Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder

dadtaxi

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    91
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

dadtaxi last won the day on October 17 2016

dadtaxi had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

101 Excellent

About dadtaxi

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. You've asked nicely, and they didn't bother to respond. So now you demand via an SAR for any and all footage of you and your car for that entire period
  2. Ignore. Then when you've done that, ignore some more. Over time you'll get some more begging letters, at which point you ignore them. They may (might) pass this onto debt colectors, in which case you can send them the "in dispute" letter to get them off your back. Ask here for specific advice when and if that ever happens
  3. "They claim the lines are valid" No they are not. Its weasel wording. They are saying the TRO governing (the yellow lines) is valid. They are not saying that the yellow lines themselves are valid As you suspect, they are most carefully not wanting to admit that the lines are non-compliant ( or at least are fearful that the lines would be found to be non-compliant by a tribunal)
  4. That's OK, you're done the nice approach, now you formally request a SAR from them requesting any and all information held by them on yourself. You obviously should specifically require them to search any and all information held concerning your credit card. while this is all you need you could turn the screw and also require them to produce any and all CCTV information ( including that car park CCTV for your car), till receipts and any other cards you may have used there ( i dint know if they do loyaly cards there, but that as well) and anything else you can think of SAR info here https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/personal-information/ You are now forcing them to do the legwork for you, using up their time and resources to prove your case for you
  5. My life's motto is "find a reason to make it their problem" I thoroughly commend your suggested approach.
  6. Others on this site will be along to advise you with much better and more accurate advice of how to deal with this ridiculous speculative invoice ( and yes you most certainly have many grounds to appeal. "It's not true" being the strongest one there is) , but in the meanwhile I believe Parking Prankster ( google it) has gone to town on the misuses and abuses of ANPR cameras and parking companies who use them. Well worth a read
  7. From the gov.uk/guidance website. "‘Unpackaged’ for the purpose of the Regulations refers to items which are “wholly or partially unwrapped” such as chips from quick service restaurants or food supplied in containers which are not secure enough to prevent fluid leaking during normal handling." Trying it on methinks
  8. The little bags are exactly for those items that are exempt. Loose vegetables, frozen goods that may dew stc etc. This is very likely a cashier who didn't know/ wasn't thinking ( except if customers try and use them as bags for non exempt items, then they can charge)
  9. Mine was a disabled car as well. I confirm that it's as easy as confirming to the PO that it is no longer for a disabled person. I already knew my class a rate due but they looked it up on their system as well right there and then
  10. Well, it wasn't more than 6 years ago. Off the top of my head it was somewhere in 2013. I don't know exactly as ive only ever corresponded with Lowell's and have received no correspondence with Opus until this single letter. So I don't think this is an "again" letter. It does seem strange that they think they can file a default on a debt they've sold on and also state is for an outstanding balance of of £0.00 Any thoughts as to how to respond?
  11. Ive got to say, that's quite impressive - linking to my last post on this from over 2 1/2 years ago! Wow Anyway - Ive done a ClearScore and have 10 positive factors, 0 negative. No changes in 2016 Does this mean the default was not filed, or that it hasn't had time to register?
  12. Received a letter from Opus informing me that they had registered a default with credit reference agencies The top of the letter shows the line "Outstanding balance: £0.00" even says that they are required to notify me before registering a defauly, but due to a systems error, this did not take place go on to excuse themselves by saying that it was filed correctly because "it is the account status that drives your the registration process, not the giving of filing of notice" Background. I had a Opus Credit card and paid it of fully ( or so I thought). I was only contacted by Lowell at a later stage with the purchased debt, of which the statement only showed multiple fees and late payments which had risen to a level of about £100 . I disputed this with them stating that I had paid the Credit card off off and insisted that they show the original "debt" rather than just the late fees. This, after many letters back and forth, they were unable to do and eventually after a "take me to court then" letter they then wrote off the debt Now, I obviously want to dispute this. What is my best course of action at this stage? (if you need a letter scanned i'll do this later if necessary)
  13. how could you be so cynical, its almost like you think they want to win
  14. On my 50cc Scooter I can but dream of 50mph being my limit, let alone Target. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . But the speed limit doesn't care what you drive .... Even you
  15. 'Do I challenge and prove to POPLA what idiots PE are' If it were me I would challenge , but on that single point only. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A risky move but then the Adjudicator would have to rule on that point alone rather than any other reason (well maybe not, they could just not turn up, or not submit evidence, but it's worth a try) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . However if you do get a specific ruling, then the fun really begins
×
×
  • Create New...