Jump to content

dominicp

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by dominicp

  1. Hi all

     

    I am writing on behalf of a friend and colleague who has got himself in a bit of trouble over his car insurance. While I am better at communicating arguments for him I do not know the ins and outs of the relevant regulation so thought I might ask for your input.

     

    Basically, he pays for his insurance monthly, using a credit agreement with a third party. He missed his August payment (well, his bank cancelled the DD without asking) and got a letter a couple of days later (dated 17th) saying he had to make payment by 2nd September latest. He was not at that address at the time and so did not get the letter until the 3rd, when he called them and was told it was too late and to contact his insurer. His insurer told him to wait for a letter. He then got a confirmation today that his policy will be cancelled - with just 4 days notice. The finance company consider all dealings closed as they got a refund from the insurer.

     

    Questions:

     

    - Was 14 days enough notice for him to make a payment?

    - Is 4 days enough notice to cancel the insurance?

    - What's the best way to deal with this with the priority being not to lose cover (he needs his car to get to work and cannot afford a new annual policy at this time)?

     

    Advice hugely appreciated

     

    Dom

  2. Hi all,

     

    I recently told Esporta I was changing my account where the Direct Debit would come from. I signed a new form as asked and all seemed well (and closed the other account). Two weeks later I get a threatening where's our money letter, and they've added £20 on as an admin fee.

     

    I emailed them, and they acknowledged the mistake. But absurdly they are insisting on charging me the £20 this month (it's 'too late to stop it') and then knocking if off next month. That seems very dodgy to me... they aren't having my money for a month for no good reason. They offered no other gesture of apology.

     

    My question is, what should I do? I initially replied and said don't you dare, I'll use the DD guarantee to get it back. But it seems that i'm only covered if there's an error, which this probably isn't (technically). Do I have to cancel the DD? is there a way I can use this to cancel the contract (mostly cos I'm annoyed at how badly they dealt with this)?

     

    Thanks

  3. It is up to the dealer at this time to show you there is no fault with the car. They also should be given the first oportunity to do any repair. Only on failure of that repair will you be entitled to take it elsewhere for repairs and to probable compensation.

     

    There is nothing to stop you going to a main dealer and paying for a diagnostic so that you are prearmed when the seller takes a look. He may take it to a dealer anyway if he can't fix it.

     

    So the short answer to your question is no, the seller should be given first chance at a repair.

     

    Thanks. Could I still just do a chargeback with VISA since the goods I purchased were faulty? It could be a helpful option if it sounds like they won't take it seriously. I can't afford a diagnostic, and don't want to run the risk of driving it there.

     

    Thanks

  4. Hello all,

     

    One month ago I purchased an X-reg Clio from a local independent dealership. Last night, the engine lost power while travelling on a motorway, forcing me to pull over on the hard-shoulder and pay a substantial sum of money to recover the car. It wasn't a case of a 'one-off' issue, because I had noticed earlier in the day a slight lack of forward momentum as I pressed the throttle, but that went away as soon as I changed gears and it wasn't noticeable enough to concern me greatly at the time.

     

    It should be noted that the car has already had two other issues - the throttle cable snapped (but this was a wear-and-tear part), which I paid for an authorised dealer to obtain and replace, and the battery had lost charge one morning when I came to the car (my insurer covers a recovery van and short-distance movement, so I had it charged for free).

     

    At this stage, I am not happy to keep driving the car, and I know the dealer has substantial responsibilities under the Sale of Goods Act. I would prefer not to have the hassle of refunding this car and then buying a new car elsewhere, though I am prepared to do so if necessary. My preferred solution would be to get the dealer to agree to pay for an inspection and repair of the car at an authorised dealer.

     

    My question, therefore, is what exactly I can force the dealer to do. I am not happy for them to 'have a look at it' since this is a potentially dangerous issue and one they might not fix properly, only for issues to haunt me down the line. Can I insist on an authorised dealer or else a refund? And, importantly, do I have a chance of reclaiming my costs of delivering the vehicle to them (I had it recovered to the dealership) and the previous cost of replacing the throttle cable?

     

    I am prepared to go to a lawyer at some stage, but again I am not sure it this will be worthwhile on cost. I would rather get less of what I want (eg, no refund for recovery) than actually have to take them to court. The priority is to have the car professionally and independently looked at and repaired.

     

    I'm dory that was a long post. Suggestions would be hugely appreciated and I'll reply to any clarification questions in minutes.

     

    Thanks so much,

     

    Dom

  5. Can you give us more information about the lines and/or signage? A photo would be useful. You might also want to request the TRO from the council.

     

    Regarding the way this thread has gone, I understand you wanted an objective legal answer, but do you see how this probably started by claiming that people having a space on the road was unfair? You started an with an opinionated post and then berated those that merely gave an opposite viewpoint.

     

    But anyway, show us a photo and get the TRO.

     

    Thanks for the constructive post.

     

    I never actually argued about the principle, only after Rooster's first post which WAS ridiculous if you read mine. He just misrepresented what I had said... funny how defensive people can get. Ah well.

