Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. 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 only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
    • Please provide advice on the following situation: I rented out my property to four students for 16 months until March 2024. Initially, the property was in very good condition, but now it needs extensive renovation. This includes redoing the bathroom, replacing the kitchen, removing wallpaper, and redecorating due to significant mould growth. The tenants also left their furniture on the grass, which is owned by the local authority. As a landlord, I've met all legal requirements. It seems the damage was caused by poor ventilation—windows were always closed, and heating wasn't used. There was also a bathroom leak fixed by reapplying silicone. I tried to claim insurance, but it was denied, citing tenant behaviour as the cause by looking at the photos, which isn't covered. The deposit barely covers the repair costs, or else I'll have to pursue money claims, which I've never done before and am unsure about its legal complications or costs. Any thoughts on this?
  • 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
      • 160 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

Speeding camera fine


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3886 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

Nearly 2 weeks ago my daughter serverly broke both her wrist and after a

night in the hospital came home the following day.

But the hospital gave her tablets and not medicene( she is only 9)

That night she was in agony so I went out to try and get her some pain releaf , I was caught doing 37 in a 30 zone.

My question is the camera got me from the front which came as a shock

and blinded me (and my son) for seconds.

Are they allowed to do that?

This is dangerous and could have caused a accident.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a good point but I would imagine it is legal for a camera to flash from infront, I'm no expert in this area and hope that someone with more knowledge helps soon. I will point out that driving at 37 in a 30 zone could also have caused an accident but I appreciate the circumstances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry about a speeding fine, a frontal gatso picture is inadmissable, just spent about 20 mins researching.

 

I agree with you that it is really dangerous though - surely that leads to a drivers inability to pay due care and attention to a road?

 

Dani

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it has a big yellow box.

 

I do admit that I broke the speed limit which I regret.

 

The only thing what gets me is they is no need for a camera

where it is because there is no path on one side of the road

and no one can pass there at all,there is no school,no shops

nothing rearly.

It was also 20.05 at night so it was dark which made the flash

stand out more, which to me was dangerous in it self.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry about a speeding fine, a frontal gatso picture is inadmissable, just spent about 20 mins researching.

 

I agree with you that it is really dangerous though - surely that leads to a drivers inability to pay due care and attention to a road?

 

Dani

 

Gatso cameras take a photo of the rear of the vehicle.

 

Gatso speed cameras explained, UK Gatso traffic cameras

 

Truvelo take a photo of the front of the vehicle.

 

Truvelo speed cameras explained, UK Truvelo traffic cameras

 

Hopefully you are not confusing the 2 devices Dani.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gatso cameras take a photo of the rear of the vehicle.

 

Gatso speed cameras explained, UK Gatso traffic cameras

 

Truvelo take a photo of the front of the vehicle.

 

Truvelo speed cameras explained, UK Truvelo traffic cameras

 

Hopefully you are not confusing the 2 devices Dani.

 

That website has glaring inaccuracies.

 

1) Gatso are not type approved to cover all lanes of the M25 (or any other multi-lane situation) at once - only one lane at a time.

 

2) Truvelo do not have an invisible infra-red flash - it is visible magenta. This is the manufacturer's website.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was an emergency you wont need to pay the fine. You need proof that you were taking an ill child to hospital though. My parents have had to rush me to hospital a few times past 2 sets of cameras at either end of the village and always get away with it as they prove that:

1. i was in need of urgent medical attention

2. they drove straight to the hospital using the fastest route possible

3. they could get me there faster than an ambulance could get to me.

Any posts submitted here on the Consumer Action Group under the user name GlasweJen may not necessarily be the view of the poster, CAG or indeed any normal person.

 

I've become addicted to green blobs (I have 2 now) so feel free to tip my scales if I ever make sense.;-)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Truvelo Cameras don't flash, Rob - well in any perceptible way - unlike Gatsos which have a distinct flash.

 

Absolute and utter nonsense.

 

Go to the manufacturer's link I provided - Truvelo has a magenta flash.

 

This manufacturer's brochure clearly shows the colour of the flash on page 3

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolute and utter nonsense.

