I thought I'd open this thread again to let others in a similar situation know what has happened since my tier 2 complaint. I received an email today from an independent adjudicator. I've included the most relevant responses and, as you can see, I was successful in my complaint "It is clear there were unacceptable delays in us contacting you about your overpayments and replying to your complaint. This poor service led to unnecessary worry and distress. I am sorry for this and to apologise for the concern caused" "On 12 February 2024 the tax credit system automatically written off all of your outstanding tax credit overpayme

Before you do any of the above – Stop! You need to spend a few days reading up on the stories on this sub- forum so that you understand the principles and you understand how to go about making your claim. We will help you – and you have a better than 95% chance of getting your money back – but you need to be in control of what you are doing. We will help you – but this is a self-help forum and you need to have done the reading so that you are confident of each step and you know your way forward. Please don't do anything at all – in particular don't send a letter of claim – until you have done all the reading and I would sugge

Don't appeal. This is a well known scam site to us. It's even been exposed on national TV by Joe Lycett! The traditional route was that we'd push Starbucks to cancel the PCN but that hasn't been working as of late. You've got 2 options: 1. Pay the £60 and the matter goes away. 2. Ignore them and engage with us. We'd rather you choose option 2. We'll be with you every step of the way. The good news is that MET rarely goes to court with this, providing you engage with us properly. The times they have is when people have either come to us late or have ignored our advice. Many times, once defended properly with

They sent their bilge out far too late to establish keeper liability. You're in the clear. Simply ignore them until you get a Letter of Claim. This is a scam site. It's been shown up to be a scam site in the national press and on national TV. MET don't want their scam to be exposed in court so they huff & puff but then bottle it when it comes to doing court or not. We have around 140 cases here. MET have started court claims only seven times, and even then it was a tactic to see if the motorist was terrified of going to court and would give in. When the Caggers defended, MET discontinued the cases. But make su

The Alice in Wonderland logic is that as you weren't using the local business - Starbucks - you were supposed to pay to park. You're right, the whole thing is a scam, and has been shown up to be a scam in the national press and on national TV. We have about 140 cases for the site. Despite all their huffing & puffing MET have only started court action in seven cases. In not one have MET had the bottle to take the matter to a hearing though, so far they've discontinued when the Cagger defended. They obviously don't want their scam to be exposed in court. Sure, you can pay £60 and the matter will go away. We would

dont use docx all your pers details are in file/info/properties read upload now a pdf dx

Thank you. Attached is a copy of the NTK, hopefully I have removed enough of the personal information. NTK Met Parking Services.pdf

Hi. Could we see both sides of your PCN please? Cover up anything that could identify you but not dates and times. HB

Write to DCBL asking them if the £70 charge is made by them or are Excel demanding the charge. Also ask if the charge includes vat. If it does why are you expected to pay their vat? Explain that you will need to know these answers before you go to Court and they already know that you are not going to pay so you are looking forward to going to court. Give it a few days and write the same letter to Excel apart from reversing DCBL and Excel's names at the beginning. IE write to Excel asking them if the £70 charge is made by them or DCBL. Then continue with what was asked in the first paragraph.

Hope we're in the correct place. Have, today, received a court order for a car loan debt taken out in 2015. The car loan was issued solely to my (vulnerable) wife, based on her annual income (at the time) of around £9000. The loan repayments were set at around £240 pm (plus a last balloon payment of roughly £3500 - after 5 years). The loan total given to her, with interest, was £14,318. Irresponsible lending at its best? We had 3 young children at the time. We tried keeping up with the payments but after the last payment we made (Feb 2018), we simply could not afford to pay. My wife got the odd letter/threat but nothing until

Well I've had a look. As an index page I suppose it looks very smart but it really doesn't tell us anything. Also, we don't know anything about the case, what it's about and what you you are appealing about. I don't think we can give any better advice than that it looks good so far. Overall, I don't understand the need for secrecy

Hi, yes the entire final version is in the 1 document uploaded today. Make sense to have the previous draft versions deleted to avoid confusion - i believe there are at least 15 previous drafts (before i stopped counting)!!

OK. All of us here have made mistakes in legal dispute - the important thing is to learn from the mistakes and get it right the next time. So for future reference - 1. Not a good idea to ignore a Letter of Claim. The PPCs are on the look out for people who don't reply, as they think there is a good chance that the person won't reply to the claim form either, gifting them an easy default win. 2. Not a good idea to fail to send a CPR request. As they usually don't reply this gives you a chance to wallop them in your WS for not producing the correct legal permissions. 3. Not a good idea to play your cards so early in your d

You need to speak to the student welfare people. They aren't the people who decide if you stay or not, they should be there for students. HB

Thanks for the feedback. I have added the new paragraph 47 to my version of the WS / court bundle as per the feedback. I won't be uploading an updated version of the WS / court bundle here, given there is no other changes needed to the previous WS / court bundle uploaded yesterday (post #244). I will now get 2 copies of the updated final WS / court bundle printed and ready to post to the Court and to Evri. For reference, the date for filing the bundle is 24th May at the latest - this is 14 days before the hearing date of 7th June. I'll keep you all updated on if Evri reaches out to me before the trial date.

