Outcome! I attended tribunal but lost! The key point was that the Adjudicator said he had to take the information as to who the owner was from the DVLA i.e. me, and that my email from my company to the contrary was not sufficient. I also got a letter from my company advising that it is correct that I am the registered keeper when the order was sent to them after the tribunal. But this was contrary to what they emailed me! So in the end I had no chance! But it was fun trying!

Thanks buzby. Are there any decent channels on FreeSat?

Hi buzby - How can I 'switch your receiver to view channels on FreeSat'? THanks

Mossycat - it was a friend of mine. All I know is he has received a speeding ticket by post saying he was doing 36mph in a 30mph limit. Should I request any supporting documents such as the photograph, the calibration certificate, training certificate etc etc, and post them too? What is the full list of documents I should ask for which may have a legal technicality issue which I could use to challange the Notice? Does anyone on here have any experience that the legal technicality approach is valid and can prove fruitful?

Can I not just make a Small Claim to Argos and state that the Sale of Goods Act has been breached since the 'goods are not a described'? The box specifically states that I will receive 'Freeview' channels however I have not received them all. Simple? Or am I missing something?

I am looking for any legal technicalities which may be present in either the NIP or the evidence etc which could mean that the Notice was not lawfully served.

Hello I am looking for some help on the above Notice of Intended Prosectution I received for an alleged speeding offence. The Notice of Issue Date is 15/3/2010 and it was from West Mercia Police. The Notice states I was doing 36mph in a 30mph limit. Can anyone help with ways out? Stewart

Hi The story is as follows. I purchased the Sky 'Pay Forever' Digital TV package from Argos last year. It cost a one-off payment of £75. No contract. For this you get a Sky man who comes over and installs the dish and a basic Sky set-top box. For the first 4 months, you get the basic Sky channels for free and then after the 4 month period, the packaging supplied with this product states that '..there will remain 200 free digital TV channels – that’s four times more than Freeview - which can be watched forever...and you can continue watching the free digital channels (including all the main Freeview channels).' When I cancelled the start-up of the Direct Debit after the 4 month period, some of the promised Freeview channels were cancelled and are now not available and secondly I only have approximately 64 free channels in total, not the 'over 200' as promised. I have complained to Argos requesting a refund on the basis that the goods are not as described but they have stated that the free channels included with this product are those from 'FreeSat' and hacve refused to give me a refund i.e. http://www/freesatfromsky.co.uk/freesat-tv-choice-all.aspx. However, this is not what is stated on the contract which refers to the 'main Freeview channels' not FreeSat. Stewart

I wish to make a small claim against Argos for breach of the Sale of Goods Act (goods not as advertised). The value of the product is £75. Can I also claim back the cost of making the claim using MoneyOnline? If so, how do I legally express this on my Claim form? Am I entitled to any further compensation for, for example, the amount of time I have had to spend administering my complaint? Thanks

On the basis that the LA have (1) supplied incorrect information to the Tribunal Adjudicator as to both the Registered Keeper and the owner, and (2) stated incorrect law in their submission to the Adjudicator, should I make a separate complaint to the Information Commissioner and perhaps the Local Government Ombudsman on this? If the LA are providing false information in this way in order to support their case, is this not a much more serious issue than a simple parking ticket? If I did this at my job I would be disciplined up to and including dismissal. I feel compelled to escalate this so as to ensure that they don't try it on other members of the public in my area. It's pretty disgraceful behaviour as far as I can see now. Any thoughts?

Hi Lamma! I am interested in your view that the LA is talking legal rubbish . Can you suggest a template letter I can send to them covering this or an ammendment to the letter as suggested by Bernie that I was intending to send? i.e. Dear Adjudicator, Re Case reference No: [#] (insert from letter they sent you) Please find enclosed additional evidence relating to this appeal against a pcn. This confirms that I am not the owner of the vehicle and the identity of who the owner is. This comes direct from the owner themselves and therefore should be irrefutable. This in support of my appeal against this pcn in the Statutory ground that "I never was the owner of the vehicle". Yours faithfully.

