Jump to content


Site Team
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Sidewinder

  1. You can only drive in the UK for 12 months with a full, VALID driving licence issued by a non-EU country. After that you must apply for a provisional licence and take a UK driving test before you can drive legally From that I would suggest that as you have no VALID licence, you cannot drive in the UK without having firstly had a provisional licence and taken a driving test. Be aware though that an application asks the specific question 'Have you been disqualified in any other country' and there is a fine of up to £2500 if you make a false declaration - it would also almost certainly inv
  2. Seconded - completely ignore. If police were not called at the time then there is no chance of anything further happening. RLP will write a series of letters threatening possible (civil, not criminal) court action and when they are not getting any further they will get a debt-collector-for-hire to write another scary letter. NOTE - a debt collector WILL NOT call at your house, all you will receive is a trail of letters before the debt collector hands the case back to RLP who will then 'recommend' that their client considers court action. THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN - Primark will have filed the case
  3. The employer will probably either not have correctly stored copies of your documents originally (or may not have recorded the date on which the check was made), or they are renewing records following a GDPR audit. There is no legal obligation for an employer to check and retain proof of right to work, but if they do so, then there would be a defence should it later be discovered that an employee was working without the necessary rights to work. They are probably looking to tighten up policies so that your data is retained correctly and with your consent and understanding of why these documents
  4. A couple of things to consider It seems from your OP that you were approached for permission and this was refused? If this is true, then is there anything in your contract (or company employee handbook) which covers any sort of requirement for photographs to be taken and used for a particular purpose? Assuming that there is no such contractual obligation, and that permission was refused to have photos taken then your employer is on thin ice. There are privacy considerations and rights afforded by the DPA (and possibly the HRA) especially as the report would be available to peopl
  5. If you hover over the word 'Donate' in your post, there is a link for donations. Alternatively follow the link in either mine or DX's signature - many thanks and well done! As DX asked, could you give a brief summary of what the debt was and the history as this will help others to better match their circumstances to yours?
  6. The lovely Katie phoned me this morning to ask about the accident which I had been involved in. It does actually sound like the same person in the clip. I am normally quite polite but having had so many of these calls I was rather abrupt today. I normally just ask them to confirm my name or the registration number of the vehicle I was driving and that is enough for them to put the phone down. If you ask where their information came from they make some vague comment about the 'Motor Accident Department' I think they quite literally phone numbers either at random or which are on a generic l
  7. Had this issue with a local second hand dealer and my son. He had just the car my son was looking for - a bit overpriced I thought but with the assurance of buying from a dealer. No credit card payment available, basically cash only. Wouldn't release the car straight away as the blower was only putting out cold air and he needed to get the heater matrix flushed (yeah I know now lol). I ended up having to put the matrix hoses back on properly as all the water disappeared, then fitted a new valve in the cooling system as that too was leaking, but as they were fairly minor things we let it go but
  8. Not removing the post from Facebook but basking in the adulation of 'friends' will not help the case either....
  9. When will people learn that NOTHING negative written about work or colleagues on social media is 'safe'. It matters not whether the name of the organisation or those that work there are mentioned. Your 'friends' will know where you work. They will have an opinion of that workplace and it's employees based on what you have written. They may pass on those opinions to others in a wider audience and those opinions 'could' bring the company into disrepute Anger against those who may have wronged you may well be justified, but Facebook is not the right place for threatening retribution (in fact
  10. Whilst to a point I agree with the 'ignore RLP' comments, this has to be with the same note of caution mentioned earlier - do not ignore anything which might follow which looks like a properly constructed letter before claim . Whilst RLP are, at base level, absolute chancers with no interest other than to line their own pockets, in theory at least, they might well persuade the employer to issue proceedings, and providing that the employer can substantiate the amount being claimed, successfully convince a judge to issue judgment. In the majority of cases where RLP blow hot air about their clien
  11. As stated above if you were told to expect a 'fine' then this was incorrect but you WILL receive a demand for payment towards 'security costs' which can be safely ignored however much they write to you and threaten legal action (civil court, NOT criminal). RLP who normally act in such cases with Boots do not have the legal authority to take you to court - only Boots could do that and they simply won't do that so RLP's demands can and must be ignored completely. What will happen is that RLP will make a case to say that you are liable for a contribution towards security costs through your action
  12. All will be fine - from the way you have described it the police wouldn't even have been checking speeds but would be focussed on getting to whatever incident they were heading for
  13. Unfortunate - as prior to 2014 they had failed to register on the money laundering register as an estate agent and which rendered contracts formed prior to 2012 potentially illegal. Have you researched other cases? There seem to be quite a few and there is a lot of information on the CEBTA website - http://www.cebta.org.uk That seems to have been set up specifically by and for disgruntled RTA clients
  14. Oh man that ZZPS letter is a gem! It might just as well have been written in crayon by a four year old. They refer to the Beavis case with no context or reason why it is relevant - just that 'we say so' and that 'somebody' has added a clearly unlawful £70 'administration fee' to the PCN amount The letter from the PPC also tells you that they can pass liability to the driver but with no mention of the relevant authority Might be an idea to grab some photos of signage if you are local Parking isn't my forte - but I have no doubt that somebody will soon advise your next steps. Fort
  15. They are EXTREMELY litigious DX, taking multiple clients to Court for exactly this, and I daresay that the OP, although the claim could be defeated, would rather avoid the stress and work involved in defending the claim!
