Jump to content

Sad sam

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sad sam

  1. Dear All Thank you for the advice/debate. As I promised I would update you on the appeal process. As you can see the Adjudicator covered my argument points, as unsympathetically as many on here advised (truth hurts). This hopefully will assist others in a similar position as to what works & what doesn't. This appeal concerns a PCN issued for being parked in a designated disabled person’s parking place without displaying a valid disabled person’s badge in the prescribed manner. M******** has raised a number of issues including the position of the disabled bays in this car park and the uneven surface over which disabled motorists have to walk. Whilst he may or may not be correct that these issues show a failure on the part of the Council to make reasonable adjustments for the disabled, in breach of the Equality Act 2010 and other legislation, I find they are not relevant to this appeal. M******** is at liberty to commence proceedings against the Council concerning these issues, if he chooses to do so, but the nub of this appeal is quite simple, namely that the contravention is being parked in a designated disabled person’s parking place without displaying a valid disabled person’s badge in the prescribed manner and this is a question of fact that has nothing to do with the position of individual disabled parking bays or the car park surface. A secondary issue, once the first point has been decided, is whether the signage on site is adequate to warn users of the disabled bays of the terms of use. The Disabled Persons (Badges for Motor Vehicles) (England) Regulations 2000 (SI 2000/682), as amended and the Local Authorities Traffic Orders (Exemptions for Disabled Persons) (England) Regulations 2000 regulate the parking for disabled badge users on-street. In off-street car parks, their place is taken by the individual Councils’ Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs). There is no requirement as to the provision of parking in the Equality Act 2010. However, public bodies must not, in the exercise of their functions, “do anything that constitutes discrimination, harassment or victimisation” of the disabled. M******** seeks to argue that disabled parking means that all disabled should be able to park in a designated disabled bay, regardless of whether or not they hold, or display, a valid blue badge. However, as the government documentation that he has produced sets out: – “There is no automatic entitlement to a Blue Badge for those suffering from a mental, cognitive or intellectual disability: autism is one of the conditions most commonly raised in this context. Entitlement will depend on whether the condition causes an individual to be unable to walk or have very considerable difficulty in walking” so it can be seen that the entitlement to a disabled badge is actually strictly defined and is not generally available to all of the disabled. M******** poses the question as to whether a disabled badge holder can make a mistake and is it reasonable to be fined for a mistake? The simple answer is that if a disabled driver fails to comply with the terms of the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) that regulates the parking in the car park that they are using, then even if that failure has been due to an innocent mistake e.g. displaying a valid disabled badge face down; knocking it on the floor when getting out of the vehicle, then a contravention will have occurred and a penalty will, in principle, be due to the Council. To deal firstly with whether or not a contravention occurred in this case, under the terms of Article 12 of the relevant TRO, if a vehicle is to be left in a designated disabled bay without a contravention occurring, it has to display a valid disabled badge in the relevant position, which is on the fascia or dashboard so that the front of the badges legible from outside of the vehicle. There is no dispute between the parties that that did not occur on this occasion. M******** argues that the Council has failed to make reasonable adjustment for the disabled in the requirement that a valid disabled badge has to be displayed. I am afraid I cannot accept this as if there was no requirement to display a valid disabled badge, anyone could park in a disabled bay and then argue that they had a disability, which would drive a coach and horses through the provision of disabled parking. I am satisfied that the badge on display in the vehicle when it was seen by the CEO had expired on expired 1st October 2016. I am also satisfied that having expired, the badge was no longer valid and that being so, that the contravention occurred. As to the second issue, namely the adequacy of the signage on site, the sign at the entrance to the car park shows a wheelchair symbol and then the wording “free parking for up to 3 hours”. It is not until a motorist gets to the Tariff Board that this wording is expanded so that it sets out that in order to have free parking for a disabled user, a “valid blue badge must be displayed”. It may be implicit within the use of the wheelchair symbol that a disabled badge is expected to be displayed, but the question is whether or not that is sufficient to warn disabled users that they cannot use the bays unless they have a valid disabled badge and display it in the vehicle. I do not believe that it is. It is a simple enough matter to add the words shown on the tariff board to the signage at the entrance to the car park and then there would be no room for misunderstanding. Having seen the signage as it stands, a disabled driver would be justified in thinking that he/she had no need to do anything else to comply with the requirements for the use of a disabled bay and would certainly have no need to go to the tariff board and see the conditions that that set out. In all of the circumstances, I am not satisfied that the signage on site was sufficiently clear and unambiguous and that being so, I also cannot be satisfied that the contravention occurred. That being so, this appeal must be allowed and M******** does not have to pay this penalty charge. Appeal allowed. I threw the all and the kitchen sink at this. I hope there is enough information within this thread to assist others. Good luck
  2. The Council refer to my descrition as agaist Traffic Management Act 2004 S78. As I read it the TMA ONLY covers "management of road networks" not OFF road! FYI http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=72053947 I look forward to your objective comments.