I have received further letters on this alleged debt from a DCA called Fredrickson. I have now complained to the FoS about NatWest not providing me with an executable CCA. Is there a template letter I can send to Fredrickson to stop them sending me threatening letters and telephoning me? Thanks

Thanks for all this. I am finding it a fascinating discussion. I can confirm that the company I lease the vehicle from is NOT a hire company. It is a car manufacturer. Because I work for a separate car manufacturer, I get a lease car as a benefit (for business and personal use) and make a nominal monthly payment for the car. The scheme attacts no tax liability (don't ask me how they managed to convince the tax man on that!). The company leases cars to my company since it is affliated. This is not a hire agreement not is there any HP payment. In the LA's submission to the Adjudicator, they state that 'while the council acknowledges that the appellant has advised that they were not the driver...legislation states the 'owner' means the person by whom the vehicle is kept...which is presumed (unless the contrary is proved) to be the person in whose name the vehicle is registered. The DVLA have confirmed the registered keeper's details on 28/8/2009 as myself, c/o XXXX Motor Co Ltd, Essex. As the contrary couldn't be proved under the grounds as stated in the NTO, as the owner could not provide details of the driver, the Council maintains that the registered keep/appellant remains liable'. But as I say, the company who lease me the car, the XXXX Motor Co, have just written to me when I asked this specific questions confirming that 'The XXXX Motor Co' is registered keeper and also the owner. So I am at a loss as to why the DVLA has said that I am the registered keeper at all. And presumably the DVLA would simply be using information supplied to them by the XXXX Motor Co. So someone is telling fibs here. As Bernie suggest in post#22, 'This comes direct from the owner themselves and therefore should be irrefutable.' Surely if the LA's submission is ONLY based on me being liable since I am the 'registered keeper' and I have a written statement to the contrary, this must be my clear defence and should be a slam-dunk win? Would it be worth my writing to the DVLA to confirm who the registered keeper is? I am reluctant to do this and I am not sure if I am entitled to be given this information anyway when I am not the keeper or owner. And surely the owner's statement on this information trumps anything the LA claim they have from the DVLA? But it does seems strange to me that there is a discrepancy on the keeper details and the case does seem to hinge on this fact. So I am thinking that either writing to the Adjudicator with this information - as per Bernie's post#22 - or keeping it in my back pocket and producing it on the day as my defence, is my best bet. Presumably there is no advantage of one of these options over the other?

Hi Update! I wrote to my Company Vehicle department and they have confirmed in writing that (1) The XXXX Motor Co is the registered keeper and (2) The XXXX Motor Co is also the 'owner'. So I do not understand how the Council have decided that I am the owner and therefore put my name on the NTO. Surely, this is now my main defence. I have it in writing from The XXXX Motor Co that I am not the owner. Is there any need to bother with secondary challanges based on this new news? The adjudictor agreed to my appeal some weeks ago and I have already have a date for the hearing in April. The adjuducator accepted my letter - where I explained that I was not the driver, that the vehicle is a company car, was on loan on this day etc etc - as my appeal application. He did not ask me to complete any other application form. This is all in writing. Should I now write to the Adjudicator stating that my challange has been modified - in-light of the bundle I have received from the Council where they stated that it is the 'owner' who is liable in the case where the driver cannot be identified and that I am the owner - to 'I am not the owner' and supply the written confirmation of this from my company car company?

