Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
  • 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

Problems with Capquest!!


quinny82
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6071 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

About a year ago i received a letter from a debt collectors agency saying that thay had been instructed by Littlewoods to collect a debt i had of £172. This came a a complete shock to me as i have never had a Littlewoods account, i called them up and explained this to them and was told that someone using my name and date of birth had created an account and had goods post to them which were never paid for. I explained that i had never heard of the address where the goods were sent and was told if i faxed proof that i lived elsewhere during the time the account was set up and goods delivered they would take me off there system. I did this and also contacted the police who told me that the crime was against Littlewoods and not myself and that they would need to contact them? I called Littlewoods and had confirmation that they had received and accepted my documents. About 3 months ago i received a letter from Moorcroft debt collectors telling me that they were instructed by Littlewoods to recover the debt!!! I imediately called Littlewoods and was told that they had never received these documents! This time I posted the documents via special delivery and also to the debt collectors as they had started to harass me about it. I called up Littlewoods again and was told that they had received my documents and acepted them and they because they had sold the account on they would need to buy it back which could take upto 3 weeks. I contacted Littlewoods again and was told that they had successfully brought the account back and were clearing it from my name. However i then received a letter from Capquest saying that they had been sold the account and that if i didn't pay the debt in 7 days that would be taking legal action. I callled Littlewoods who told me this this couldn't be the case as they now owned the account and that they would write to Capquest. Now again i jhave received a letter from Capquest saying they are getting a court order to get baillifs on to me!! I called them up and they are staying that they still own the account and that Littlewoods haven't been in contact with them!

 

I really don't know what to do as it feels like i am going in circles! As everytime i contact Littlewoods they tell me they own the account not Capquest and that they have indeed contacted them and when i call Capquest they deny this! I have received a letter from Littlewoods saying that they now own the account and that i was not responsible for it and having document my calls to them and who i spoke to. What should i do as this is really stressing me out!:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to the CapQuest club.

Now don't worry about their nastygrams as they are designed to scare.

I received the same court and bailiff letter myself this morning.

 

Now time for action:

 

First NEVER talk to these "people" on the phone as they will try and get you to agree to anything.

 

Before you even think about making any sort of acknowledgement or payment to a DCA you MUST ensure that they have the LEGAL right to collect the debt.

This is achieved by requesting a copy of the Signed, Executed Credit Agreement via a Consumer Credit Act (CCA) request.

There is a template letter to be found here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/20758-creditors-dcas-letter-templates.html

Letter N.

Is it important to start the letter:

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY in Big Bold letters.

 

It is best to send this request via recorded/special delivery as there are some inportant deadlines to observe.

 

After 12 WORKING days the "debt" is in default and stays that way until the request is complied with.

If a FURTHER month passes then the DCA has committed a summary criminal offence and the matter should be referred to Trading Standards for action once the DCA continues to demand payment.

 

I hope this clarifies some things.

  • Haha 1

Be VERY careful whose advice you listen too

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your help! Will get onto this right away!

 

It helps to know that i'm not alone.

 

My only question is where did they get my details from? As it was always Moorcroft who I previously dealt, then all of a sudden Capquest get involved!

 

I appreciate your advice, hopefully i'll get some answers soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to the CapQuest club.

Now don't worry about their nastygrams as they are designed to scare.

I received the same court and bailiff letter myself this morning.

 

Now time for action:

 

First NEVER talk to these "people" on the phone as they will try and get you to agree to anything.

 

Before you even think about making any sort of acknowledgement or payment to a DCA you MUST ensure that they have the LEGAL right to collect the debt.

This is achieved by requesting a copy of the Signed, Executed Credit Agreement via a Consumer Credit Act (CCA) request.

There is a template letter to be found here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/20758-creditors-dcas-letter-templates.html

Letter N.

Is it important to start the letter:

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY in Big Bold letters.

 

It is best to send this request via recorded/special delivery as there are some inportant deadlines to observe.

 

After 12 WORKING days the "debt" is in default and stays that way until the request is complied with.

If a FURTHER month passes then the DCA has committed a summary criminal offence and the matter should be referred to Trading Standards for action once the DCA continues to demand payment.

 

I hope this clarifies some things.

 

I know that this is your standard reply curly, but it is irrellevant in this case. Why should she be asking for anything and paying good money when she has all the paperwork she needs already from Littlewoods.

 

All this will cost now is a stamp telling Capquest to put it where the sun don't shine and to take her to court if they so wished, and that no further correspondence will be entered into.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...