  3. Thank goodness back on track with sensible meaningful debate. I totally agree with your sentiment and position. Separately: Is it reasonable to go to the shops & demand you return home to get the badge you forgot to bring with you, when disability means it is a struggle to get to the shops in the first place? Or to just pay up? Waste of bandwidth? Or fraud prosecution for displaying a BB? Some of the vitriol spewed by some posters has been disgusting. Others in a similar position will read this and be so disheartened. Some with sever financial issue & some see it as a cash cow for middle men. Or is it a fairer situation that were you forgot to bring your badge, or forgot to display it, that the legitimately issued PCN is revoked upon proof of a valid BB? Seems like a reasonable adjustment. Take heart - The Equality Act takes precedence over any 'contractual' term. If you are unfortunate to be in a position whereby you can legitimately park in a disabled off-road car park, with a valid up to date BB & get a ticket for not displaying it, dont worry. I will post the outcome once my case is reviewed at the appeal stage.
  4. On another site I have found specific references to applicable acts & presidential legal cases. I knew I was in the right. The Equality Act takes precedence over any 'contractual' term. As the judge stated the Operator had a legal duty to make a reasonable adjustment' for a genuine disabled person, that an Operator's terms & conditions to display a Blue Badge would circumvent the Equality Act 2010. Its a shame this threat was hi-jacked. If knowledgeable people had input it would have been done & dusted on page 1.
  5. With out those that challenge equal rights we would have none. Us disabled .... OMG. Sorry I do not believe your fable. Learn the definition of fraud. Its my badge, no fraud. If there are Equal rights to protect Disabled persons, how then have I done anything wrong. You write like a keyboard warrior. You are totally unbelievable.
  6. So eloquent. Clearly you have not read my first post. OMG talk about going of topic. I have a BB, so how do I relate to your solicitor friend.
  7. Did that as I stated & got nowhere, hence I asked for further advice. Its in my first post!
  8. Waoh, I didn’t expect some of the abrupt replies. I got a jist of the position and yes, I have sent of my NtO appeal. As I have previously said it would be nice if there was clear advice to the disabled to assist when parked, say in an instance where you forget to display your badge. I would have liked to see some precedents quoted, but not 1 has been offered, even though you refer to them! I asked for anyone’s knowledge re ECHR or Equality and Human Rights Commission, as other sites seemed to state that the BB position is not enforceable, if you are registered disabled. But the replies seem to ignore this. The thread has eroded with many just dishing out personal ridicule rather than meaningful advice. Firstly, the park & bays state Disabled free parking. There is NO clear sign regarding the BB requirement. This seems to be forgotten by many or not even read. Around Warrington there are many parks all with different requirements, some only requiring the clock, so try to remember every different requirement for every park, especially if the requirements are not displayed.
  9. I must say I am surprised at some of the replies. This situation is bigger than this 1 instance. What happens when you forget to place your badge? Or your dog knocked it down. In any of the cases if you have the legal right to a disabled bay, why should a PCN be upheld. I agree and accept in any case were an officer cannot determine with certainty that a vehicle is being used for the carriage of a disabled person, it should receive a PCN. However once the authority receives proof that the vehicle was being used/parked correctly ie for the use of a disabled person then the ticket should Always be revoked. Mistakes happen, why should the disabled be punished for a simple error. That is not fair or reasonable. Parking on Council land is for ALL disabled. Equality Act is very clear on that as is Parliament. Section 149(4) states how this applies to the treatment of disabled persons: The steps involved in meeting the needs of disabled persons that are different from the needs of persons who are not disabled include, in particular, steps to take account of disabled persons' disabilities. Confusion, forgetfulness MUST hence be considered by LA. But I asked a question, if the BB scheme is clearly for ON-ROAD use, how can you receive a ticket off-road?
