Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

*NOT* Disillusioned with CAG of late


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5809 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

 

Do U consider yourself sooo special that U should get preferential treatment + explanations??

 

No, just a little bit slow. I wish you'd explain the joke

 

...Are U a SPECIAL Person Hippy-chick??

 

 

My daddy always says I am

I would be obliged in future if U would keep your opinions to yourself!!!
But this site is all about sharing - and this is the chill out room. I know I'm really stupid - but I really do wonder why you have to resurrect old, dead threads when there are so many new, to my mind funny, new ones aroundl.

Any help and advice is offered in good faith, based solely on my own knowledge and on experience gathered from this site. I am not qualified to offer legal or financial advice, which you should seek from an expert before making any important decisions. My opinions are therefore offered without liability.

 

If I've been helpful, please click my scales. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I wish you'd explain the joke

I know I'm really stupid

Joined: 15th Sept 2007

Posts: 174 (to date)

Rep: Informative + 4 Green Blobs

 

Been impressing someone have we dear?!...:rolleyes:

 

 

 

 

I really do wonder why you have to resurrect old, dead threads
For someone who has been a Member for just over 2 months + has not Posted on this Thread before,

U seem very assured of yourself + very au fait with who + who may NOT have had had online dealings with each other, prior to your Membership starting?!

FWIW It is the 1st time that I have seen this Thread + Posted accordingly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now then, children.

Play nicely or I will confiscate your ball. :D

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

-------------------------------------------------------

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

------------------------------------------------------

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ruk...I'd be quite happy if U actually punctured it tbh!!!

 

When is someone going to put a STOP on REP being given out for BG2 Posts??

It didn't used to count when worthwhile Posts were getting Posted in the Main Forums during BG1.

Is it a software problem...or current website policy??

 

I have noticed one or two decent Posters on the Main Forums who are seeming to get little or NO recognition for their efforts to genuinely help others + this includes NEW S/H btw.

Yet, miraculously, there are Posters with relatively high % of Posts in BG2 who seem to be forging ahead!

 

How disheartening this must seem to others more deserving??!!...:???:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any rep given in the Bear Garden is ignored by the system and are not included in a user's total.

In the same way, any posts in the BG are not counted.

If a user posted only in the BG and nowhere else, then their post count and rep total would both remain at zero.

This was implemented quite a while ago (During the reign of the original Bear Garden) to prevent a little clicque of users, using it to artificially inflate their scores.

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

-------------------------------------------------------

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

------------------------------------------------------

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any rep given in the Bear Garden is ignored by the system and are not included in a user's total.

In the same way, any posts in the BG are not counted.

I beg to differ on the REP NOT counting Ruk.

+ I didn't mention anything about Posts counting...They STILL don't!

Try giving ME REP + U will see for yourself!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I beg to differ on the REP NOT counting Ruk.

+ I didn't mention anything about Posts counting...They STILL don't!

 

Try giving ME REP + U will see for yourself!

Interesting. Rep certainly isn't supposed to count in the BG. Yours is currently sitting at 199. I'll rep you and see what happens...

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right enough, rep duly added! I'll bring it to the attention of the webmaster.

  • Haha 1

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well at least Rooster got one thing right. BG posts are not counted, a perfect example of which is Alterego aka Bankfighter aka blueskies.
I don't understand...a perfect example of what?

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now can EVERYONE see what I mean!!!

It throws the WHOLE REP System into disrepute + God knows how long it's been like this for??!!

Methinks 'certain' individuals have known about this faux pas for ages + have abused it to gain higher than would be expected reputations in a relatively short space of Membership time or amount of quality Posts??!!...:-x

Link to post
Share on other sites

post counts in the alterego profile are zero as this user has only posted in BG
Ah, I see.

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No way of knowing how or when it was re-enabled. It shouldn't have been and now that you have brought it to our attention we can put the matter right.

Many thanks MTM for your diligence.

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

-------------------------------------------------------

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

------------------------------------------------------

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites

It amazes me that NO MOD etc has noticed this happening before their very eyes???...:confused:

Did NONE ever stop to think about how Posters in the BG2 were gaining Blobs left, right + centre in such a short period of time, without Posting much on the Main Forums???...:?:

Link to post
Share on other sites

It amazes me that NO MOD etc has noticed this happening before their very eyes???...:confused:

 

Did NONE ever stop to think about how Posters in the BG2 were gaining Blobs left, right + centre in such a short period of time, without Posting much on the Main Forums???...:?:

Can't say that I did. My rep's turned off anyway so I don't tend to pay much attention to other people's either.

