Jump to content


BankFodder BankFodder


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

1 Follower

About 1971clt

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Your post comes over very pedantic. I've admitted I've made an error I've never used the word outrage or outrageous. The space left for wheelchairs is blatantly relevant. If the distance left for a wheelchair to pass was under 1.2m width, the sign posts have therefore been but up incorrectly. No? Therefore I may have a case against the Council. If you can post an image of another street which has this lay out as a calming measure I'd look forward to seeing it. I've never seen chevron signs used at the entrance or exit of any side street.....except this one. I 've got no problems with calming areas at all - I'll repeat that. I DO NOT have a problem with councils reducing speed of traffic. What they should have used is yellow and white bollards so drivers can actually see these in the dark. By the way...Are you stating I'm a careless driver, Mr perfect? The kerb I had to reverse over (if you had read my post correctly) is only around 3 or 4 inches off the pole - I was parked on the right hand side of the road - reversing from there. However, I do like that you do agree with one point...that an incorrect sign may have been used. Cheers. councils don't need to have seen a clear history of people driving irresponsibly (you know, like myself) to spend tax payers money on putting poles in the middle of the road... .they just like to get their Government grants spent on anything before April. In other news.....I'm off...Byeeeee. oh, by the way.
  2. Hi I'm a little frustrated to say the least.. ..I've just made a drop off in a street in Newcastle upon Tyne (1.00am) - I noticed when I entered the side road that it was 2 way traffic but had calming area at the entrance/exit for one vehicle only to pass. It had 2 huge black and white "Sharp Deviation" or "Chevron" road signs on two black poles around 15 feet from the junction. I am pretty sure as this road is a normal road with no tight deviations that the wrong sign has been installed. I would assume when a chevron sign has been used it is informing motorists of dangers to tight bends (?) I was unfortunately distracted and forgot the road tethered into a calming area with exit for one vehicle. I parked the vehicle on the right hand side of the road. From that position, I then reversed - checked mirrors etc and haven't noticed the black pole (which is a foot into the road) as the street has extremely poor lighting (it was 1am and the road is nearly in darkness). I've caused major damage to the side of my car with damage done to the side bumper and rear quarter panel before it gets to the wheel arch. I am annoyed with myself but I'm equally annoyed that I can't understand the mentality of why the council has placed a Sharp Deviation sign on 2 black poles with each pole causing an obstruction on the path (for wheelchairs) and the road. It's baffling and I've genuinely can't remember seeing another road with this type of signage. I would like to assume the correct sign which should have been placed is the road would be the mounted yellow plastic signage (yellow and white plastic bollards with a blue arrows). There is also no coloured road surface to inform drivers its a calming area. I would like to know if I have a case to take legal action against the council for damage done to my vehicle. I've obviously made the error by not checking everywhere before moving but feel I have not been helped by the poor decisions of the Council. I have attached the files but will try to also add the photos to this thread too. Hopefully I'm reading this correctly.... I've just searched to see if there is a minimum width which councils are required to abide to for clearance for wheelchairs (as the pole is also cemented into the path). I've found this: The British Government have set a recommended minimum width, to be enforced by local Authorities. What is the minimum width? Answer: "1800mm on access routes to buildings, from bus stops or car parks with a deregation down to 1200mm around existing obstructions -'Manual for Streets 2' CIHT 2010". I do not believe the clearance is 1200mm and will check this tomorrow. If the width is less than 1200mm is the signage illegal? Thank you in advance for any help C
  3. Wow - ok...I'll inform him and tell him to read a few threads on here. Much appreciated and I'll update when required.
  4. Thank you for your replies. He is concerned that if he stops the £5 per month payment (which he is happy to pay as its zero percent APR) that they may "come after him" for the full amount. Do I write to confirm that I understand they have not been able to supply the correct information in the required time frame and that I require confirmation from them that the debit is now void (?) I think he would be happier with something in writing from them to say something along those lines. Thank you again C
  5. Cant understand why that is - just busy trying to sort out - thanks https://imgur.com/zBir2xS
  6. Hi My father has just received 2 letters today (21st September). One from Cabot - Their letter is dated the 14th September 2017 and electronically post marked. We sent the letters on the 6th with proof of postage. The letter is attached but the first line states "We currently do not have this information on file". Please inform me what letter I should reply with for my father. The next is from Mint. There is no date attached but is electronically post marked. The only information given to my father are all his statements over the last 12 years. There is no letter attached - only statements. Again, I would be extremely grateful for what I should do next. Thank you in advance C https://imgur.com/zBir2xS
