Jump to content

ericsbrother

Registered Users

Has the CAG helped you...?
Please help us.

  • Content Count

    16,426
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    31

Everything posted by ericsbrother

  1. They know their roboclaim is rubbish and you still have a couple more bites at the cherry. Chamces are they will drop it later on, often when they have to convince their client to pay more money for the hearig fee. They like you to pay up without questionif that wasnt so they would have to do some work to earn their money
  2. my younger daughter got stopped for doing 58 in a 30 limit and she accepted the charge and got 3 points and a small fine. Now as that was a face to face encounter the administration of justice was no dounbt slightly easier so I would be tempted to let the team that deals with traffic matter know that it was you, you realise you have been stupid and would like to have the matter disposed of as quickly as possible so would it be possible to do this without the matter going to a court hearing? You may be lucky and get offered a speed awareness course ( depends how full they are and the local police's attitude to their use for the speed you were going). It is likely that a quick response will result in a lower penalty though.
  3. there are stil unanswered questions about the land and the rights of way over it. By having a TRO the council may well have adopted the land so agood look at your deeds and the map that goes with them will be necessary. The road may not belong to an individual and as you describe it the curtillage that is your property may have by way of continuous use a right of way over it but that is not the same as the council ever having rights to create a TRO as it wont be a public highway. TRO's can apply to a public right of way though even if the land doesnt belong to the council. Some councils do apply the Dawood decision quite ruthlessly and ticket people in private car parks so getting a ticket for parking on your own land where there is no delineation is a very likey scenario. You may have to fight this all the way to the high court but you need to really go through the deeds and other such sources of info before you do anything. Get your neighbours involed as well so that way if all 32 houses have a beef with the council then they will take more notice tha just one
  4. getting a third party to do the work is legal as long as the head lease says it is OK. What would be worrying is if the second cmpany has any relationship to the supposed proper management co such as the same directors or getting paid for consultancy rather than actually doing the work. Taking a large co as an example. Kier or Interserve have many sub companies that do all sorts of stuff on behalf of the main co that are primarily a building co and Food delivery respectively. You need to look at your lease very carefully anad ask for sets of accounts an query everything that isnt obviously for actual work done. So if co B appoint a byuilding co to do some work are they charging a fee for professional services? If so then that should be challengeda nd you as a group either seek to ahve the management co removed as they arent up to the job or you shallenge the money spent on their fees as unauthoried ependiture dependingon what the leases say.
  5. I would be writing to the DVLA and ask who has accessed your keeper details, when and why. This may be telling. there is a particular address yo need as the DVLA has a dozen postcodes for different departments so you will need to do a trawl to find the right one. You could phone and ask for the correct address but they wont give you any details about the enquiry over the phone
  6. now several things to point out. The first big sign you encounter says 4 hours free aprking see other signs for conditions. This is an invitation to treat and is not a contract that binds you to the other termsdso you can park for 4 hours and not have to consider what any of the other signs say. the commonest example of an invitation to treat is a sign in a shop windoe saying " sale, 50% off most items" when you go in and pick up an item and are told that it isnt in the sale you cant force the shopkeeper to sell it at a reduction and converseley he cant force you to buy an item just because you picked it up to ask about it. You can wander round the shop and leave without purchasing anything, whether yiou saw the sale notice or not. The shopkeeper cnat demand you buy somehting or charge you for the heat and light. So as the invitation is for 4 hours then that is that, you dotn even need to read the other signs. Also the signs say if you do this then you have a contract with UKPC but if you do that you have a contract with Highview. No, should you accept the terms of the signage then that cannot be with 2 parties so the signs needs to amke clear who is offering you the contract and what the terms are. If UKPC have a contract with tesco then it should be their signs and they cant offer agency, even if the agreement with Tescos say they can that is not what is being offered to you. Yiou can argeu that as UKPC are offering you a contract then any breach like parking on a yellow line isnt in that contract so isnt a breach Highview cant offer you a separate set of temrs beacuse they are not the principals. all they can do is act as agents to UKPC at most and this means that you are not answrable to both. Now in your case UKPC have demanded money for something that is applicable if a ticket is slapped on the vehicle and although we know they did this we havent seen the original ticket to see if it actually matches any of the terms offered in the signs that dont necessarily mean anything.
  7. take time to read up on how this curcus rolls on, you know by now that the dca has no locus or agency so they cant do anything other then write the letters they are paid to send out. The bill of £160 is ficticious as well, but all of the IPC members add this to the amount they demand because 85% of people pay it and out ofthose who dont the majority just bury their heads in the sand rather than doing as you have done and take advice on what is what so the cowboys make money by acting unlawfully. Let us know when you get the next missive and file these away with all of your other stuff as you can use it to bite them back. The disappearing ticket/first letter will be produced but by showing every bit of correspondence you can convince a judge that you didnt receive it and thsi company has previous form for behaving like this