Hi Jamberson:- The sequence of events was that I initially ticked the box on the Notice saying something like 'rejected on basis of legal technicality'. This was because I received the Notice via second class post. This was rejected by the Council since they stated that they correctly served it to the registered keeper, The XXXX Motor Co Ltd, by first class post. I then realised that I had loaned the car out on that day (hence the reason I received the Notice via post) and so wrote to the Council saying this and advising that for this reason I did not believe the parking offence was anything to do with me. They wrote back with neither a rejection or acceptance but said that they would not enter into any further correspondance and that I should contact the Adjudicator on this. So I wrote to the Adjudicator (first class post), as requested by the Council, with this information asking them to cancel the penalty. I recieved no reply so assumed that the penalty had been cancelled. The next thing I got is a letter from the council some weeks later stating that a dept had been registered with the Court, my employer will be contacted to take the money from my salary, baliffs will be send etc etc. At this point I was rather shocked, to say the least, and wrote to the Council to ask them to explain but they claimed that the Adjudictor had not recieved my letter. I then wrote to the Adjudicator to ask if they received my letter. They wrote back to say they 'had passed my letter of appeal onto the Adjudicator'. So I take this as tacit confirmation that they received it. And I have now requested a personal hearing which has also been accepted. At no point have they asked me to fill in any form in order to make an application for adjudication. They have said my letter is the application. I have just received a letter from a DCA but with no details of what it is about. So I am not sure if I am now being chased by a DCA on this. Are the Council allowed to do this when I have requested and had a Tribunal accepted? I think the acceptance of the Tribunal came after the Council sent their threatening letter and so perhaps they have been remiss in cancelling the DCA action etc? Should I write to the Council to complain about the DCA chasing me when I have a Tribunal set for April? I would have thought this is clear-cut harassment. Bernie:- 'If you own the car, on what basis does your employer require you to lend it to others?' It believe it is mandated that I lend it out for business use in my contract of employment. But I can confirm this from my HR dept if required. 'Who insures it when it is used by others?' It is covered by the same corporate insurance policy that I driven under. 'Do you know who was driving it when the alleged contravention took place and can this be proved?' No. No-one will admit! Mean and Green:- Re the section you highlight in red text...(1) My company car is not loaned under a normal hire arrangement! I work for the car manufacturer themselves and the company car I receive is taken on a loan agreement for a maximum period of approx 6 months and then I return it and it is sold in the dealer network. But I have no tax liability! I just have a monthly loan payment taken directly from my salary. So I am not sure if this qualifies as a 'hiring agreement' as in a 'normal' company car hire. (2) I am not convinced that I have actually signed any agreement where it states that I am liable for penalty charges. This may or may not be written down somewhere on an internal intranet site but clearly that does not mean I signed-up to this on the actual agreement form. I need to get a copy of the agreement I signed from my company vehicles office I guess? Cheers all!

My name IS on the documents I have received as the liable party such as the Notice to Owner. And I sign the lease agreement not my employer. There is a full set of t&cs. The only statement I can find in the T&Cs re 'ownership' is the following: © Upon our acceptance of this Agreement we will pay to XXXX Motor Company Limited the Loan Value. Upon your collection of the Goods title to them will immediately pass to you directly from XXXX Motor Company Limited. So this would look like to me that I am the 'owner'. Also, I see in the T&Cs the following:- © You are liable for any offences and/or charges committed or incurred by you in contravention of the Road Traffic Act 1974 (or any subsequent amendments). (We may pay any fine you incur for which you will reimburse us upon demand together with an administrative charge of £10 (plus any VAT) per fine So....it looks like, unbeknown to me, I a HAVE signed an agreement saying that I am the owner and I am liable!! One item I have not mentioned is that the Council proceeded with their action against me and registered a dept at the County Court after they had advised me that they would refuse to correspond with me and AFTER I made representations to the Tribunal (as they advised I should do). It does not seem correct procedure that they continue with action inspite of me continuing my appeal with the Tribunal office. When I complained about this, the Council denied that my letter was received by the Tribunal. I wrote to the Tribunal and they confirmed that they got it. So this seems highly irregular to me and I have written to the Council with a harrassment complaint because of this. But perhaps I can use it at the Tribunal?

Jamberson & Bernie I will check who hires the car from the lease company. I am not sure if this is me or my employer. I have a written agreement for the car which I will check tomorrow and let you know. Thanks

And it was sent the lease company first. So perhaps they named me and gave my address?

Sorry, yes, my name is on the Notice to Owner with a number after it. But the address is put as 'C/O The XXXX XXXXX Co Ltd, etc, etc, England' i.e. the lease company.

