Give them nothing! They do not need encouragement. In my experience, when I defended myself against NE Parking, I won and was awarded costs. Keep going.

Having gone down the route of appealing to the PPC and then to the IAS, only to be stumped by the PPC failing to provide correct information for the IAS appeal, this also rules out an appeal to POPLA. I can't see any court standing for such an abuse of process.

4 hours ago, dx100uk said:

i thought i remembered reading long ago that signs and cameras on existing buildings don't need planning? only those on poles which have to be holes dug/wires in trenches/erected/installed at a later date.?

doesn't wipe out the other issues mind.

 

dx

 

Not sure about cameras but signs fixed to walls are subject to planning consent.

When I worked in the outdoor advertising business we had to have planning consent for all freestanding signs and for those fixed to walls.

The only possible exception was where the the sign was fixed to a wall of a business premises and advertised a product relevant to the business.

So a sign on a pub wall advertising a particular brand of beer was covered by deemed consent, whereas it would need full consent to advertise a brand of car. 

Google maps shows the position of that permit holders sign on the entrance to the car park as being in Vanguard Way. It also shows that in 2019 there were UKPC signs attached to properties in Vanguard Way on the other side of the road from the car park.

"Now she has some outstanding legacy debts with Moorcroft's which date back from around 2009. These were originally from Halifax relating to overdraft and credit cards that defaulted due to her having to give up work suddenly due to ill health if I remember correctly and before you ask she did get PPI back on those accounts."

This is interesting. I had three consecutive loans with a Building Society on which I claimed PPI. I was entitled to PPI on all three of them and I was advised of the amount of the PPI due on each one. To receive the total amount of PPI the loans needed to have been settled in full. Loan one was paid off by loan two, loan two by loan three and loan three by Lowell Portfolio when they bought the debt. Result! I owed the building society nothing. I don't think it would harm you to contact the Halifax but there's a fair chance you don't need to. 

"You'll know if it's a TV License sales rep at your door by their unkempt appearance and refusal to reveal who they are. They will instead keep repeating the name of who they believe to be the occupant and keep asking you to confirm that's you."

Not to mention the Vauxhall banger rusting away in the street!

You can ignore them at any time if you wish to do so. Neither do you have to buy a licence. Of course, you then invite their attention. They will write their threatening letters and you will eventually be door stepped. You don't have to let their agent in when they call. They will go away but keep on coming back. If you can dispense with all of that hassle by filling out an online form every 2 years why would you do otherwise?

Go here: 

Fill out the form and make a declaration for two years. After two years they will ask you to do the same again.

At the risk of repetition:

Until you receive a Letter Before Claim from Lowell's solicitors it's all shredder fodder. Don't waste your time with it and don't lose any sleep over it.

I wouldn't bother keeping it in case it may be useful in the future. Read, laugh and shred.

No LBC = no worries. Sleep well my friend!

Until you receive a Letter Before Claim from Lowell's solicitors it's all shredder fodder. Don't waste your time with it and don't lose any sleep over it.

Note what FTMDave says. So long as Parking Eye have your correct address, and are communicating their bilge to you at your correct address, then any Letter Before Claim issued to you will land on your door mat. 

It's a tempting place to put the old foot down. Having been held to 10mph round the Armley Gyratory you come off on the bypass and the dual carriageway opens up. It used to be 70mph only now it's 40mph. There's a lot of roads like it. Good of you to accept that you were in the wrong. Honesty is the best policy!

Argos were exceptionally good at consumer rights - then they were bought by Sainsburys! (Or whoever owns Sainsburys these days).

• Website sales - Either your business operates its own website to display and sell your products, or you use a service like Amazon, eBay, or Etsy. If a consumer chooses to ‘click and collect’ this is still classed as distance selling as the contract was agreed at a distance, even though the goods are collected in person. However, the distance selling regulations would not apply if a consumer chose to reserve goods online and then goes to your shop to review the reserved items with no commitment to purchase. That’s because the goods aren’t purchased in an online transaction as that is simply a goods reservation.

As dx100uk has pointed out to you:

So long as you ordered and paid for the goods in full online you have the benefit of DSR and the seller must refund you regardless of your reason for return. It matters not that you collected the item from a store nor that you returned it in a likewise fashion.

It does not matter that the box has been opened. You are entitled to test the goods for fourteen days and you cannot do that without opening the box!

Watch the time limits: 14 days to notify the supplier of a return. 14 days to make the return, from the date of notification, and 14 days to receive your refund from the date of return.

For 'partners' read Debt Collectors. I've had experience of this. Just shred their letters as you do Lowell's letters. Ignore them. They will eventually hand the matter back to Lowell who will offer you bigger and bigger discounts if only you will pay! Don't ever pay - do as you have been advised and come back here.

West Yorkshire Police provide photographs if you wish to view them. Go the portal mentioned in the notice www.westyorkshirepas.com.

It states in there:

"This website allows you to view media and documents associated with your offence, as well as general information and FAQs relating to road traffic offences.

You can also nominate another driver, saving you postage costs and enabling you to speed up the process of discharging your liability."

Given that it was manned equipment it may have pictured the front of the vehicle and the drivers face. This could be of great benefit to you - or not as the case may be.

I do not think of DCA's as having any more power than that of a postage stamp and a cheap envelope. A message to their employers to keep the old address up to date is generally advised. Other than that they can do one!

My niece has had a parking charge notice from these clowns on two occasions. On neither occasion did they go anywhere near a court. (They got as far as Debt Recovery Plus before giving up).

I had a similar experience.

I received a text from Arrow Global which was rather vague.