 

Go to the manufacturer's link I provided - Truvelo has a magenta flash.

 

This manufacturer's brochure clearly shows the colour of the flash on page 3

 

Oh dear semantics again,

 

Rather than typing quickly, I will spell it out.

 

A magenta flash is not as perceptible as a white flash, and shouldn't blind you. I say shouldn't, but there are reported incidents of truvelo camera filters not working.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jenschnifer

 

It wasn't on the way to hospital, she had just come out. I was trying to get pain killers, she has broke both Radius and Ulmer bones in both wrists.

If Phamasists (even just one) opened on a sunday night I would have been fine, but I had been to 3 local corner shops already and was concerned over the pain she was in waiting for me to get home.

 

Its ok because I haven't any points anyway so this will be my first.

I just find it dangerous to be flashing someone from the front and thought it maybe illigal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear semantics again,

 

Rather than typing quickly, I will spell it out.

 

A magenta flash is not as perceptible as a white flash, and shouldn't blind you. I say shouldn't, but there are reported incidents of truvelo camera filters not working.

 

No not semantics. You're saying now not perceptibly white. However, your previous post said not perceptible.

 

It is virtually impossible for a filter to fail - most cases of non-magenta flash are caused by the filter being missing.

 

Truvelo Cameras don't flash, Rob - well in any perceptible way - unlike Gatsos which have a distinct flash.
A Truvelo flash is required as part of type approval to be magenta and is definitely perceptible (look at the photos on the manufacturer's link I gave).

 

If it is not magenta, then the prosecution of the speeding case fails as the device cannot be certified as operating according to type approval.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Notice of Intended Prosecution. It's the notice that has to be sent out to the registered keeper within 14 days of the offence (in most circumstances, there are some exceptions) and the registered keeper is obliged to nominate who was driving.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah got it yesturday.

Pink form, I didn't know what to do with it,never had one before.

I had to fill it in though because I was in my partners car.

Luckly I had told him about it on the night it happened.

I have filled it in and sent it yesturday but I asked the post office for a

reciept because of the strikes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a shame I hope she gets better.

 

Just in case something similar happens again you can ask hospitals if they'll give you an alternate to tablets if you've got a kid who doesn't like them and the pharmacist has it in stock. My aunts a pharmacist in a Glasgow hospital and she says they have loads of stuff in liquid form for kids but doctors outside the kids wards don't tend to give them just because they're used to writing out a script for the adult version. Hope your daughters arm gets better, did she get to pick the colour of her stookie?

Any posts submitted here on the Consumer Action Group under the user name GlasweJen may not necessarily be the view of the poster, CAG or indeed any normal person.

 

I've become addicted to green blobs (I have 2 now) so feel free to tip my scales if I ever make sense.;-)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

She wanted (our rather her brother wanted) black and white for Newcastle United but when she was in theater they just put white on up to her shoulders, she didn't have a say in it.

 

As for the tablets, she was having liquid all the way through her stay in hospital so I persumed they would have gave her liquid, they would ask which one she'd perfer so I said liquid every time.

I suppose your right with the Doctor, never thought of that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shame, but the white ones are easiest to write on!

 

To answer the court question I don't think you have to go for little speeding offences, I think that can get done by post unless it was really bad like 100 in a 40 zone or something.

Any posts submitted here on the Consumer Action Group under the user name GlasweJen may not necessarily be the view of the poster, CAG or indeed any normal person.

 

I've become addicted to green blobs (I have 2 now) so feel free to tip my scales if I ever make sense.;-)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it has a big yellow box.

 

I do admit that I broke the speed limit which I regret.

 

The only thing what gets me is they is no need for a camera

where it is because there is no path on one side of the road

and no one can pass there at all,there is no school,no shops

nothing rearly.

It was also 20.05 at night so it was dark which made the flash

stand out more, which to me was dangerous in it self.

 

Quite obviously it is there because people speed...you are proof!

 

I just don't get all this mitigation with offending,

 

'I only stole because it was there, nobody was around, it was dark...'

 

Give me a break for Gawd's sake.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...