Jump to content

webbscatering

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    1,079
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by webbscatering

  1. My hunch was right Tilys Carpentry is not monitored by CEL they have a picket fence around their car park with a generic "No Unauthorised Parking" sign nailed to it.

    So the parking offence was committed on a site that CEL have no jurisdiction even though their POC claims to have.

    The Grooms House signage by CEL is now off the floor and stands about six foot high to the right of the car park which is now clearly visible .

     

     

    Tilys Car Park 2.pdf

  2. Totally agree looks very amateurish and indecisive so a lesson learnt for the future. The wife is going over to the car park today to take photos because in their POC they claim he parked in Tilys Carpentry Car park but on the PCN they claim he parked in Grooms House Car Park. I just want to see if CEL look after Tilys car park too according to Google map they don't but need to check.

  3. I filed this already on the 16th April:-

     

    1. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the
    Mini Cooper

    2. It is denied that the Defendant parked in Grooms House Car Park Stanshaws Court Drive Yate Bristol at the times mentioned in the Particulars OR the Defendant is unable to admit or deny the precise times he was parked in Grooms House Car Park Stanshaws Court Drive Yate Bristol as he has no recollection of this. The Claimant is put to strict proof of the same.

    3. It is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the carpark is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper Claimant is the landowner.

    4. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.

  4. Filling out the defence but stuck on this one:

     

    3. It is denied that the Claimant has complied with Schedule 4, Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 [set out the specific ways in which the requirements of the paragraphs mentioned above have not been met].
    Only include the above paragraph if you have checked the POFA and can refer to the specific paragraphs which have not been complied with. Otherwise delete it. Do not forget to renumber the remaining paragraphs.

     

    Have they complied with PoFA 2012?

  5. Amazing work and thank you very much for the time and effort you have put into this, but I think there maybe some confusion or cross wires as I'm doing this on my sons behalf because being a halfwit he buried his head in the sand hoping it would go away. My son is the registered keeper and also the owner of this particular car (which is now written off) So they haven't tried to palm this off on me, I really sorry if this is how its come over and my good intentions was not to mislead anyone.

  6. this is just a excerpt taken from a legal firms website although does not apply to me it makes interesting reading:-

     

    Nevertheless, the respective advice of both the EU Commissioner for Transport and the CAA has emphasised that each cancellation must be assessed on an individual case-by-case basis. This means that airlines cannot use COVID-19 as a blanket excuse for cancellations without compensating passengers. Airlines intending to rely on the ‘extraordinary circumstances’ exemption for COVID-19 related cancellations must be mindful that the burden of proof is on the airlines in such scenarios and of the need to demonstrate, in each case, that:

    a) there was a clear link between the extraordinary circumstances and the cancellation; and
    b) the cancellation could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures were taken

  7. Just looking at the Insurance Claim Form, Not applying a claim for the Ryanair flights but only for my out of pocket expenses would give this claim a better chance of success.

    So my out of pocket expenses are:

    One Way flights to Athens

    Two nights accomodation

    Flights to the UK

    Taxi Fare from Gatwick to Stansted

     

    I will try Visa first then try the insurance claim if not successful.

     

    I took this from the EU261 Sheet:

    FLIGHT CANCELLATION

    If your flight is cancelled, you are entitled to the rights set out below (see following sections 1.; 2.; and 3.). As regards your right to compensation, please note that Ryanair is entitled to refuse compensation when:

    1.you are informed of the cancellation at least two weeks before the scheduled time of departure; NO

    2.you are informed of the cancellation between two weeks and seven days before the scheduled time of departure and are offered re-routing, allowing you to depart no more than two hours before the scheduled time of departure and reach your final destination less than four hours after the scheduled time of arrival; NO

    3.you are informed of the cancellation less than seven days before the scheduled time of departure and are offered re-routing, allowing you to depart no more than one hour before the scheduled time of departure and to reach your final destination less than two hours after the scheduled time of arrival; NO

    4.we can prove that the cancellation is caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken by Ryanair, including not limited to political instability, safety and security reasons, weather disruption, labour disputes or failure or delay of air traffic control facilities.

    Excert from the CAA website

    Please note that the CAA’s interpretation of extraordinary circumstances set out above is illustrative and for guidance only, rather than determinative of our view in any specific case that may arise. Each case will be context and fact specific. It should also be recognised that should a passenger or group of passengers disagree with the CAA’s interpretation in a specific case, it is open to them to seek to enforce their rights through the courts

     

    Still loving the advice guys any comments on the above would be greatly appreciated x

  8. I think to get my out of pocket expenses it would be better to go through the insurance and I know dx will tell me off for this but to use Bott & Co the claim firm that have a good success rate with Ryanair to try get my compensation...like previously mentioned I'm not concerned about the compo but to get my out of pocket expenses back or at least most of it.

     

    if I post the insurance claim form will you guys scan over it and see what the chances are?

     

×
×
  • Create New...