Jump to content

silverfox1961

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    21,068
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    23

Everything posted by silverfox1961

  1. As this is VCS, make sure that anything from Excel be saved. (same company, different names) As it stands (and in my opinion) I would now ignore them and only respond to a Letter Before Action (Usually from Gladstones or BW Legal) They think they have you as a mug and will chase you right up to a possible court claim. The courts are very different to the unnamed adjudicator whom the IPC like to hide and will take all situations into account. It is likely VCS will file a court claim but fail to show up on the day as is their norm in trespass cases such as yours.
  2. Hi I have 'some' experience of what you are going through and things have changed a lot since my last involvement. It is very rare for children under seven to be assessed for any special need unless they have a known disability. A parent has the right to ask the school for a special needs assessment and if the school refuses, the parent can go to the Local Education Authority. Any assessment should be completed by a qualified psychologist and the results given to both the school and the parents. Once the assessment is done, the psychologist can set out what the needs are and the school sets this out an Individual education Plan (IEP) which should be complied with in full. If the LEA refuses an assessment, there is a tribunal that can be utilised. If a parent wishes to instigate legal action then a specialist must be involved. These forums only offer advice in what we would do and is nothing like legal advice.
  3. Can you fill this in to the best of your knowledge https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?462118-Have-you-received-a-Parking-Ticket&p=4883055&viewfull=1#post4883055
  4. You may have already read this but it can't hurt to have the link here https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486394-Parcel2go-Hermes-lost-goods-**small-claim-issued-***-WON***&p=5112242&viewfull=1#post5112242
  5. Letter Before Action first. Give them 14 days to pay up then when they ignore this, on the 15th day file papers on the MCOL site. You can register with the site in advance. Companies like P2G don't want their terms and conditions questioned by a judge and they may just decide to settle. This has happened previously in other cases.
  6. I'm assuming this is the site in question. https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5656307,0.1770434,3a,82.7y,316.01h,103.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s00sKtrlcN_Lgc4OYlAgRlA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 I notice there is a sign directly in front of the entrance however, it isn't lit so at the time you visited, it's likely that it was dark so could not be seen. At the other entry, there is a sign on the wall but again, unlit. As far as I can tell, there is only one other sign on the lamp post which is lit but the fact that the other signs are unlit, it would be reasonable not to look for this sign as the other two are basically in places where car headlights cannot illuminate. It's definitely worth visiting again to take pictures of the signs. (better done in the dark too) The one good thing about ECP is that they rarely do court having taken a total of one case this year. If any appeal is thought of, never state who the driver was and use the fact that the car wouldn't start as mitigation. They will reject any appeal out of hand but they must give a POPLA code to go for independent appeal and this is where the lack of visible signage can be argued.
  7. Hi, I have unapproved your images as you have left in the car reg. Can you remove that and repost.
  8. Not the first time I'm afraid. I have seen a couple of threads here. This one may just be the one you need. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?489035-Euro-car-parks-ANPR-PCN-MRH-Esso-meads-Purfleet-**WON-AT-POPLA**&p=5138735&viewfull=1#post5138735 It can be quiet on the weekend but hold fire for more advice. In the meantime, 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
  9. I would suspect that your landlady would have no idea what is going on. She has an address (I assume) for all her personal mail so it's likely she didn't get informed about the parking situation. Only she can answer that. What I would ask her is if she bought the home freehold rather than leasehold. That would put a different spin on things. Absolutely read your agreement to see exactly what it says about parking. I would also be asking the management company whether they have the right to unilaterally impose conditions on the land in question or whether they should have included you all before implementing the scheme.
  10. Well that spells it out quite clearly and I hate to say it but RLP have done the right thing (for a change) I agree that it's likely that Primark had no say in the matter and RLP played Judge, Jury and executioner although not in this case. I wonder if the statement on the GDPR applies to every case they deal with. I never thought that passing on personal details were lawful in the first place but that statement suggests that they wont. I think it's safe to mark this thread as resolved.