  16. What was the date of the original contract?
  17. Thanks - for ease of reading:- 1. Date of Infringement - 4th May 2018 2. Date on the NTK - 11th May 2018 3. Date Received - Unknown as not signed for. 4. Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? No 5. Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes, via onsite camera. Photos available online via their website (in addition to the one in the PCN) 6. Have you appealed? No 7. Who is the parking company? One Parking Solutions Ltd 8. Where exactly? Broadwater Street West P&D, Worthing BN14 9DE The letter informs how to appealing to them
  18. Can you please copy and fill this out with your own answers? https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?462118-Have-you-received-a-Parking-Ticket-(1-Viewing)-nbsp All of the emotional stuff is largely irrelevant so just stick to the facts - you went to park, the parking spaces were occupied by pallets, therefore you were unable to park in a marked bay and was not actually 'parked' as such? Have they provided photographs of you in the area? Would they support your assertion that the pallets were occupying spaces? Did you not notice anybody taking phoitos - did they i
  19. Just remove all of the emotional aspects of your post - you were caught shoplifting, the police were not called, you were advised that you would receive a charge in the post So - your next actions will be to ignore everything that you receive (if you receive anything having given the wrong door number) even if they threaten court action to make you pay. They won't, and never do. This is an outside company acting in Primark's name. The police cannot become involved afterwards, and it cannot affect your job prospects or anything else. The incident is not a matter of public record nor will a
  20. I tried with a vape pen and completely failed. I convinced myself I was doing OK by just substituting the odd cigarette with a few puffs on the vape, but was probably still smoking as many ciggies as ever and abandoned the vape within a couple of weeks That was until my wife resolved to give up with a proper vape - in her case an Arc Mini from Totally Wicked. Cost about £40 with the first bottle of 'juice' and she has not even wanted a cigarette since - and that was many months ago. So impressed was I that I bought the same and since I first used it I am proud to say that I have not touch
  21. Also, and not wishing to add petrol to the fire, what happens if the TP insurer has a CMC handling the claim? Courtesy car, out of pocket expenses, personal injury (either genuine or encouraged to develop one by the CMC?) I guess that whilst MIB might pick up the cost of the damage but so far as I am aware they wouldn't settle a PI claim? Could there potentially be action taken to recover directly against the OP?
  22. Once insurers become aware one of a claim first things that happens is a three way conference call between yourself, the insurer and DVLA to verify your details and status of your licence. Unless you can get this resolved without insurers I fear that you might come unstuck at an early stage
  23. They will say that - it is their business model and is worth an awful lot of money. They also sue a lot of their clients for exactly the same reason hoping that they will get an undefended case and a payout, but they have also been spanked several times with a properly defended action. Strictly speaking they are correct - there is an agreement containing Clause 14 which does say that in the event of cancellation a fee will be payable, even after the 12 months has elapsed , but there is also clearly a condition stating that the agreement lasts for 12 months. This wo
  24. It is a local bylaw - and apparently a very popular one as most right minded people see it in a similar way to dog cr*p being left in public places - it is a pretty disgusting practice for most people. I believe the bylaw covers spitting in public, so whether on the street or not would probably be irrelevant There wouldn't have to be a board there to warn against it so long as the bylaws are published 'somewhere'. There is also the point that there are some things that any reasonable person would find unacceptable I don't believe you can appeal as such, but you could probably opt not
  • Create New...