled with people going to the Cinema or Asda provide parking for the local hospital? Up until now most drivers do get scared and worry about PPC notices. Starting a public campaign against them and informing people these companies are powerless is only going to end up with one result, everyone will pay to park to go shopping.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at all green man. The owners of the car park can do as I previously mentioned. it's free if you use the business and a time limit can be put on the length of stay. Say two hours free for shopping in their store.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at all green man. The oners of the car park can do as I previously mentioned. it's free if you use the business and a time limit can be put on the length of stay. Say two hours free for shopping in their store.

 

 

They already do that and no one pays the 'fines' for overstaying as they are according general opinion unenforceable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ASDA's have a store in Bedminster Bristol right in the middle of the Bedminster shopping area. This of course is very attractive to other shoppers. ASDA's deal with this by charging, unless you have a receipt for making a purchase in their store at that time. Incidently this was common practice in some car parks in the U S where the car park had agreements with local businesses. An idea that shoul be adopted in this country perhaps.

 

ASDA Bedminster have never asked to see my receipt when I have I shopped there. They do have barriers at the entrance to the car park but they never seem to use them and seem to not have any on the exits.

 

That said providing the charges are reasonable and that the conditions of entry are made clearly visible at the time of entry I think most people don't have to much of a problem paying to park or providing a receipt to prove that they have shopped in the store providing the parking. It's when we get to the realms of paying penalty charges or being clamped for non-compliance or alleged non-compliance that we get problems.

 

The supermarkets have to decide whether the lost business through commuters/non-shoppers parking plus the cost of having attendants to check receipts/accept payment plus the loss of goodwill (if any) is worth the revenue generated by the "extra sales to gain a receipt" plus the charges accrued from the parking charges.

 

I suspect that many Supermarkets may have trialled this sort of thing in the past and rejected it as un-economic. However I did encounter this at a store in the Midlands recently so it may be that the local stores are left to decide how to manage things.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...