Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • no i meant the email from parcel2go which email address did they send it from and who signed it off (whos name is at the bottom)
    • I understand confusion with this thread.  I tried to keep threads separate because there have been so many angles.    But a team member merged them all.  This is why it's hard to keep track. This forum exists to help little people fight injustice - however big or small.  Im here to try get a decent resolution. Not to give in to the ' big boys'. My "matter' became complicated 'matters' simply because a lender refused to sell a property. What can I say?  I'll try in a nutshell to give an overview: There's a long lease property. I originally bought it short lease with a s.146 on it from original freeholder.  I had no concerns. So lender should have been able to sell a well-maintained lovely long lease property.  The property was great. The issue is not the property.  Economy, sdlt increases, elections, brexit, covid, interest hikes etc didn't help.  The issue is simple - the lender wanted to keep it.    Before repo I offered to clear my loan.  I was a bit short and lender refused.  They said (recorded) they thought the property was worth much more and they were happy to keep accruing interest (in their benefit) until it reached a point where they felt they could repo and still easily quickly sell to get their £s back.  This was a mistake.  The market was (and is) tough.   2y later the lender ceo bid the same sum to buy the property for himself. He'd rejected higher offers in the intervening period whilst accruing interest. I had the property under offer to a fantastic niche buyer but lender rushed to repo and buyer got spooked and walked.  It had taken a long time to find such a lucrative buyer.  A sale which would have resulted in £s and another asset for me. Post repo lender had 1 offer immediately.  But dragged out the process for >1y - allegedly trying to get other offers. But disclosure shows there was only one valid buyer. Lender appointed receiver (after 4 months) - simply to try acquire the freehold.  He used his powers as receiver to use me, as leaseholder, to serve notice on freeholders.  Legally that failed. Meanwhile lender failed to secure property - and squatters got in (3 times).  And they failed to maintain it.  So freeholders served a dilapidations notice (external) - on me as leaseholder (cc-ed to lender).   (That's how it works legally) I don't own the freehold.  But I am a trustee and have to do right by the freeholders.  This is where matters got/ get complicated.  And probably lose most caggers.   Lawyers got involved for the freeholders to firstly void the receiver enfranchisement notice. Secondly, to serve the dilapidations notice.  The lack of maintenance was in breach of lease and had to be served to protect fh asset. The lender did no repairs. They said a buyer would undertake them. Which was probably correct. If they had sold. After 1y lender finally agreed to sell to the 1st offeror and contracts went with lawyers.  Within 1 month lender reneged.  Lender tried to suggest buyer walked. Evidence shows he/ his lawyers continued trying to exchange (cash) for 4 months.  Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been to renege and for ceo to take control.   I still think that's their plan. Lender then stupidly chose to pretty much bulldoze the property.  Other stuff was going on in the background. After repo I was in touch by phone and email and lender knew post got to me.   Despite this, after about 10 months (before and then during covid), they deliberately sent SDs and eventually a B petition to an incorrect address and an obscure small court.  They never served me properly.  (In hindsight I understand they hoped to get a backdoor B - so they could keep the property that way.)  Eventually the random court told them to email me by way of service.  At this point their ruse to make me B failed.  I got a lawyer (friend paid). The B petition was struck out. They’d failed to include the property as an asset. They were in breach of insolvency rules. Simultaneously the receiver again appointed lawyers to act on my behalf as leaseholder. This time to serve notice on the freeholders for a lease extension.  He had hoped to try and vary the strict lease. Evidence shows the already long length of lease wasn't an issue.  The lender obviously hoped to get round their lack of permission to do works (which they were already doing) by hoping to remove the strict clauses that prevent leaseholder doing alterations.   The extension created a new legal angle for me to deal with.  I had to act as trustee for freeholders against me as leaseholder/ the receiver.  Inconsistencies and incompetence by receiver lawyers dragged this out 3y.  It still isn't properly resolved.  Meanwhile - going back to the the works the lender undertook. The works were consciously in breach of lease.  The lender hadn't remedied the breaches listed in the dilapidations notice.  They destroyed the property.  The trustees compiled all evidence.  The freeholders lawyers then served a forfeiture notice. This notice started a different legal battle. I was acting for the freeholders against what the lender had done on my behalf as leaseholder.  This legal battle took 3y to resolve. The simple exit would have been for lender to sell. A simple agreement to remedy the breaches and recompense the freeholders in compensation - and there's have been clean title to sell.  That option was proposed to them.   This happened by way of mediation for all parties 2y ago.  A resolution option was put forward and in principle agreed.  But immediately after the lender lawyers failed to engage.  A hard lesson to learn - mediation cannot be referred to in court. It's considered w/o prejudice. The steps they took have made no difference to their ability to sell the property.  Almost 3y since they finished works they still haven't sold. ** ** I followed up some leads myself.  A qualified cash buyer offered me a substantial sum.  The lender and receiver both refused it.   I found another offer in disclosure.  6 months later someone had apparently offered a substantial sum via an agent.  The receiver again rejected it.  The problem of course was that the agent had inflated the market price to get the business. But no-one was or is ever going to offer their list price.  Yet the receiver wanted/wants to hold out for the list price.  Which means 1y later not only has it not sold - disclosure shows few viewings and zero interest.  It's transparently over-priced.  And tarnished. For those asking why I don't give up - I couldn't/ can't.  Firstly I have fiduciary duties as a trustee. Secondly, legal advice indicates I (as leaseholder) could succeed with a large compensation claim v the lender.  Also - I started a claim v my old lawyer and the firm immediately reimbursed some £s. That was encouraging.  And a sign to continue.  So I'm going for compensation.  I had finance in place (via friend) to do a deal and take the property back off the lender - and that lawyer messed up bad.   He should have done a deal.  Instead further years have been wasted.   Maybe I only get back my lost savings - but that will be a result.   If I can add some kind of complaint/ claim v the receiver's conscious impropriety I will do so.   I have been left with nothing - so fighting for something is worth it. The lender wants to talk re a form of settlement.  Similar to my proposal 2y ago.  I have a pretty clear idea of what that means to me.  This is exactly why I do not give up.  And why I continue to ask for snippets of advice/ pointers on cag.  
    • It was all my own work based on my previous emails to P2G which Bank has seen.
    • I was referring to #415 where you wrote "I was forced to try to sell - and couldn't." . And nearer the start in #79 .. "I couldn't sell.  I had an incredibly valuable asset. Huge equity.  But the interest accrued / the property market suffered and I couldn't find a buyer even at a level just to clear the debt." In #194 you said you'd tried to sell for four years.  The reason for these points is that a lot of the claims against for example your surveyor, solicitor, broker, the lender and now the receiver are mainly founded in a belief that they should have been able to do something but did not. Things that might seem self evident to you but not necessarily to others. Pressing these claims may well need a bit more hard evidence, rather than an appeal to common sense. Can you show evidence of similar properties, with similar freehold issues, selling readily? And solid reasons why the lender should have been able to sell when you couldn't.
    • You can use a family's address.   The only caveat is for the final hearing you'd need to be there in person   HOWEVER i'd expect them to pay if its only £200 because costs of attending will be higher than that
  • 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