  10. I found this. I cant get the whole link, but search researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN01360/SN01360.pdf Easy to read. CH 5 is interesting. There is no requirement as to the provision of parking in the Equality Act 2010. However, public bodies must not, in the exercise of their functions, “do anything that constitutes discrimination, harassment or victimisation” (section 29(6)). Is placing rule signage over 100m from allocated parking discrimination? The distance is further then the eligibility criterion for the BB! Beyond the question of discrimination is the public sector equality duty set out in section 149 of the Act. Section 149 provides that a public authority must, in the exercise of its functions “have due regard to the need to” among other things, “advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it”. This involves having due regard to the need to “take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are different from the needs of persons who do not share it”. Section 149(4) states how this applies to the treatment of disabled persons: The steps involved in meeting the needs of disabled persons that are different from the needs of persons who are not disabled include, in particular, steps to take account of disabled persons' disabilities. So a disability my make someone forget to use or misuse their badge, etc etc etc. The Public Authority MUST take due regard. Hope that helps others also
  11. Dear Disgruntled. You have spotted it exactly. The Sign in front of each bay is exactly as I have shown, JUST the Max stay 3 hours. In front of 5-10 bays is the advisory to lift access. There is No advisory to Blue Badge. Separately I reread the Blue Badge leaflet, which is quite clear (PG6): "A Blue Badge will help you to park close to your destination, either as a passenger or driver. However, the badge is intended for on-street parking only. Off-street car parks, such as those provided in local authority, hospital or supermarket car parks are governed by separate rules." How can a Local Authority then apply the BB scheme to an off street carpark? Hence Can a Violation 87 be issued properly on an off-street carpark? I note the Equality Act 2010 means that Local Authorities must make reasonable adjustments. The Equality Act 2010 does not include any provision for Blue Badge holders only vs any disabled parking to discharge the duty to provide 'reasonable adjustments' for parking. Limiting accessible bays in off street parking to Blue Badge holders only surely risks contravening the Equality Act 2010. The Equality Act says you should never be asked to pay for the adjustments. The BB scheme costs money to participate. If LA's demand BB surely that is against the Equality act? I wonder what the more learned out there think!
  12. This notification is at the other side of the carpark, away from the disabled bays, in no way visible to disabled drivers and in the opposite direction to were the disabled are directed. Hence my position if you have rules or requirements should they be prominently placed?
  13. Please find attached the entrance sign and the bay parking sign. Nowhere does the car park imply BB requirement, until you get the PCN through as it states it were others pay. However the disabled are advised to walk in a different direction to were that BB advisory is. The carpark is gravel & the charge point is about 100m+ from the disabled bays. Any thoughts. Entrance & Bay Signs.pdf
  14. Dear Ethel Street I to have unsuccessfully searched for the same case with no joy. But Even UK law is clear, the provisions are for the Disabled, not BB holders. As a BB holder I am therefore registered disabled. Dear Jamberson Truth hurts, but thank you. I have just received the Notice to Owner. Hence your assistance would be appreciated. I found a detailed case. Hard reading, hopefully helpful to some. Brain still turning. Case No: CO/505/2002 THE QUEEN ON THE APPLICATION OF LORD MAYOR AND THE CITIZENS OF WESTMINSTER and THE PARKING ADJUDICATOR
  15. Dear Jamberson & Surfer01 Firstly, is there a Law for displaying a BB incorrectly, whether upside down, sideways or out of date? Slightly side tracked, but perhaps relevant to others. I agree that the CEO issued the PCN correctly. My car was parked in a disabled bay with an expired BB, hence the CEO needs to enforce that disabled bays are ONLY used for Disabled persons. I believe the expired BB is a Red Herring. The issue must be if a vehicle was validly parked in the disabled bay. Surely either you are registered disabled or not? Hence either you have the right to park or not. I have proven I am registered disabled, hence surely while exercising my right to park in an allocated space, I cannot be committing a finable offence! The Law I believe is that reasonable adjustments are to be made to avoid disabled people being placed at a "substantial disadvantage", hence the bays have been provided. The bays I believe are for disabled people, not merely BB holders. While on the most point they will be 1 in the same, there will be instances were mistakes are made, ie forgot to place the badge in the screen, placed it up-side-down, sideways or at an angle. That is the issue with disability, especially when not from birth, habits were formed and it’s hard to teach the old dog new tricks. My belief is that while the PCN was correctly issued, it should immediately be revoked when like this a genuine or registered disabled person is able to show the error that caused the PCN to be issued. If a disabled person has the right to park, the BB is merely there to assist all in the paperwork chase that can follow, should a demand be placed as a consequence. If prof of disability is shown, no offence can have occurred.