 I phoned the number - only to be answered by Crapquest! (I ascertained that Crapquest had been bought by Arrow Global).

It was explained to me that the reason for contact was a debt to HBOS arising from a credit card for a sum in excess of £6000.

Since I have never held an account with HBOS I asked further questions only to be told that default notice was served in 2003.

At this point I burst out laughing! I pointed out that even if the debt were mine it is statute barred with bells on!

I was then put on hold for nearly five minutes before the guy came back on the phone to tell me that the debt is statute barred and that I did not need to pay it!

Totally unbelievable!

The original post was one week ago. Not much time for the OP to know whether the matter is being pursued or not. This matter is time critical in that there is an implied contract here. An implied contract is fluid and subject to change until one party sets it down in writing and serves it on the other. It is very advantageous, from a legal standpoint, to be the party who sets the contract down in writing as it can then be used as an entire defence in any future legal proceedings.

I like the idea of the formal complaint as suggested by stu007. I have had a play around with it. Have a look and see what you think.

Dear Sir/Madam

FORMAL COMPLAINT

On XX/XX/2022 my Housing Officer (insert name if you know it) came out on a visit due to a complaint I made about rubbish dumped by a previous tenant. She took no interest in my complaint but took a great deal of interest in the shed installed in the walled in garden situated at the property. She stated this was against your Housing Associations policy and ignored the issue of the rubbish left by the previous tenant. She threatened me with my tenancy if the shed is not removed.

This shed was installed in XX Year (insert date if known) by (insert the Tenants names at that time) and as tenant (insert name) left I took over their responsibility for the shed with XX Tenant (insert name) to date.

Before this shed was installed in XX Year (insert date if known) a discussion was had with the Housing Officer of that Housing Association at that time, and they gave permission for this shed to be sited.

This shed has now been in the exact same location for XX Years with Housing Officers physically seeing this shed over those years and inspecting the shed with no issues at all. We have changed Housing Associations three times since its installation.

I now find it unacceptable that your Housing Officer has, rather than dealing with the issue of the rubbish left by a previous tenant that they were called out to see, taken issue with this shed installed with permission XX Years ago. They stated that it is against your Housing Associations policy.

1. Permission was granted for this shed to be installed in XX Year (insert date if known) by the Housing Officer at that time. If this is not on your Housing Association records, then this is due to maladministration on the part of that Housing Officer at that time not noting it on the records.

a) Permission was granted by the Housing Officer in XX year for the installation of this shed

b) The Housing Association has changed on three occasions during this time to different Housing Associations. There have been no issues identified by any Housing Association regarding this shed’s installation, purpose, or use, with it being inspected periodically by different Housing Officers.

c) In XX/XX/XXXX we won the city's best garden award. photographs were taken and the shed was present at this time.

2. This shed is maintained not by the Housing Association but by me and XX Tenant therefore there is no cost associated to the Housing Association for its maintenance. We abide by Health & Safety regulations to ensure the safety of all residents. This has been done since its installation.

3. As your Housing Officer stated this was against your policy, I would like to be provided with a copy of that exact policy they are referring to.

4. We are more than happy for the Housing Association to arrange a date and time if you wish to inspect this shed and for your advice on Health & Safety issues to keep all residents safe. We have always complied with this during the shed’s installation to date.

I look forward to your reply

5 hours ago, stu007 said:

Now as the other Tenant at the time this Shed was installed wasn't given permission and as the Housing Association has changed hands 3 times over the years this is where you use that and a little white lie that you were given permission XX years ago by your housing officer at that time simple as that not your fault they don't have it on record.

Where has the OP stated that the shed was installed without permission? I think it perfectly reasonable to assume permission was obtained, (albeit verbally rather than in writing - unless you can show a document giving written consent). It is also reasonable to assume that the HA at the time the shed appeared would have noticed it! They would have required its removal had they not consented to it being there. The OP was not party to the original agreement regarding the siting of the shed. They are entitled, however, to rely on their agreement with the fellow tenant, and the implied contract between themselves and the current landlord, to protect their interest in their co-owned property.

So, the shed is not owned by the landlord but is owned by yourself and another tenant. This just gets better!

The landlord is party to an implied contract, which they inherited from the former HA who owned the site, to allow you and a fellow tenant to keep a shed on the site for any legitimate purpose. You may store whatever you like in it, providing you adhere to H&S guidance and any relevant bylaws. You must maintain the shed to a reasonable standard and not allow its existence, purpose or use to cause nuisance or offence to your fellow tenants or neighbours.

If the landlord wants to terminate your contract they must show you to be in  breach of it. Failing that they must negotiate with you. I would agree, with the proviso that they replace the shed with an even bigger one!

I am no expert on where sheds can be placed or what can be stored in them. My experience of social landlords is that they provide one shed per property, where the property is not communal, and gift the shed in perpetuity to the tenant. This absolves them of the need to maintain the shed at their expense. They do not state what can and what cannot be stored in the shed.

If there is nothing in your tenancy agreement that covers this, and the the shed has been in use by yourself for over 20 years, then I would suggest that there is an implied contract between the landlord and yourself. The landlord, under the terms of the contract, allows you and your fellow tenants to use the shed for any legitimate purpose, and to store whatever you like in it, providing you maintain the shed and adhere to H&S guidance and any relevant bylaws.

I would put the implied contract into writing and serve a copy on the landlord.

I now have a letter from Debt Recovery Plus. They want me to phone them so they can look into my liability depending on whether I was the driver or the keeper. They threaten that if I don't contact them they will take it that I agree that I am liable. I didn't know that these parasites had such power. Do I contact them or do I continue to ignore the matter?

Horizons Debt Collectors..pdf