  8. If you own the land without easments or rights over it andif there is room to pass without actually encroaching on that part of your land you could just put a fence round it. obviously that will make parking for you awkward. However, the council will claim that their permit scheme is an easment in itself. No it isnt, you agreed to it. Bit like me borrowing your lawnmower. I cant then lend it out myself or tell you how and when you can use it or refuse to return it to you upon such a request. If you agreed to let me manage your lawnmower the I can lend it out but it is still yours and I have to retun it subject to the conditiosn of the original management contract. You will therefore need to look at what was agreed at the timeand whether there was a time limit agreed. It aint for the council to decide that time limit as they are just borrowing your lawnmower so to speak
  9. you havent read the full sentence FOR ANY ADDITIONAL clauses..... that are on the signage and then jumped to the wrong conclusion. You will see this on many signs, they say that if you dotn apy up within a certain time then recovery costs will be added. they can only do that if they sue the DRIVER as the keeper was never party to the agreement their liability to the parking co is strict- limited by the POFA. Also, not every charge issued is faulty, some companies do get it right and have all the correct permissions. that is why we ask for a long list of information and tell you to ask the council about planning, demand sight of contracts etc. however, even when the parking co does all of that if their signs arent obvious and their machinery for registering vehicles-ie like the equipment Highview use at Tesco stores is so complicated then they still wont necessarily win a claim. parking co's make about £300 million a year on issuing pcn's and roughly 5% of those are actually correctly issued. the above comment is so anyone who actually gets a properly issued pcn and it ends up in court they still have a way of keeping the actual amount down to the true level. Not a single member of the IPC will be in that 5% and they will all add spurious fees to the bill. Could it be they receive advice that isnt true but as most peopel dont fight tooth and nail they find it is worth their while telling fibs and risking a earbashing in court
  10. still havent had an asnwer as to who has the AUTHORITY to say yes or no to the issue of a permit. You must make tyour friend undersatnd that this is the most important aspect of the temp permit scheme, not who actually issued them, who was away that day or what ther management commitee do in their lunchtime. Was the concierge issued with instructions about who gets on or not and who gave them that order, the management or the parking co?
  11. yep, keep all of your paperwork safe and copy this thread to a memory stick or print it off as well. You can do the same for other useful threads
  12. if you have alrerady submitted you might be able to change the wording without charge if you hurry. other than that snail mail to Gladdys only as your version wont make them wnat to drop it at this point, you will have to slap them hard with your Witness Statement later on
  13. ring the court as you may still have time to challenge the judgement. If they say no then you fill out the N244 to ask for a set aside. You will win the rematch unless you manage to shoot yourself in the foot
  14. If you get as far as engaging a lawyer dont forget to throw in the biased ballot including people who have no interest in the land (doesnt matter thay are near neighbours). Now there may well be an easement for the road to allow all and sundry to pass along it but that wont affect your property as long as that right of way/throughfare is maintained. There was a case some years ago when all of the mews of Sth Kensington were adopted by the council. people had plant pots outside their houses for decades and all of a sudden they were being issued with parking tickets. DYL's were painted round people's doormats etc so what seemed like a good idea by the council to prevent clogging the narrow streets by interlopers didn nothing but aggravate the people who lived there. I woudl speak to all of your neighbours who actually have a curtillage on this road and see what they want before you spend money. Also look at the background of Dawood v Camden as that decision effectively allows councils to clobber people on their own land where the boundary is not clearly defined (and that statement is generous to what was actuallly said). Also dont forget, the council has unlimited funds (your money!) to fight yo and no liability for any individual regardless of how unreasonable or unlawful their behaviour
  15. no such thing. Some poor tree died just so they can write this twaddle. Can I send them a letter saying that I hold them responsible for killing the dinosaurs? File it with your other paperwork and let them waste more of their money employing some other twonk to write to you as well. IF they get as far as a PAP lba then you can let them know what you think
  16. drop point 2 as it may be true but what they mean is by entering the land the driver agreed the offered terms. Now as there was no contract as the signage is prohibitive then it never can be the case they agreed to pay the PCN You could instead say for point 2 "As there was no contract to consider the driver could never agree to pay the PCN" point 3 say " the Particulars of claim are so sparse as to be incoherent, they do not state if the cause for action is for monies due under a contract or for damages for a breach of contract. the sum claimed is greater than the amount demanded by the Notice to Keeper and so is either adding unlawful costs or there is the unlawfully applied assumption that the defendant is the driver" point 4 state that you were not the driver at the time and then say it isn't clear in what capacity the defendant is being sued as there is no keeper liability so it is put to STRICT PROOF that the claimant show who was driving at the time. point 5 the term is CPR 31.14 request for documents (that assigns the right to enter into) contractS..... now this is longer than I would normally want to say at this point but the main part about lack of contract doesn't say anything that leads you down a blind alley so the rest is there to show Gladdys that you aren't going to wet yourself and pay up. When you send this to court you are advised to send Gladdys a copy as well as it is good practice. i would send a copy to Millennium as well so they can see their money running down the drain. That way they may very well decide NOT to pay the hearing fee plus another £50 for the legal help they wont get