  7. Letters sent - I'll post updates in the next few weeks hopefully. Thank you for links and advice.
  8. Many thanks for the quick reply - I'll look into this now. Thank you
  9. Hi It's been around a year but there's an update on my fathers account. He received a letter from Mint on the 18th August 2017 giving him "notice" of "assignment" of the debt to Cabot Financial Limited. This assignment was made on the 3rd July 2017 without informing my father. The letter states that Wescot will continue to mange the account on Mints behalf. Total debt owed £3033.23 (He has agreed to pay £5 per month - he is 70 and can only afford this). He has missed no payment dates. The letter states he should start paying Wescot Credit Services Limited with a new Sort Code and account number. It states that any payments made direct to Mint will be made to Wescot on his behalf but it would be important that the changes are made asap. My question is how do I reply to this letter. Do I state that he does not agree with the new agreement. His debt is wit Mint - not Wescot. Does he state that Wescot must have paid his debt and that he now owes Mint zero ?? Any comments are greatly appreciated. I've told him to continue paying the £5 per month to Mint until I get a reply on here. Thank you I've just noticed there is a second letter attached to this from Wescot. It actually states that Wescot (Cabot Financial) have bought the "account" held with Mint. It states on the letter the debt is £3018.23. I assume they have purchased the debt - I won't be contacting them and I'll inform my father to have no dealings with them. As someone pointed out last year, I might inform them that he can now only afford a £1 per month !
  10. Thanks for reply....I've changed a bit but my father seems happy with most of it. Cheers
  11. How does this sound....cheers Dear Sir As you are fully aware, I have received a letter from “Wescot Credit Services Ltd” (a Debt Collection Agency) – with the letter dated 8th July 2016. The letter informs me that my account is now being “managed (?)” by this Debt Collection Agency. It also confirms that I will continue to pay my Mint (Royal Bank of Scotland) Visa bill the total sum of £5.00 (five pounds) on a monthly basis with the next payment due on the 28th July. It also states clearly that “if” an agreement has already been setup with Royal Bank of Scotland (which it has), that I can leave all instructions for payments in place (which they are – by standing order). I am fully aware of my rights and would recommend that you continue to agree to your side of our agreement and continue to accept my offer of £5.00 (five pounds) per calendar month. As a 68 year old, retired man, I have little income with my only income being my state pension. I am quite prepared to confirm my income and outgoings with the usual expenditure form that Mint supply every year or so. What I am extremely surprised about but certainly not worried about in the slightest, is the extortionist amount that Mint (Royal Bank of Scotland) believed I could afford to pay on my July Statement. This laughable figure of £1628.17 was demanded and expected to be paid by the 22nd August 2016. I would suggest that you take a look at my agreement with your company and you will find that I have not broken any agreement and will continue to pay £5.00 (five pounds) per calendar month. You are welcome to take me to court if you believe I have broken any agreement with you but I assure you that this could and would almost certainly result in any judge reducing my affordable payments to you. At present, I am actually struggling to pay your company £5.00 per month. I would finally like to inform you that I will not be replying to any letter/phone call to the Debt Collection Agency (Wescot) you have so kindly appointed to “manage my account” and I would recommend you inform of that. I fully understand that a Debt Collection Agency has no legal power at all – I’ll repeat that last bit... they have no legal power at all. If Wescot Credit Services Ltd decide at any stage to enter any part of my land a cost/invoice of £1000.00 (one thousand pounds) will be charged to them directly. My so-called “debt” is with Royal Bank of Scotland and I will continue to deal directly with the contact information I have with Royal Bank of Scotland. If I receive any threatening letters or phone calls from Wescot Credit Services Ltd, I will take this as harassment and court action will pursue. I would recommend to inform them of that as you obviously have direct dealing with them. In conclusion I am happy (at the moment) to continue paying Mint (Royal Bank of Scotland) £5.00 (five pounds) per calendar month to pay my “debt” which at present stands at £3078.23 as of my July 28th 2016 balance. Thank you
  12. Thanks for that - I must be cracking, up but how do I edit a previous post? Thanks
  13. Thanks for information - yeah, I made a slight error..he IS paying by standing order which is excellent and good you've confirmed it's the right path. Looking at the posts here I think a letter is going to go to Mint and explain that if they require a recent expenditure form - it can be supplied along with the fact no payments have been missed and the agreement of paying them £5.00 per month has not been broken. I'll maybe post on here first before I send, just to confirm I've got all the "i's" dotted and "t's" crossed. Thanks
  • Create New...