Hi. I think you already know that stealing isn't the way to live in the UK. You could ask for advice from the student welfare people at your university who should be able to tell you about how to deal with this and refer you to legal advisors if you need them. HB

thread title updated please complete this:

But, but, but... They've already sent you a letter of claim, which said... "Should the outstanding balance not be settled by 20/04/20204 we will commence legal proceedings against you without further notice."

Retain all your paperwork with regards to trying to settle...come back if /when you actually receive a Letter of Claim or Letter before Claim. Edit I see they have actually issued one... come back if they issue a claim. . .

If you were to try try to reach a settlement it must be done preferably before allocation of the claim or better still before they issue the claim.

Nick - point taken. Thanks. New version attached with changes in red. wv600 - I would send it off ASAP, and yes by e-mail both to the court and to UKPC. That's because the point is not really to convince the judge, in fact judges don't have to accept SWSs and may well disallow it. The point is to turn the heat on UKPC. The sooner UKPC get it the sooner they will wet their underclothes and the sooner they will discontinue and the sooner you will be able to plan your holiday activities ... well that's the idea anyway Supplemental WS with suggested changes - version 2.pdf

Topics merged please do not start further topics on the same issue Yes it would be registered as a CCJ. .

Hi. Yes, to do this properly you should send a Letter of Claim and give them two weeks to sort things out. Be ready to file the claim on MCOL on Day 15. The experts should be along soon with further advice. HB

It fizzled out, they kept delaying the complaints process. In the end I believe they stopped charging me for a bunch of services, unsure if it was deliberate or a mistake so I stopped bringing it up. Ultimately we bought a house and moved out.

I can't imagine that EVRi will want a judgement against them on this and based on this argument. I reckon you have a better than 90% chance that they will try to reach out to you before the trial date. They know that what they are doing is thoroughly wrong and dishonest and contrary to law. They are following this thread, of course – and they've already seen this witness statement. I imagine that they are scrabbling around trying to understand how they can extricate this without using too much face. I suppose they will make an offer to you which is a few quid short of your claim in order to say that they were justified in being stup

New paragraph 47 – If you insert that – and move everything else down then I think you are good to go. Well done on going through the mill on this but it looks pretty good

As Dave has already said they sent out their PCN too late That means that Met can no longer pursue the keeper as the charge cannot be transferred from the driver now to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable to pay so it is best not to appeal so Met cannot glean from the appeal who may have been driving.

I thought you had missed the defence part and now only the Witness Statement is due. That should give them a surprise when they see the keeper was not the driver, they do not know who was driving and their PCN does not comply with the Act. Oh dear I hope PE haven't started counting their chickens.

You can only get a CCJ if you lose the case and then stick two fingers up to the court and refuse to pay. Even in the very, very unlikely event of you losing, as long as you paid within the 30 days ordered by the court you wouldn't get a CCJ. But you've come here very late and we need the sticky filling in please.

Word files contain the writer's personal details, so I've converted the Word file in your post to PDF. Here is a new version with suggested changes in red. I've swapped stuff about. I think it makes more sense if you argue (a) the signs weren't there, then (b) even if they had been there the driver would have complied with the T&Cs shown. Supplemental WS with suggested changes.pdf

"I am slightly overwhelmed" That's natural mate, we have all been there, grab a brew and try to relax for a 10 mins and take on board what you need to do.

Hasn't been mentioned, but I assume the OP was detained and searched at some point? Did they have the legal right to do that with a minor?

SIomeone under 18 can be chased for a debt only if it's for something deemed as needed everyday (mobile phone contract, food etc) I think this will be a legal grey area and yet another reason to ignore DWF

means nothing. just trying to kid people its going up some kind of chain. get reading a good few threads here each day. dx

please keep all contacts you might make with others in the open, don't engage in personal private messaging out of sight. you never know who people really are. although it is correct there is weight in numbers, legally in the UK there is no such thing as a class action.

for your notes...

I know I've posted a few similar threads over the years, so at the risk of boring you all ... Work today took me to the industrial area of the Italian town of Rovigo. The town is infamous among locals as being impossible to find a parking space in. Logically enough that makes businesses in the centre which have a car park a target for abusive parking, On the way I saw that something that was a disused building last time I passed that way has now been transformed into an Aldi, so I stopped to stretch my legs, kill time and pick up some odds & ends. To my surprise a barrier blocked my way, which is strange in Italy. I pressed

i think it boils down to there is an obvious NEED for it where that car park is. in the uk there never was and there still remains NO NEED for any need for private parking companies. the original roots, which go back very many many years, date to a time whereby a VERY small number of individuals dreamt up a money making scheme and began offering a service to private land owners, to clamp and tow vehicles that were not permitted on their 'private land' as they were trespassing. after many years it was eventually outlawed as 99% of the land was NOT GATED. thats when the PPC 's had to change tact... dx