Jump to content

mamothd

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    19
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mamothd

  1. I paid over £400 for a 300 different tests on a Porsche Panamera with RAC inspection service. I bought the car as RAC saw nothing major wrong. Less than a week on and a garage has found 2 major faults: 1. several hoses need replacing 2. more crucially, they say the gearbox will need replacing soon, at around £5000. They can tell because when you reverse it it takes time to build momentum. Surely RAC should have spotted both of these faults. How do I go about getting RAC to pay to for these repairs?
  2. I have received an enforcement letter for a civil debt in the County Court. The problem is we don't know the person it's addressed to. The named person has never lived at my address. I have no idea how the plaintiff got my address, but they have made a mistake. I can prove via council tax and electoral records that only me and my wife have ever lived here. We are elderly and are very worried. I don't know if it's a scam, but I've looked up the enforcement company and they appear to be genuine. How can I stop them chasing me for a county court judgeent which has nothing to do with me?
  3. I bought 2 separate bulky items from Ebay. They were sent by royal mail tracked.I am the recipient. The signature on each item is "sp1" Apparently this is their code for 'nobody at home to receive". If noone was home they should have left with a neighbour (they didn't do this) or returned to sender. I believe they were left outside my door, where presumably thy were stolen. This is negligence. All I know is I've paid for items I haven't received.I'm now in a vicious circle because royal mail say it's not their responsiliblty. Ebay are not interested as the items show as delivered. I've contacted the sellers.One hasn't replied at all, and the other no longer has the postage receipt, so he can't claim for me. Why should he anyway? it's not his fault royal mail have acted negligently. I've been reading it's very hard to sue royal mail... something about tort? But i'm not prepared to let this stand.they have to take responsibility. can someone please tell me exactly the correct name and address of Royal mail I need to sue. This has become a matter of prinicple.
  4. thanks the ticket was timed 2 minutes after the time displayed on the badge clock. presumably this is too soon to give me time to drop off my passenger,so i have a good defence. can you suggest some good wording in my defence letter?
  5. thanks reverse is here: http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh49/mammothd/pcnreverse.jpg in fact, it did say no loading, so not sure if i have a defence. I did have a blue disabled badge displayed, but ,again, not sure if this would help.
  6. can anyone tell me if there are any legal reasons I can appeal this PCN.Is it legally worded ok? eg. date of issue, etc. http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh49/mammothd/pcn.jpg
  7. thanks adamna. It's true, what does "in " windscreen mean? especially since I recall a lot of tickets have glue on the back which instruct you to affix on to a window. The problem is, the adjudicator is funded by the councils themselves, so are not really on the motorist side. do i really want to risk a whole morning off work and another £40 when I've no more than a 50/50 chance.
  8. I'm saying it was defective if the instructions had been to afix "on " the screen. Obviously "in " the windscreen would be taken to mean it's dsiplayed so someone outside the car can read rthe ticket through the windscreen. I bought a parking ticket today,BTW, and it had no glue on it.Clearly, these tickets are not designed to be stuck on to glass.They are,presumable,meant to be put on to a dashboard. Although I did so, it was just my bad luck it turned over after I walked away, and I'm resolved I'll have to pay it.
  9. Just thought of something which,in fact, harms my case. The ticket says "display in windsreen". It doesn't say "ON" windsreen. Therefore they'll argue it deliberately doesn't have glue on it because it's only supposed to be displayed in a way that the warden can read it through the windscreen. This would clearly include the dashboard. From this the adjudicator would argue it wasn't defective as an instrument, and it was my responsibility to ensure it was displaying correctly.
  10. Thanks a lot for your help.The ticket was upside down, so you couldn't read the front of it From reading the LB Wandsworth case I'm 99% sure I have no chance. That chap did what was asked. ie. stuck it in the windsceen first, and still got refused the appeal. I didn't actually do what was asked. I put it on the dashboard because there was no glue on it. I daresay an adjudicator would say I should carry sellotape with me! Interestingly, I NEVER put a ticket on the windscreen.I always display it on the dashboard. So strictly speaking I could always be done for not displaying in the proscribed manner.But I never have been before (of course, in those cases the ticket was at least perfectly readable by a warden). My best defence is the ticket has no glue on it at all, so is a defective instrument. But maybe a hostile adjudicator would suggest I'd rubbed off all traces of glue after the event to make my case look better (I haven't done this,of course). What do you think of that defence? I think this is important because there must be hundreds of cases like m ine every year.
  11. Had to display on the dash as there is no glue on the ticket. It fluttered to wrong way up after I walked away, and when I returned got a ticket from Westminster cos it wasn't displayed properly. My time is expensive, and I want to go all the way, but if I'm going to lose is it worth it? Does anyone have experience of this defence- they'll say it was my duty to check it was up the right way before I left the car. tragically, the ticket itself appears to be correct in every way, so a technical defence is pointless.
  12. so it looks like the fluttering ticket is my defence. As I said, there was no glue on the ticket, which is why I had to put it on the dash.But should I have checked it was the right way up before I walked away? Is it really worth defending? What would you do?
  13. so it looks like my defence is the fluttering ticket. There was , I repeat, no glue on the ticket, so I had to put it on the dashboard. But will TPAS say I should have checked it was displaying the right way up before I walked away? If so, is it really worth fighting? What would you do?
  14. I had read somewhere here that "date of notice" is not the same as "date of issue" in law.It said without date of issue on the front it's invalid. is that correct?
  15. I've just noticed the back of the pcn says "....,payment must be made within 14 days (including the date of issue of this penalty charge notice)..." so it does mention date of issue, but on the back.Does this make it valid, or do those magic words have tobe on the front?
  16. thanks g & m but if you look at atached pcn it doesn't have date of issue.or have I missed it? If it's missing des that mean it's invalid?
  17. thanks a lot hopefully, the pasting will work. http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh49/mammothd/ticket1-2.jpg http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh49/mammothd/t-2.jpg http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh49/mammothd/pcn11.jpg
  18. I'm trying to work out how to attach a scanned image here.Hope fully, soon you'll be able to see both sides of Westminster's PCN. i'm still not clear: does it have to have colour and/or date of issue to be valid? To me, it would be strange if Westminster's tickets are invalid.i mean, how little would it cost them to make the wording right, compared to the millions they get in fines? maybe I'm just being naive. Any help from an expert would be great.
  19. got a ticket from westminster today. Was displaying a valid ticket, together with my disabled badge. the ticket says display on windscreen, but there is no glue at all on it, so is impossible to stick on the windscreen. I mean no glue at all!! so displayed on dashboard, and the old wind thing happened after walking away. result is it was upside down. Attendant came and noted on his machine the ticket was valid when I collared him, after issuing a PCN. Technically it wasn't displayed correctly.But if there was no glue on it (and I'm keeping the ticket as evidence), is it legally valid? Is that a basis for a let-off? has anyone else got off with an upside down ticket (which was nevertheless a valid ticket)? Have written to them, but no doubt they'll reject.Is it worth going to adjudicator and risking my time and an extra £40? thanks Neil
×
×
  • Create New...