Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×
Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

silverfox1961

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    21,068

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    23

 Content Type 

Everything posted by silverfox1961

  1. silverfox1961
    Hi and welcome to CAG I got your PM but it's much better to advise on the main forum. In the PM you said that it was a permit holder only site. As such it's likely that this will be trespass rather than contractual however please give as much info here so that we can assist better.
  2. silverfox1961
    On the assumption that the OP is from India and is in the UK, this should be reported to ActionFraud. As for getting back anything. I would say that the money has gone.
  3. silverfox1961
    I have no idea why I know this but... If a company is registered with a regulator in one member of the EU, they are allowed to use cross border trading which is why there will be nothing on the FCA website. We would need to learn Dutch and look at Hollands register of companies. I have also found a way to link a Daily Mail article without feeling too dirty http://tinyurl.com/y7mvo8rs
  4. silverfox1961
    As the police were not involved at the time the offence was brought to your attention, it's highly unlikely they will do so. The letter you have clearly states there is a nil value for stolen goods/points so how could the police do anything with a no value claim. I have not heard of any case that was passed on to DWF or RLP where the police have got involved after the event and it's been a few years as well. Worrying over what 'might' happen is doing you no good whatsoever whereas knowing what 'WILL' happen should assist your thinking. DWF Will continue to send letters. Once the letter process is complete DWF WILL stop writing to you. What MIGHT happen is that they may try and use the debt collection route and use a DCA to contact you which means nothing. DCAs have less power over you than I do. By paying DWF does not stop any police proceedings IF they have been started. We nor you know whether any action has been started by the police and DWF can't pass the details on to them. Sainsburys could but they are likely to consider the matter closed as you have resigned. MY opinion is that the police will never get involved so it won't do you any harm by ignoring DWF
  5. silverfox1961
    Oh dear, I am no expert and I doubt you will find any experts on Binary Options on CAG as it is a speciality industry. Binary Options are a very high risk trading operation and you accept that you could lose some or all of your investment, This is from their web page 100 Pall Mall are serviced offices and it's likely that there are no actual employees there. Just a message taking service. As much as I hate to tell you this, the Daily Mail has an expert who has warned of this type of trading before. I can't bring myself to actually put a link here as it would make me feel dirty but if you find the Daily Mail website and then search for Tony Hetherington, you will find lots of other sorry cases just like yours.
  6. silverfox1961
    I agree with DX. If police action were to be considered that is a different ball game. DWF have no authority to pass the case on to the police. Any action should the police get involved is separate to what DWF are claiming for and if you were unlucky enough to have a visit from the feds, this would not stop DWF claiming their pound of flesh. Ignore them. They may be a firm of solicitors but their power over you is nil.
  7. silverfox1961
    Hi and welcome to CAG. Employee theft 'may' be treated as a more serious case than shoplifting crimes as this is because of the abuse of trust. Whether Sainsburys will take action against you is unsure at the moment. DWF can do no more than send you letters with veiled threats but actually mean nothing. Listing security costs as a reason for chasing you is neither here nor there as even if the store security was involved, they are paid to do it and this cost is part of the stores base costs. The role of the manager is to oversee all the running of the store and that should include employee theft however if that is NOT the case then theoretically they could bill you for his time but in my opinion that is unlikely. I would ignore everything from DWF however if you get anything from a solicitor titled 'Letter Before Action/Claim' come here first and let us see the letter.
  8. silverfox1961
    As I have said previously, CRS are a fairly unknown company so they may only have a three letter process but I would expect more. I doubt they will get a debt collector involved as there aren't many 'pay on result' companies around so you may be right. Sit tight.
  9. silverfox1961
    As with the previous case involving body worn cameras, Channel 5 tried all ways to get around it and the same applies in this case. They must have hoped that by providing a lengthy response, they would baffle OFCOM. They were having none of that. What I would like to see OFCOM doing now is to go back and examine all the 'not upheld' cases and find out whether the BWC were the property of DCBL or the program makers. I wouldn't be at all surprised if more similar cases came to light. I may just ask OFCOM that question.