  11. You are correct. I was in Cite Europe last year and saw a C&A. Nowhere as big as the stores they had in the UK but big enough to hold a lot of stock. I also remember the Canda range of clothing they sold in the past. Whether they do now, I have no idea. Mind you, the Carrefour store at Cite Europe is massive. I usually travel by coach and depending on where you live it can be a cheap day out. I pay £50-55 (from Suffolk) but I save that when I go to Adinkere (tobacco alley)
  12. I would imagine from the opt out would mean that the parking space would not be covered so if an unauthorised car parked there, the parking company would take no action. I find it disingenuous of PPM to say they didn't receive the permit back. That is the answer most would give when they did get the letter but don't want to acknowledge it. My opinion only. Why would any company accept an opt out when it is a potential money earner from it. The parking scheme is supposed deter irresponsible parking, not the lawfully held parking space. You are under no obligation ever to display due to primacy of contract. You were there before they were!
  13. I am highly surprised at this. I would think the mentioning of the Oxford case wouldn't have made much difference as they could claim your case is different (it isn't) I bet you didn't record the call did you? Make sure that before you upload anything, you remove all personal details. I don't like the words 'suspended indefinitely' as it leaves them open to chase again but we will have to wait and see what comes out in the future. A tentative well done.
  14. Don't stress over this. They add those details in order to scare you into paying. Unlawful/illegal? No but highly unethical. They cannot share any of these details with anyone( apart from police and certain others) without your express written permission. They don't share those details to the police or anyone in law enforcement as they were not involved at the outset. Under the General Data Protection Regulations, they would need a damn sight more than your date of birth and your address to get any personal information about you and if say, the NHS did release confidential information about you, the NHS would be in serious trouble. People cannot just get your data since the law was tightened. For RLP to apply for the data, they would need your permission to do so which you won't give. Don't stress over data protection and keep on ignoring them. They will stop-eventually. RLP are like dogs with bones. They are reluctant to let go so it won't end soon but all you NEED to do is realise they have NO POWER over you-EVER!
  15. Hi, just my 2p Indigo will want you to settle this before any court action is mooted. If it goes to the Magistrates Court and found guilt (unlikely) Indigo gets nothing. This is the reason they want to worry you. As for the BPA being the follow on appeal if you get turned down by indigo is a non starter as the BPA don't do penalty appeals. I would let them spurt as many letters as they want. They can do nothing nor any debt collector they may choose to use. I don't see it going to court but it's always better to get your evidence together just in case.
  16. Hi, The link provided is for private parking tickets. Without seeing any tickets which I would hope you will upload in pdf format it's hard to say what is likely to happen. I'm also assuming this was a windscreen ticket. Was the company employed without any consultation? As it stands, you have supremacy of contract as you have an allocated space within your lease. You do not have to show any permits whatsoever if you wanted to. This parking company is a one man band and are quite likely to take court action (249 cases so far this year) You could appeal to them if you wish but as they are members of the IPC, they will likely reject your appeal and after that it's pointless appealing further to the IAS as they are an 'old boys club' who are on the side of the parking company. I would suggest that you appeal the first time and when they reject you, write back to them stating that should they wish to take court action, you will defend in full. Don't involve the IPC at all. Hold fire for other opinions and if you can, let us see the ticket (suitably redacted of personal details and bar codes/reference numbers)
  17. Hi and welcome to CAG Lesson learned I assume. That is the point of store security and it worked. What should never happen is a company chasing for an amount which earns them a profit. The store got the goods back so there is no loss whatsoever. The security staff are paid irrespective of how many people they apprehend so there is no loss there either. RLP make the allegation that each 'event' costs between £300 and £500 yet they have never been able to prove this. IF the store did lose that amount, they would take court action as it would be worth their time to do but as it isn't, they don't bother. There have been no county court cases taken by anyone since 2012 when a certain retailer, with the help of RLP got a good slapping for making up figures that do not stand up in court. Basically, do not write to them or even write on an envelope "Not at this address" and post it back. Just ignore every missive from them as they are totally powerless. They may pass on this 'Undisputed amount' to a debt collector but this is a waste of time as they have even less power than RLP. Do not ring them either. Treat them with the same contempt as junk mail. I would like to see the letter as I have an interest on the wording they use. If you can, upload a redacted copy of the letter as a pdf file. Oh yes, tell your friend about this thread.