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's really amazing - i hadn't noticed that. It appears that 2 out of my last 10 reps were indeed awarded in the bear garden. Including one by MTM, I have to say ;) If you have a look, RobertXC, you'll see it's true.

 

I agree, this really shouldn't be happening - can anything be done to recalculate total reps because it does seem unfair that users are rated highly without actually being rated on the quality of their information, if this is indeed what is happening as MTM suggests?

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt anything can be done retrospectively, but it should be simple enough to fix moving forward.

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...Including one by MTM, I have to say ;)
That's perfectly correct tiglet!

However I was surprised when the software allowed me to do it + assumed that it would be like when a Newbie below a certain Post count Clicks + there is NO Rep value added?!

It wasn't until last night that I actually put two + two together!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's quite worrying Robert - when I first joined the site, i would look at the users with the most rep as the one's most likely to be able to give good advice. I've looked around and can see what MTM is saying - so some people with very few posts have about the same rep as me, for example.

 

Normally, when I see that, it is because the person is very expert in a particular field and has gained their rep taht way. therefore, i would be more likley to trust them.

 

However, now we're in the situation where users without very much experience in the day to day answering of posts (which we can tell because of the post count) appearing to be "expert" and so can give advice which users will accept on this premise, possibly against the advice of another user with lower rep but more posts who doesn't visit the bear garden and so their rep has all been earned.

 

I would be happy for any rep points I have received from BG posts to be removed and the total recalculated. Currently, the system is making a mockery out of the idea of reps and turning it into a back-slapping exercise.

 

Don't get me wrong _ I've given reps in the BG for posts and as I've said, I've also received them. However, as I also said i didn't think they counted towards the user rep (they never used to) and as i do post on the main site a lot too and get reps that way, never figured it out until today.

 

I just think it's grossly unfair that usesr who give their time to help others are at risk of not being as recognised as those who don't. i'm not disrespecting anyone who spends time in the BG - i do myself, but I wouldn't expect nor want to be given a rep based on jokes or comments there.

 

As an example, my rep count stands currently at 496. Only a little way to go befoer i get my light green blob. Will someone watching please give me a rep (I will ask for it to be removed afterwards) to give a practical demonstration of how wrong this and I will further comment once this has been done.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With 162,000 registered users, a proportion of which post in the BG., what's to notice? It takes a number of rep points to produce a green blob and as the actual number of rep points is not displayed on posts, there is no of knowing without looking at profiles, which is time consuming.

Also to get a clue to that we would have to monitor a few users very closely over a period of time.

If we closely monitored some users for a week and then found that their rep total hadn't changed, would we then assume that everything was OK.

Or should we then PM 162,000 users to ask if they had given rep points to any of those users and in what forum? I doubt that many of them would remember anyway.

Even if every team member spent literally 24/7 online it wouldn't begin to even scratch the surface.

When users, such as yourself, point these things out to us and bring them to our notice, we can then rectify the position.

Regarding the removal of any spurious rep awarded in the BG, it is probably not a lot of points anyway. How many points have YOU received in the BG. You may well have received none, or loads. Do you know?

How many rep points should we deduct from your total?:D

Call them a bonus as it's getting near to Christmas.:D

 

Regards, Rooster.

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

-------------------------------------------------------

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

------------------------------------------------------

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see where you are coming from Rooster, but I have to disagree on point of principle. I really feel strongly that this is misleading to new members especially and unfair to those who work hard on the forums but perhaps rarely visit the bear garden.

 

Surely there must be some way of being able to see whather reps came from the bear garden? i know that I have identified two in my last ten - no offence or ingratitude to those who supplied them, but I really would prefer them to be removed or, failing that, my rep to be disabled.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can remember someone's REP once being ZEROED for blatant REP Whoring tiglet...;):p

 

On point of principle, MTM, I'd rather my rep was zeroed than unearned and misleading.

 

What I was asking for was a practical demonstartion of how a post which has not assisted any member can lead to someone gaining higher rep count than they are entitled to. as my rep count was nearing the place where I would get an extra blob, I thought it might show people viewing how grossly unfair and misleading this is.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be happy for any rep points I have received from BG posts to be removed and the total recalculated. Currently, the system is making a mockery out of the idea of reps and turning it into a back-slapping exercise.

This was exactly the reason that Bear Garden rep was stopped.

You would see a little clicque of users repping each other for posting a smiley.

I would think that the total rep given in BG is quite low as everyone would believe that it was ineffectual, (as we did).

Now that the situation has been recognised we can put it right.

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

-------------------------------------------------------

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

------------------------------------------------------

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...