  10. silverfox1961
    Today, OFCOM has upheld another privacy case by these chancers. https://www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom/latest/bulletins/broadcast-bulletins#accordion__target-88630 It's one hell of a long read but well worth it. The decision starts on page 27. I can see yet another case Channel 5 will have to pay out. This story is again, DCBL using body worn cameras issued to them by the production company meaning that all of the images and sound belong to them and not DCBL. I can see there being more cases in the future especially ones recorded after the new GDPR rules came into play.
  11. silverfox1961
    AND can you fill this in please. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?462118-Have-you-received-a-Parking-Ticket&p=4883055&viewfull=1#post4883055
  12. silverfox1961
    Hi and welcome to CAG. I have had to unapprove your attachment as it contains all your info. Could you please hide all names, addresses, registration numbers, reference numbers aand any bar codes and upload as a pdf please
  13. silverfox1961
    Wow! Just checked and CEL (trading as starpark in this case) are members of the BPA so it beggars belief that they could get the NTK so wrong. I have googled the basement entrance of the Debehams and seen the signs on entry. Payment must be made within 10 minutes of arrival but nothing about what would happen if you were 11 minutes. I'm guessing you had to put your registration number in at the P&D machine. As far as I can tell, the signs at the entrance do not convey any sort of invitation to treat although the images were taken in May 2017 and they may have changed in the interim so please get pictures. There is a tiny sign next to the pedestrian access sign which I cannot get a close up of. Even if it does state terms, it is too small to notice, especially if you turned left as you would have missed it. As others have said, it is CEL who have to take action but not until they have sent a Letter Before Action/Claim. You have an absolute defence to this as the NTK is out of time and you are under no obligation to name the driver. Anyone in this country can drive your car with your permission. The fact that they haven't mentioned PoFA is grounds for complaint to the BPA but I think they will just refer you back to CEL and go through their complaints procedure.
  14. silverfox1961
    Not sure I agree with that. IZAL toilet paper is even better than a letter from DRP
  15. silverfox1961
    Hi and welcome to CAG. I echo my colleagues advice here. CAG does not condone theft of any sort and believe that there is only one body to deal with these situations. The Police. For the unknowing, the letters you will receive will be written in a way that could make you think that you must pay this 'fare'. NO! This is purely an invoice asking you to pay. It's just the same as me asking you to pay me for my time. Read the letters at least twice and understand that they have been worded to imply that if you don't pay, you will be taken to court. Again-NO- this is just pseudo-legal-speak. So as the others have said, ignore then ignore some more but remember, we are here to assist you, not the likes of RLP who ,in my opinion should never be in the business at all.
  16. silverfox1961
    Hi Have they given you a link where you can view the pictures. Showing a picture of some non descript car means nothing. There must be a close up of the windscreen, taken at a normal persons height rather than lower down that it hides the P&D ticket. Was there no parking ticket applied to the windscreen on the day? The BPA website shows that this company does self ticketing and normal ticket (one issued by an employee) There is nothing to show that they use ANPR systems. Ignore? Appeal? Dunno! I would but then I like causing trouble
  17. silverfox1961
    Let me make this clear from the outset. I am no expert. All I can do is pass on my daughters experience with her ex. My daughter ended up needing solicitor advice and representation. As she hadn't reported her ex to the police for mental abuse, she couldn't claim legal aid so had to find a brief who would engage with a payment plan. If your ex is causing you mental issues, make a report to the police. They may pay him a visit. Just keep the proof. Voice messages, emails, texts etc. Arguing over childcare should never happen but some people use them as a stick to beat you with. Mediation is a good idea-IF he is willing to participate as this is cheaper than taking court action. As your children are now able to make decisions for themselves, could you discuss with them what they want in greater detail than you already have. Your ex should be responsible for maintenance as he is the absent parent and if he is working then he should be paying. I don't think it matters that he has them at weekends. If you cannot agree sums then the CSA it is although (the last I heard) they will charge your ex 20% for their overheads and you 4%. This is from a couple of years ago so things may have changed. Just a thought, if the police do get involved, they may be able to deter him from calling you and sending messages and this may work without you going to court. I'm not sure you could get legal aid either as you 'own' your own home. If push comes to shove, you may need to take court action to stop him behaving like a complete idiot. If he truly wants to get more access than he does, let him take the action first. Sorry I can't be more helpful. ps. My daughters ex is still an idiot and leaves his youngest son (11) home alone for hours whilst he goes to work while the older one doesn't like going over that much anymore and as for maintenance-Hah-what a joke
