Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 24/06/21 in all areas

  1. I will definitely make sure everything's in writing. Thanks for your help guys
  2. I think a serious point is being missed with regards to the deed or contract. This is from PoFA 2 [1] giving a breakdown of the descriptions and the one that is important to your case is waht is a relevant contract "relevant contract” means a contract (including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land) between the driver and a person who is— (a)the owner or occupier of the land; or (b) authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land; I am assuming that a contract does exist where a director from VCS has signed but the fact that two witnesses have not signed the document means the deed has not been "validly executed" according to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44 -and I would include the URL since not all Judges may be aware of contracts and the necessity of correct signatories being present. It follows on from there that as there is no valid contract there can be no contract between VCS and the motorist. So even if "no stopping" could form a contract [which it cannot], it is immaterial. There is no valid contract end of. I would then go on to say that a company completing as many contracts as VCS must know that there is no contract at EMA and so to issue PCNs is bordering on fraudulent. In addition under their CoP they have signed to say that they comply with all Laws and Regulations relating to parking. It calls into question there ability to receive data from the DVLA. As per Lord Neuberger Parking Eye V Supreme Court "And, while the Code of Practice is not a contractual document, it is in practice binding on the operator since its existence and observance is a condition of his ability to obtain details of the registered keeper from the DVLA. In assessing the fairness of a term, it cannot be right to ignore the regulatory framework which determines how and in what circumstances it may be enforced". The Judge should throw out the case there and then. It fails one of the first criteria in PoFA. You should be asking for exemplary damages for putting you through all this knowing that they had no contract and no case. And to stop them carrying on the scam.
  3. The mediator was very good and did not put any pressure on to settle and stuck to the facts but looking back Hermes mediation tactics were to deny everything making it sound like you didn't have a case then offer the amount minus the £25 so my focus went on the amount rather than counter arguing the facts of the case. If that makes sense. i didn't like principal that i was going to be paying the costs of bringing it to court by myself as they suggested that it was my choice to do so when every attempt to speak to Hermes about this previously was met with silence or links to packlink. Also if they were that sure i didn't have a case why were they so willing to offer almost the full amount from the off but i wasn't going to argue over £12.50.
  4. If you have a look around at the used car problems that we have on this website, most of them have at least one element – paid by cash or paid by bank transfer, cheap car, bought a substantial distance away. We don't how much your car is, but to require a 10 hour return journey is really quite excessive. And I gather that you haven't even seen it. Although to a great extent you are protected by the fact that you have bought it on finance, even dealing with the finance company under the consumer credit act can be problematic because we are finding that mostly they are extremely uncooperative to the point of being obstructive. Here's just one example where there is a finance agreement in place and here is another And there are many more cases where people have bought cars at ridiculous distances from their home. You say that just because it's close to you doesn't mean it's a good deal. Does that mean to say that because it's five hours away from you, it must be a good deal – and you haven't even seen it? Have you factored in what you are going to do if you have some problem in the next two or three or four months – or within the next 12 months and you have to return it to the dealer to be repaired and then go back home while you wait for the repair to be carried out and then to go back down again and collect it and bring it back home. I have to say that I'm a bit impressed the dealer actually wants you to see the thing before you collect it. Most dodgy dealers wouldn't so that's one good point in their favour but still you are taking a huge risk. I don't know what difference you think a warranty makes. A warranty simply serves to distract you from your statutory rights and give you the impression that you have got some protection which you wouldn't have otherwise. Warranties are by and large a con trick intended to give the impression to some naïve purchaser that they are getting some extra protection or some extra value as part of the purchase. Wait and see what happens if you have to enforce the warranty. Ha ha. The best thing you could possibly do is exercise your rights under the cooling off period and cancel. Buy something closer to home. If you don't, then the chances are that you will be back here again in a few months asking for help because the car is defective and you are having difficulty getting it sorted out. Already you seem to be having some kind of dispute about the difficulty of going to collect it. And it hasn't even gone wrong yet. My site team colleague above is absolutely correct, unless it is written into the contract the car does not have to be delivered to you. You have to collect it. Don't you see the warning signs already?
  5. It was bound to happen, wasn't it? UK phone companies only dropped roaming charges because the EU told them to, IIRC.
  6. Well done. Some caggers have found that mediation was quite difficult but it sounds as if you had someone impartial. HB
  7. Thanks for the update. Not a bad result so well done. Hermes deceiving everybody again about your right to sue them under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act. Did you tell that to the mediator? Hermes are fundamentally dishonest in respect of this third-party rights issue.
  8. OK, I've tweaked things just a little bit (the odd typo, the odd word changed to make it flow better, etc). However, I've moved the paragraphs around and given each section a heading to try to make your legal arguments clearer. There may be more formal ways to phrase the headings, see what the other regulars think. You'll have to change the exhibit numbers. I've added a paragraph 16 in red saying Simon is claiming £50 legal costs yet he is representing himself (with an extra exhibit). I think paragraph 6 needs to be split into two, RTA and bye-laws, and you need to lay it on thick about the bye-laws. Indeed give the bye-laws their own section. Apologies if I've knackered the lay-out! However, see what the others think too. WS version 3.pdf
  9. Watch out for pressure now when the dealer attempts to recover the purchase by offering to deliver the vehicle. Stand your ground – but also appreciate that this problem has been caused by you
  10. @Titchytitch sound good. But wait to see what happens after the Police interview him. This may or may not change how the Police are dealing with this. Cautious hopeful approach that this will be resolved is probably best, as until the Police actually charge him with offences, there is possibility this saga will keep going.
  11. Hi Scruffy, DX is right in that you need to try to get the CCard refund reversed immediately on the basis you were wrongly told you owed fees and late fees that were NOT payable. Tell the CCard provider the payment was made based of threats made by the gym's admin company about how much you owed. Let us know how you get on with the CCard Co and ignore the gym and/or their admin company. The 12 month agreement should not have been extended because the gym was closed due to Covid - not your fault, or your problem.
  12. its not an agreement as they say... you signed nothing.., it's a contract and there are no gym contracts that can vary the industry standard of 1 months cancellation, just read a few john lloyds threads here... the 12mts is not a valid term, you don't have to stay that long, you can cancel giving 1 months notice , i'e ideally your cancel and allow one more payment, you most certainly do not have to pay all 12 and most certainly no-one can charge any 'late fees' they are unfair and unlawful under FCA Rules and i notice debitfinance are regulated by the FCA tooo...so are breaking their rules and need reporting. don't get had get that payment cancelled now.. else you'll never get the money back. nothing anyone can do to you. get hat payment blocked or request it back. ring your card company now next time stop talking to all these scammers.
  13. I see 'Roam like at Home' is Brexiting led by O2 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-o2-data-roaming-charges-b1871484.html and Boris is passing 'laws to legitimise it: "The government says it has passed legislation to protect holidaymakers, including a £45-a-month limit on any charges for using mobile data abroad before having to opt into further use" New brexit mantra More of the costs - none of the benefits
×
×
  • Create New...