  16. Dear Jamberson Thank you for your reply. I sent 2 replies regarding the PCN. My first was short & sweet. Dear Sirs I am a Blue Badge holder, please find attached. I have been issued a PCN, while parked in a disabled parking bay. As you can see I can validly use disabled designated bays. I would hope that you will review this matter ASAP & issue an appropriate remedy. (I had attached the current up-to-date BB) I received what I believed to be a generic reply, as it refereed to applying for an up-to-date badge. Dear *********** Re: Notice of rejection of “challenge” – Traffic Management Act 2004 PCN No : W..... Date Issued : 11/05/2017 11:17:20 Location of Contravention : Time Square Car Park Thank you for your correspondence regarding the above Penalty Charge Notice. Your vehicle was served a Penalty Charge Notice for being parked in a disabled person`s parking space without clearly displaying a valid disabled person`s badge. Having reviewed the photographic and written evidence, as collected by the Civil Enforcement Officer, I can see the disabled badge displayed was not deemed as valid as the badge had expired. Please note; it is the responsibility of the badge holder to ensure disabled badges are renewed in good time. The “Blue Badge scheme: rights and responsibilities in England” Booklet clearly states:- Renewing the badge You should apply for a new badge from your local authority some weeks before it runs out. You can renew the badge online at www.direct.gov.uk. The new Blue Badge Improvement Service will send you a letter to remind you. If you provide your mobile telephone number or an email address when you apply, reminders can be sent to your email or mobile phone. Do not use the badge if it has expired or you may be fined. Please refer to the images inserted, as captured by the Civil Enforcement Officer during the serving of the above-mentioned Penalty Charge Notice: Image A is of the sign advising of the parking restrictions in place. Image B is of your vehicle parked on/in Time Square Car Park. Image C is of your vehicle’s dashboard. Image D is of the expired disabled badge. I have carefully considered your comments and have taken into account all the written and photographic evidence, as collected by the Civil Enforcement Officer, and I conclude the Penalty Charge Notice had been served correctly to your vehicle. You can still take advantage of the reduced charge of £35.00 by paying within 14 days from 18/05/2017. Please note that this discounted rate is no longer available after 14 days and the charge will return to the original charge of £70 if payment is not received in time. At this stage you may follow one of two possible courses of action: i) You may settle the Penalty Charge Notice in full by paying the £35.00 within 14 days of the date of this letter. This payment will close the case and you will receive no further correspondence on the matter. Closure of the case would mean that further appeals against the Penalty Charge Notice are not possible. ii) You may wait for a Notice to Owner (NTO) to be sent to the Registered Keeper of the vehicle. The Notice to Owner gives the keeper of the vehicle the opportunity to begin a formal appeal process - including a hearing before an independent adjudicator. However, once the Notice to Owner is issued the full fine of £70 will be due and you will no longer be able to pay at the reduced £35.00 rate. Payment can be made as indicated on the attached sheet, making your remittance payable to Warrington Borough Council, quoting the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) No. I regret that Warrington Borough Council will not be able to enter into further correspondence at this stage regarding this Penalty Charge Notice. However, further representations can be made at the Notice to Owner stage as detailed above. Yours sincerely PS Johnson Parking Administrator As my nice approach didn't work I forwarded a 2nd more detailed response: Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) No .... Dear Mr Boyer & Mr Broomhead Thank you for your swift reply to my initial challenge. It is clear from your reply that you did not read the evidence/attachment I sent to you. Firstly, please find attached the entrance to your carpark. It clearly shows disabled parking 3 hours free. I have upon your demand highlighted that I am currently registered disabled. (PHOTO WAS INCLUDED) The sign you have attached to show “parking restrictions in place” as you can see is typically obscured by parked vehicles. The parking conditions you highlight could not possibly be read by even Steve Austin, never mind able bodied or disabled, from the disabled parking area. (PHOTO INCLUDED) Under the equality Act could you please explain how you are making reasonable adjustments to avoid disabled people being placed at a "substantial disadvantage", when the obscured/hidden sign that you have referred to requires navigation of 100m+ from the allocated parking over extremely uneven terrain, totally inappropriate for persons with mobility issues. Could you please explain how you are making reasonable adjustments when a registered disabled person has supplied you with their current disabled registered proof? It is important that parking operators provide clear signage from the entrance, as per the BPA Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice. Whilst