  18. silverfox1961
    Still not that happy with this company however, they did do a partial refund. They calculated how many miles my daughter had travelled and costed that out at 25p per mile. She did a lot of miles before the car went kaput and as a result, they repaid £900 which is £600 less than what we paid. As my daughter is very busy (4 kids, training to work with a nursery and a partner) we decided to accept it and move on. She has managed to get another motor with the assistance of bank of dad! The exact amount she now owes me is £1260 and I won't be letting her off-this time! I just need to put off dying for a while longer as my funeral fund is seriously depleted When I get around to it, I will leave a less than generous review of them.
  19. silverfox1961
    Hi and welcome to CAG. This is the second case I have seen where Primark have involved the police and both times the value of goods stolen were above £50 so this seems to be their policy which (to me) is the better option than passing the details onto RLP. Unfortunately, Primark do both! The police AND RLP. Two wrongs do not make a right as the saying goes. You did wrong but by Primark passing this on to RLP, they too did wrong. On CAG, we are all for getting the police involved and stopping civil claims altogether as these so called costs, do not exist except in the mind of RLP. The store got the goods back so no loss there. Security are paid whether they catch anyone or not so there could be no loss there either so boo hoo to RLP. I would say that it is possible that you may be 'invited' to the police station to give an account of yourself and explain why you made the choices you did. The police are humans (well, most of them) and will decide what to do. This could be an official warning or a fixed penalty notice or something else. We don't know. Ignore RLP and any of their lackeys pretending to be debt collectors. Neither RLP nor a debt collector will turn up at your door. Let us know if the police do get in touch. In the meantime, try and figure out the reasons you decided to steal. Not having money is not an excuse.
  20. silverfox1961
    Hi Firstly, can you complete this https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?462118-Have-you-received-a-Parking-Ticket&p=4883055&viewfull=1#post4883055 Was this at night?
  21. silverfox1961
    I am all for using alternatives to Palm Oil but as far as I know, Palm Oil is easy to produce whereas rapeseed and sunflower oils are a lot more work for less oil quantity. I have seen many programs where Palm Oil plantations have been planted in the habitat of Orang-Utans forcing them to be closer to each other which would bring conflict for territory. Unfortunately, money talks and the environment takes a back seat. I only use vegetable oil (sunflower oil leaves a funny taste) however, the oils I bought from Asda just says vegetable oil and doesn't list anything that can be related to palm oil
  22. silverfox1961
    Wot 'E' said
  23. silverfox1961
    Thanks for that info. This is the company http://www.cspmparking.co.uk/ They are not affiliated with KFC. They just manage the car park. As a member of the BPA, they are supposed to allow a minimum of 10 minutes grace period. Did your friend keep the receipt? What date did the NTK have on it? With windscreen tickets, if no response is received within the first 28 days then the company can apply to the DVLA for the keeper details. The NTK must be received between 29 and 56 days after the notice to diver has expired. If your friend chooses to appeal, he/she must not state 'I was driving' Only ever state 'The Driver'
  24. silverfox1961
    Hi and welcome. Rare as it is, Primarni on occasion don't bother with using civil recovery, possibly because they read some posts on here and realise that RLP have no authority to charge anyone and did the right thing and banned you although the clothes you had to buy was punishment. I happen to think that is a good thing. As for getting your details from your debit card. Nah! Banks will not give out your data to anyone without your permission and certainly not without the order of the courts so you can see it won't be worth it. If you really want cheap clothes, go to Asda. The quality is better than Primark.
  25. silverfox1961
    Hi I really don't understand the reasons for wanting to go into John Lewis or Waitrose unless you think it is a status symbol. The next step down is Sainsbury's (in my opinion) so go there instead. It's not rocket science!

Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...