Hello Thanks for all your replies. I have now requested a hearing. Some more info on the sequence of events below. I received the Notice through the post. It was sent to the registered keeper who is my company car organisation. It stated 'following receipt of the attached notice identifying you as the person responsible for the vehicle referred to within the notice. I am writing to request that the attached documention is completed and returned to the relevant authority etc.' In the Notice History contained within the bundle sent to me, the council contacted the DVLA and the returned information is shown in the History on 28/8 as 'DVLA - VQ5 Retunred Address Needs Review'. Then on 4/9 is states 'New Address Added to Case, Addressee 'C/o The XXXX XXXXX Co Ltd'. This address was the company car company. Then on 14/10 it added 'New Address Added to Case, Addressee: myself'. I have since contacted my company car dept and they advised me in writing that the registered keeper is 'The XXXX XXXXX Co Ltd' not myself. So should I write to the Adjudicator stating that I am not the 'owner' since I have been advised by the company that they are the registered keeper? Or keep this in my back pocket and state it on the day as my defence? As an incidental issue, I sent a letter of appeal to the Tribunal stating that I was not the driver on 5/11 - as the Council has advised me that would refuse any correspondance and to take the matter up with the Tribunal. I did not get a reply from the Tribunal, so assumed my appeal was successful and the penalty had been cancelled. Then, out of the blue, I got a letter from the Council on 14/12 stating that they were now registering the charge as a dept at the County Court! To be honest I couldnt believe it. The Council have since stated that the Tribunal did not receive the letter. I have written to the Tribunal asking this - with a copy of the letter. They replied that 'my letter of 5/11 will be passed onto the Adjuduictor'. So not a categorical yes. I am wondering if this makes the process adopted by the council as unlawful? Not sure if there is any further advice on defences based on the above or should I stick with I was 'not the owner' since I have been advised by the lease company that they are the 'registered keeper'? Thanks

Hello I would appreciate any advice on a parking ticket I received through the post from my local Council, for an alleged parking offence. The vehicle is a company car and I am required to lend it out for other employess to use for business use. On the date of the alleged offence my vehicle was on loan. I advised the council of this but they have rejected my appeal. It had now gone to the Adjudicator. The council have stated in their submission that under the 'Traffic Management Act 2004, Chapter 18, Part 6, 92 - Minor Definitions that the owner...means the person by who the vehicle is kept...is presumed (unless the contrary is proved) to be the person in whose name the vehicle is registered'. Is this correct? I do not see why I should be charged with a crime I did not commit. Is there any advice as to what I should do now? Should I write with a further submission to the Adjudicator to challange this? Or is there no hope? SA

Hi - MaroonDevo has suggested that my thought that I should seek a ruling of unenforceability on my CCA (only t&cs provided) is now a bad option following the ruling by Waksman in the Carey case. I was wondering what was the ruling by Waksman in the Carey case? And does this now mean that the general advice is that we can't go to court to try and prove an agreement is unenforceable? So the only option is to wait and defend? I'm not sure I see the difference. If unsuccessful bringing a case on the grounds of no prescribed terms or signature how could this defence be successful if used to defend? I have made a complaint to the FoS now on the document the NatWest have provided me as a complying with my CCA request. Stewart

Hi - can anyone help me complete a N244 form? I want to ask the court to strike the claim since the claimant did not contact the court advising that he wished to proceed within the required 28 days from receipt of my defence. Q3: Will the above suffice? Q4: What is a 'draft of the order you ar applying for' and do I say Y or N? Q5: Do I need a hearing for this application? Q7: Dont understand this question! Q8: What level of Judge should I request? Q9: Do I say that MBNA or Restons be served with this application? Q10: I am thinking that I should attach a witness statement with details of the dates etc (which I have asked for in writing from the Court). Is this the right thing to do here? Thanks

Update - I have recieved the claimants AQ and a Notice of Hearing of Application (for Summary Judgment) on 2nd Nov. Although I did not yet return my AQ. The claimants solicitors also attach a copy of my 'original' CCA Pictures by saitken67 - Photobucket and copy statements showing all my transactions. They also attach a separate copy of the 'current' Credit Card Agreement Regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

Will do tomorrow - hope not too late...I thought that perhaps I could dispute this since it came after 28 days from claim defence?