you clearly indicate that accessible bays are for Disabled use, your entrance signage ONLY indicates that your ONLY enforcement is on a 3 hour time limit. You have included a photo of the clock in my car, which clearly shows I have not parked for an excessive time. I note the European Court of Human Rights, ruled that disabled parking spaces were there for ALL disabled people and not just blue badge holders; so anyone disabled and driving a vehicle, or a vehicle carrying a disabled passenger who are REGISTERED disabled can lawfully use these spaces as there is no need to display a blue badge. I accept your right to make enquiries that the vehicle parked under the Disabled up to 3 hours is valid. I have done that by providing you with my valid blue badge. I had unfortunately left my current & up to date badge at home. When you are disabled, there are many additional considerations to make, and a simple oversight like, did I remember my badge can happen. It is sad that you would seek to profit from such a lapse. I believe your current position amounts to discrimination, clearly you are discriminating against disabled people; or discrimination against disabled people who choose not to apply for a blue badge even though they are eligible to do so through being registered as disabled. You are clearly seeking to profit by placing any terms of your parking in a location hidden/obscured from view or of such a distance or over such terrain that it is not possible to read, or access for those with mobility issues. I accept your right to check that a vehicle parked in a disabled space is used or catering for a disabled person within at the time. I have forwarded that proof, as I was using the car, your site CCTV will be able to confirm that & as you can see I am currently registered disabled. I would hope that you will review this matter ASAP & issue an appropriate remedy. Kindest regards
  17. I will try my best to answer the questions posed. WHO has issued the charge notice? Warrington Borough Council Issued by a Civil Enforcement Officer. However, Payment is to be sent to a PO Box in Sheffield! The email contact is [email protected] They have issued a Penalty Charge Notice. Issued in a Warrington Borough Council car park. The carpark is for Warrington Retail Market, accessed of Academy street. From street view WA1 2BQ is very close, you can see the signs, market shoppers carpark, disabled free parking 3 hours. I believe it is Council signage. The only signage at the disabled bays is standard human in wheelchair, “Max Stay 3 Hours” Driver, currently and at the time registered disabled, clock was on display. I hope that helps, thank you for your feedback
  18. Yes its a Penalty Charge Notice. I mentioned BPA as surely to recieve a Penalty some form of notified Law Breaking must happen. I feel this is just wrong. Registered disabled using a disabled bay. Seem like Bureaucracy gone mad if fines are imposed for being forgetful, not displaying a badge!
  19. Hi, I was hoping the more savvy on here could help me. I recently had to nip to the shops, once I got there & parked up I realised I had left my current/valid blue badge at home, I had been in someone else’s car the day before. The shops are in Warrington, the carpark is Council operated. I did have an expired BB including the clock in the car. My car is registered disabled. My disability, severe heart failure, means it takes effort to get to the shops, but needs must. The parking at the shops states disabled parking free & 3 hour stay. I displayed the expired BB & clock accordingly. When I returned about an hour later I had a ticket, code violation 87, Parked in a designated disabled persons parking space without displaying a valid disabled persons badge, (great). I notified the appeals centre that I am registered disabled and forwarded to them the up-to-date BB, believing that would suffice. I was wrong, they are pursuing the matter, hence I ask for any knowledge you can assist me with. There were no easily visible signs that deemed that a BB was required (nit-picking), from my research Under the Equality Act reasonable adjustments are required to avoid disabled people being placed at a "substantial disadvantage". They have an obscured/hidden sign 100m+ from the allocated parking over extremely uneven terrain, totally inappropriate for persons with mobility issues. As per the BPA Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice, they clearly indicate that accessible bays are for Disabled use, the entrance signage ONLY indicates that their ONLY enforcement is on a 3 hour time limit. I note other posts state the European Court of Human Rights, ruled that disabled parking spaces were there for ALL disabled people and not just blue badge holders; anyone disabled and driving a vehicle, or a vehicle carrying a disabled passenger who are REGISTERED disabled can lawfully use these spaces there is no need to display a blue badge, which is deemed as placing additional measures. Has anyone come across this? I feel it is sad that a council would seek to profit from such a lapse of memory, which is 1 of my disability issues, I do understand and appreciate their need to enforce non compliance, but surely once proof of disability is shown there is no crime? Any assistance would be appreciated.
