Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

1 Follower

About Darset

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Thanks. And, yes, that point about not seeking to mitigate so-called losses is a good one as well, I'd say. In fact I see from the NTK that the claimed observation time then shown as "period of parking" is from 10:46:11 to 10:46:24, a whole 13 seconds! And as for parking companies, no, I have no illusions whatever about them as upright, ethical companies. That's all very helpful, so thanks everyone.
  2. Thanks. That link is interesting and although IANAL it does look as if this notice mentioned above is also a forbidding one rather than an offer in similar manner ("No parking at any time") to the cited one. Specifically it says "No parking or waiting in the roadway or on the footway/verge and any time. These Terms and Conditions apply to all motorised vehicles." It goes on to say that "a £90.00 fixed charge may be issued if you park or wait" [wrongly] ... [that] disabled badge holders are not exempt, comments on discounts and additional charges, that photog
  3. Thanks, both. I understand that double yellow lines on private land will not have the same meaning or restriction as on the highway but Napier, or whoever, is perfectly entitled to paint them on the ground and stick up notices prohibiting parking on the roadway. I don't think that's really the point as Napier has, and shows on its sign, a general prohibition on parking anywhere except in the designated spaces. And as for "penalty", no, Napier didn't use that, that's my wording, intentionally chosen. The issue, as I see it, is that Napier has issued some prohibiti
  4. Thanks. No, I've no illusions about IPC! In fact, though, the denial of the appeal was from Napier, not (yet, possibly) IPC.
  5. On 17 May my wife went to visit a business located at St Andrew's Industrial Estate, Bridport, DT6 3EX to collect an item waiting for her at a local business. Finding all designated spaces full and because she has a disability parking permit she stopped on double yellow lines on the roadway and duly displayed her permit. She was away for a short period, perhaps five minutes at most, r eturned to her vehicle and as she was about to drive off noticed an attendant photographing her vehicle. She spoke to the attendant to explain her actions and was apparently
  6. Thanks. That's very helpful. I'd expect that if anyone accepted the FOS recommendation then they couldn't go on to initiate a separate action. However, I wasn't sure whether the fact that FOS had cited Bank of Scotland would also effectively bar my sueing a legally different company, such as HFC. Reading the Evershed comment, although it doesn't specifically mention such a situation, suggests that it probably would. I might email the guy mentioned there and ask him that as a simple question.
  7. Thanks. Yes, that's pretty much my thinking as well.
  8. In September 2008 I asked Marbles, then both owned and managed by HFC Bank Limited, to make a balance transfer with plenty of time in hand to complete it and subsequent transfers. This was intended to clear another c/c account so that I could make a further transfer (on promotional rates) to a third c/c company to clear that balance in turn so that I could then take advantage of a promotional offer of 6.9% for life. Marbles screwed things up thoroughly not once, not twice but three times and compounded the problem at the last possible moment by dramatically reducing my credit limit so t
  9. Darset

    Darset v MBNA

    Fascinating! Just checked through the information sent to me by MBNA in response to my follow-up SAR and find a couple of letters apparently (but not in practice) sent to me from Sean Humphreys, Director of Customer Satisfaction, one for each account and each dated 14 July which say: " ... Thanks for getting in touch recently. We're pleased to enclose a copy of your most recent terms and conditions. Don't forget some of the other fantastic features of your account: [encouragement to use the internet] We'd like to take this opportunity to thank you for your custom and
  10. Darset

    Darset v MBNA

    Interesting letter from CapQuest, specifically from a Ms McEvoy who calls herself 'Qualilty Assurance Officer', just received: Dear Darset ... I confirm that the above referenced account is now in the process of being closed on CapQuest's system in order that it may be returned directly to MBNA. You will receive no further correspondence from CapQuest regarding this account. I thank you for taking the time to resolve this matter and inform CapQuest of your dispute with MBNA in order that this matter may be resolved. Please accept my apologies for any inconvenience this
  11. Darset

    Darset v MBNA

    Both accounts have now been passed to capQuest Debt Recovery, about three to four weeks apart, and cQ has been in touch with broadly similar letters. A suitably amended copy of the most recent one is attached as a PDF. I've replied (also attached) saying basically that I don't recognise their right to deal with the issue and advising them to return the stuff to MBNA. When I get a moment I'm going to research capQuest and see if there are links back to MBNA other than as supplier and customer. I've had a quick look on the Companies House web site and there's half a dozen or more capQu
  12. Darset

    Darset v MBNA

    Thanks cB. Yes, I'm pretty sure that there's information missing, probably both as regards telephone transcripts or recordings and information in respect of making decisions about managing the account. I spoke with someone from the ICO on Thursday and they recommended sending in this new information and adding it to the existing complaint. So the next thing is to go through carefully what MBNA has supplied, match it with what I judge they're likely to have (from internal and other evidence), establish clearly from the relevant Act what rights I have and duly send the fully annotated material i
  13. Darset

    Darset v MBNA

    Got the SAR data back earlier this month and am just going through it. Various things jumped out immediately so I've already checked with the ICO whose advice is to write again to them adding on further complaints to my earlier one. Firstly, MBNA said that as they'd sent me the data in December there was no need to repeat all that and so they're sending only new stuff. That's OK, I suppose, although I should have preferred to have had everything a second time so that I could do a close comparison to see if anything had changed. The ICO says that if a second request is made within a 'reaso
  14. Darset

    Darset v MBNA

    As MBNA is still trundling down its standard path and paying not the slightest attention to their present failure I thought it was time to put more pressure on them and so I've made a second SAR. This was posted on 18 May and duly delivered to their offices on 19 May, according to Royal Mail. Since sending my earlier SAR in November 2008 I've learned a lot more - from both here and the ICO website - and so on this occasion I sought to cover all angles permitted. In particular, I asked for audio recordings, manually stored material and personal data arising as a result of automatic processing o
  15. Darset

    Darset v MBNA

    I nearly followed your advice in my most recent letter to MBNA but in the end took a more conventional route. Received all in the same post, pretty much, a couple of letters one each from the competitors for the position of Head of Customer Assistance, Paul Campbell and Dee Dillistone, together with a Mickey Mouse default notice from someone else (various things wrong with it which I'll go into another time). Also had a call from another chaser, a more urbane one this time, Richard Phil(l)ips who at least had the confidence his colleagues lacked or perhaps was less ashamed working for MBN
  • Create New...