  17. the plus side is that they will need a recording of their calls to show a contract exists by offer and aceptance. that same recording will also prove they lied to gain a pecuniary advantage so will do for them. You need to speak to NPower and tell them what has happened and how these bandits were representing themselves as servants on NPower ( use that term as it means somehting different to agent) and see what they say about it all. The plus side is if you do get offered a better deal and take it the cowboys wont really want to take you to court as it will reveal their dark practices
  18. probably LiP costs as they are usually 5 hrs max for small claims track. however, if retailer agreed to this for Tomlin order then that is usually enough. They did sign it didnt they?
  19. agree with BF, the vendor should contact the owner of the land and apply for adverse possession if they have enjoyed it without permission and if permission was granted they need to secure its purchase or transfer before your daughter buys the place. If that cant be done tell her to walk away. all of the problems currently in the news about the building developers ripping people off with leases only occurs becuse some idiot buys them at full whack with such terms in place. I jave a friend who buys problem properties but he never pays much for them, probably about 60% of supposed market value. that is where she wants to be if she carries on as is.
  20. as for repair etc, they mean if you accidentally break them you are liable. Now this is a bit of a problem in some respects as strict liability is not required, ie if you did something stupid and broke a sinkl then fair do's you pay but if you drop a pan and break a kitchen tile, the dropping of the pan isnt usually a forseeable event and tou arent normally responsible. as for maintenace of equipment like washing machines etc, again you are not responsible, their use is part of the tenancy and thus LL is responsible for their upkeep. You can sue LL if they dotn repair said item in good time. Now if you were to wash bricks in it then that is not normal use and the clause would apply but you dont need a clause to guard against straightforward negligence. The same goes for indemnifying any visitor, employee etc, that is what he need LL insurance for. All in all any clause that isnt legally enforceable such as thses render the whole contract void if you so prefer. Personally I would make LL move his washing machine out and you get your own Storage is then his problem This looks like a tweaked commercial repairing tenancy rather than one for a dwelling
  21. then nowt to do with the insolvency people. They cant appoint anyone, only he can so it looks like he agreed to this without asking anyone for advice he should have taken professional advice before he was made bankrupt as what has been agreed now is done. he could wind the company up but that will cause as much grief as the current situation. Mind you, he could run up massive debts and the accountant will be equally liable as a director. he couild try speaking to his local Chamber of Commerce Drop me a message with the name of the company and I will see if there is anything adverse on Duedil etc
  22. agree, they need sig to help verify who you are. It also then bashes them when they try and claim that they need more ID to process your SAR, the law is very clear on that. What you dont need to sign is a CCA request because if they then decide to muck you about the debt enforcement clock is on hold anyway. All covered of the EU money laundering regs on "knowing your customer"
  23. think about it, why do they use companies like CWD to chase people up with veiled threats rather than just going route one? answer, they know they cant. Law is not extraterritorial withoput treaties and the UAE fails at every hurdle to satisfy any EU legal requirement for debt enforcement so they wont be given one. Half the time the UAE banks dont even satisfy UAE law on debt enforcement even though it is very simple for them to obtain a local judgement.
  24. you dont send it until you are told to by the court Once you have a date for the hearing you pile in with everything you have got, until then you use what you have written to get past the front desk
  25. so you respond to Gladdys and copy letter to parking co as they have to pay for Will and John's cock ups. Dear sirs, I am in receipt of your latter dated the 15th inst and note that despite being solicitors you do not seem to know that the POFA doesn't apply to Scotland. This surprises me since you also run the IPC and presumably are expected to have some knowledge of the law before you spout forth to your members on such matters. just to make things clear, there is no liability to your client whatsoever and any claim will be robustly defended and a full costs recovery order sought as your conduct would palpably unreasonable by trying to exert a liability that you know doesn't exist. To save you wasting more ink, I deny being the driver at the time and you cannot make assumptions or claims as to who was driving as you have fallen at that hurdle on many occasions before. It may not stop them trying their luck but it will make it hard to persaude a judge they werent being unreasonable in trying to flog a dead horse and you the stand a good change of getting a decent amoutn for your time spent on this matter as costs. The idea of sending a copy to the parking co is so that they actually see it and can then decide whether this dog bites rather than just relying on Will and John's word that you wont
×
×
  • Create New...