  20. Dear SV In our car case after the first insurance valuation we turned to Parkers’s, Glass’s guide and CAP's of which we were able to get 2 of the 3 trade valuations. We also found in identical car for sale ie spec & colour, but had 5000 MORE miles for £7,500. This is when they upped their first valuation which we did not accept. When we stated we would take the matter to the FOS the insurer accepted the average of the 3 industry valuations £6,700. My point on this is that this should have been the initial valuation as the insurer employed a professional to examine the car for valuation. Why should an innocent accident victim be so out of pocket? The vulnerable would have been duped by the insurers professional enabler into accepting a 1/2 valuation offer. I believe this is deceitful and fraudulent. You pay insurance to cover your risk from loss, not to add to your misery. Car insurance is compulsory. Insurers & the industry should not see insurance fraud as a 1 sided affair. Legislation & companies powered with consumer protections should not be turning a blind eye to such practices. I do not accept 50% trade advisory valuations, clearly in the knowledge that 50% will not cover the loss as commencement for negotiations. These are professional enablers, no different that the professionals increasing loss valuations, that the insurers are fighting against. Many of the Loss adjustor's state they are independent in introductory letters, this is clearly wrong and could easy mislead the vulnerable. I hope you see my concern. We should not consider just ourselves but ie consider an innocent OAP. left with 50% valuation. That is taking advantage is is clearly FRAUD.
  21. If you run with your sentiment of 'name of the business' etc, why is it then when people attempt to up their claim, the insurers can null & void the contract, plus have you arrested & prosecuted for insurance fraud. A valid claim should not be such a battle. Paper 6 deals with this & how Insurance Law is way behind the rest of the world. But Parliament is dragging its heels. The playing field should not be SO 1 sided. Hence my concern that those empowered to redress the unfairness' are not, instead breading further issues for their own financial benefit.
  22. With the car claim the insurers professional enablers tried to deceive by valuing the car at less than 1/2 what others exactly the same were for sale at. 1/2 the industry standard valuations. How is that anything other than fraud? This took about 6 months to resolve. With the property, the insurance company firstly said no damage, to be very clear they repudiated the claim. Then they said the claim was worth £200, then £1000, then £10,000 then £40,000 the £137,000, then £180,000 then £200,000 then over £200,000. This has taken NINE (9) years, in a house that is uninhabitable. So what is undervaluing a claim by over £200,000, or Then you find that this is standard insurance practice from industry professionals, that the powers that should care or investigate don't.
  23. I feel sorry for the others that may have received what I would classify as abuse. Onto your topic, Insurers can go to the the FOS, the FOS will investigate fraud if the Business makes the allegation. They will not if the individual makes the allegation. If an insurer alleges fraud they refuse to pay the claim. Hence again it is in the individuals hands to take legal action against the company with bottomless pockets & Legal firms on retainer. It is amazing that if someone claims £1,000 for £200 of goods the insurance industry cries fraud. But when the allegation is returned, several cannot see how costing an individual £100's £1,000's or £100,000's you find acceptable. That is despicable. With regards offers, http://www.cila.co.uk/files/Anti-Fraud/Fraud_Guide.pdf President of the Chartered Institute of Loss Adjusters (CILA) was asked at a conference what was the difference between a claim for negotiation and a fraudulent claim. He provided this view: “A claim that was two times overstated was probably a claim for negotiation. A claim that was 10 times overstated was probably bogus and fraudulent.” My point what is a claim that is 1000 x a difference. But then again 'you can not see fraud'.
  24. I have tried contacting the FCA. They do not accept complaints from the general public. They advised that the only recourse is personal legal action. As I say there is no-one to fight or defend he position of the individual. Industry has this well sewn up
  • Create New...