  18. Hi I have just read on their site about breakable items and they state that televisions over 37" would not be covered. I can't see why that should be an issue. TVs under 37" are just as able to be broken by poor handling. Did the recipient send pictures of the delivered item? Did you give them 14 days to rectify (Letter Before Action). If so then it really means that your next step is the route mentioned by Bankfodder. You will need to find out the actual name of the company (DHL trading as Ipostparcels or similar) It may be at the bottom of any letters received but looking on the Companies House website shows masses of them. http://tinyurl.com/ybtqcr7b This is the closest I could find http://tinyurl.com/y73v6kea
  19. I have been looking at keeper liability and it is an interesting read. I looked at the KADOE contract from three years ago (not seen an updated one-yet) where it implies that if PoFA is not used, keeper liability can be argued. We have known this for a while. Within the KADOE contract is a part about keeper liability as defined in schedule four, paragraph eight which say's:- http://tinyurl.com/yddgdpkn As AS parking are members of the IPC and do not rely on PoFA (in the majority of cases) it seems to me that they have no right to apply for keeper details from the DVLA AS parking have taken 1 case to court this year. That speaks volumes
  20. Hi I have looked at Ashstead Lock but I can't see any 'Way' on Google Streetview. Does this site include Birmingham City Council Licensing and CityServe? If so, I'm looking at the right place. There are signs at the entry at each entry and they state 'Pre authorised vehicles and permit holders only' I cannot clearly view the on site signs so it might help if you could supply us with pictures. Euro Parking Services do take court action but there is no info on how many cases were won (by default or poor defence) and how many were lost They have issued around 7.5k tickets and taken court action on 56 occasions this year. The facts are that Euro have stated the completely wrong place and you can state this as such if it went to court. As Euro is a member of the IPC, they don't follow PoFA and as such can't rely on keeper liability but they will try if it got that far. They assume the driver is also the keeper and sue on that basis except you have no obligation to tell them who was the driver. What I have seen these companies do is not use PoFA except when it suits them, usually at court.
  21. I read on the news this morning that Quadrilla want to increase their seismic limits from 0.5 to 2.0 before work stops. Erm, sorry quadrilla, you agreed to these limits when you got permission and now that these quakes are having an effect on your activities, you want to move the goalposts. Even tremors that cannot be felt must be causing some damage below ground and my opinion is that if more quakes occur, the cumulative affect will be a large quake doing damage above ground. Then there is the well casings. If quadrilla fitted the casings with an expectation of minor quakes not affecting them, what would happen if the higher limits were imposed. I bet the casings would deform at the very least but what if the fracture? How will quadrilla deal with it? Answer; they won't be able to do so unless they withdraw all the drill tubes and inspect the entire length of the casings with remote cameras. They won't want that to happen as it will affect their bottom line. The government minister(s) involved with the approval must be in hiding at the moment.
  22. Hi I don't think it matters who the NTK was sent to. The fact that it sent it to the company rather than you means nothing. Sending it to the company outside of the 14 day limit on ANPR renders the charge invalid. I'm not that well up on parking and company/lease cars but it just seems logical to me that (not so) Smart Parking are too late to enforce.
  23. Morning, I got your PM but DX has answered your questions. RLP are more aggressive in the letter sending and will chase for what seems ages before they pass the account to a debt collector. NO DEBT COLLECTOR will knock your door. Simple reason why. RLP may pay a flat fee to a debt collector to chase you OR the debt collection form agrees a no win- no fee basis. Either way, it is not financially viable for the debt collection firm to organise a personal visit as the person who could visit will want paying for his/her time. There is another firm called DWF who do send three or four letters then they stop. It serves no-one to worry about what might happen. Only what will happen and nothing from RLP suggests that they will. Ignore, ignore some more and when you get worried, read back on this thread to what we have said. If you move house, don't tell them. It would then cost them more to trace you and it's likely that they won't bother.
  24. It should state clearly at the top of the letter to avoid confusion. It should also give you a time frame to respond before court action starts. I would look around other threads to see if there are any LBAs there
×
×
  • Create New...