     

    Re the restrictions, I think I can explain it pretty well: it is just a normal parking bay (not individual car bays, one long one with dotted lines to indicate width). It is the standard style in London at any rate. Signage just says residents only 9am - 11am, same as you would expect for a normal CPZ sign.

     

    I've emailed the council anyway, I'll see what they say.

  6. Heaven save us from armchair lawyers who google on the internet and think they have a new angle on the law missed by tens of thousands of lawyers over many years.

     

    Dom your supposition is wrong on so many levels I am not going to waste time going through it. I suggest you take your research to a lawyer and ask him.

     

    So you've taken a quotation out of context to make it look silly, and then just said you can't be bothered to explain your point anyway. This board really doesn't come across very well from this thread.

     

    If you're so clever, why not look at the legislation I actually referenced and justify your opinion?

  7. I will leave this thread to run for a while.

    Going to cast my vote...... provided nobody's parked across my drive. :rolleyes:

     

    Oh look, a sarcastic comment. Not expecting this one to get shouted down, though. Also, it's more of the same pettiness. If you've got a car on your drive then it is illegal to block it in.

     

    Incidentally, I'm guessing you're one of those people with a driveway then...

     

    I've a mind just to do it a few times, get ticketed, win at appeal and if I annoy some people with driveways then all the better. Might even be Rooster's :p

  8. Oh for heaven's sake. This is really quite shocking: Rooster posted an overwhelmingly irrelevant example which I had specifically ruled out, and this entire thread is now filled with people taking a position on morality instead of the legal situation.

     

    Given the number of people who post with the intention of getting off morally justified parking tickets through loopholes, this does really smack of hypocrisy.

     

    For the garage example, again of course I wouldn't condone parking there because you'd have to entertain the possibility there was a car there, and again it would still be illegal. My principle stands and you haven't yet explained why my interpretation of the LAW is incorrect.

     

    You say "On most housing estates there are no lines, white or yellow) painted on the roads" but in this example there are, so that really isn't relevant.

     

    I read that as a contravention is committed if you park in front of a dropped kerb, unless there is a designated parking bay adjacent.

     

    Sure, but there is, because there is one long unbroken parking bay along the road.

     

    I presumed from other posts that there were people on this forum with some legal knowledge. If nobody wants to offer a legal opinion then fine, I'll survive, but please can we stop with the personal attacks on my view of the scenario.

     

    If this arguing continues then I would hope mods will just lock this thread.

  9. Hey all,

     

    I've followed this forum for quite a long time but never actively participated. Now I've got myself an account, hope to see you about!

     

    Anyway, I live in an area with very high parking density (small houses but average of more than 1 car per house) so it can be a nightmare in the evenings trying to get home. There are in the area a good few houses which have driveways / dropped kerbs and are often away from them. As far as I can see, having a driveway which people avoid blocking is essentially the same thing as having a reserved parking spare on the road (since the gap for the driveway is usually just one parking space) and I don't see why that's fair, since nobody else can reserve parking places on the road outside their own house, especially given the lack of spaces as previously described.

     

    Note that (1) I obviously don't condone parking across driveways where cars are on them, and (2) the dashed white lines representing the CPZ places continue through most of these driveways (no yellow lines are painted). I think parking across driveways in use is illegal for obstruction to highway, in any case.

     

    So I've done some research, and the council have informed me that their policy is not to ticket cars parked across driveways unless specifically told to by the owner of the house. But my own research into legislation seems to suggest that there is no basis ever for ticketing cars so long as they are within designated parking places and not on yellow lines etc.

     

    The Road Traffic Act 2004 states:

     

    86 Prohibition of parking at dropped footways etc.

     

    (1) In a special enforcement area a vehicle must not be parked on the carriageway adjacent to a footway, cycle track or verge where—

    (a) the footway, cycle track or verge has been lowered to meet the level of the carriageway for the purpose of—

    (i) assisting pedestrians crossing the carriageway,

    (ii) assisting cyclists entering or leaving the carriageway, or

    (iii) assisting vehicles entering or leaving the carriageway across the footway, cycle track or verge; or

    (b) the carriageway has, for a purpose within paragraph (a)(i) to (iii), been raised to meet the level of the footway, cycle track or verge.

    This is subject to the following exceptions.

    (2) The first exception is where the vehicle is parked wholly within a designated parking place or any other part of the carriageway where parking is specifically authorised.

    A “designated parking place” means a parking place designated by order under section 6, 9, 32(1)(b) or 45 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (c. 27).

     

    Now, please tell me if I have read this correctly - it does seem pretty explicit. If so I will write to the council asking for written clarification and then if and only if I absolutely have to, I will consider parking across empty driveways. Unless of course I am allowed to reserve my own place outside my house.

     

    This is quite an ambiguous point with other online guidance; it would be nice to clear it up once and for all, for other people too.

     

    Thanks for reading that, too :)

     

    Dom

×
×
  • Create New...