CP Plus private parking and Trethowans


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5838 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

I have read loads of other posts and am not sure what to do.

 

I have a company car so the vehicle is registered to the company not me.

I went into the clacket lane services M25 which is controlled by CP Plus.

 

My wife was desperate for the loo so i pulled into the empty coach park which has the door closest to the toilets. While i was waiting in the car the attendant came over and told me I shouldn't be in the coach park ( i explained that i was waiting for my wife) but he didn't tell me to move or issue me with a charge notice.

 

A month later a letter from Trethowans solicitors, acting on behalf of CP Plus arrived at my office.

It seems to have the usual demands and threat of court action.

 

I have emailed Trethowans and explained what happened (now i realise that was a bad move) and they put the proceedings on hold while they got a copy of the Charge Notice which they sent to the office (220 miles from where i am based!).

 

They still maintain the debt is due but will allow the reduced rate of £45 instead of £80 to be paid as I didn't have the Charge Notice to be able to pay it early.

 

If i wish to appeal they have told me to write them a letter.

 

I have since checked and there are signs about parking in the coach bays and the fines etc. at the entrance.

 

Can I appeal because he didn't actually give me a ticket or put it on my car?

 

I assume that i can't use the angle about who was driving as I have already told them i was.

 

What should I do? Fight it or pay £45?

I think they use very underhand tactics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They cannot fine you but technically can charge you £45 for parking in the Coach bay if thats what it says on the sign. Whether they can legally collect the debt is another matter completely and a matter of hot debate on the board. There are several sticky posts at the top regarding private parking 'fines'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read loads of other posts and am not sure what to do.

 

I have a company car so the vehicle is registered to the company not me.

I went into the clacket lane services M25 which is controlled by CP Plus.

 

My wife was desperate for the loo so i pulled into the empty coach park which has the door closest to the toilets. While i was waiting in the car the attendant came over and told me I shouldn't be in the coach park ( i explained that i was waiting for my wife) but he didn't tell me to move or issue me with a charge notice.

 

A month later a letter from Trethowans solicitors, acting on behalf of CP Plus arrived at my office.

It seems to have the usual demands and threat of court action.

 

I have emailed Trethowans and explained what happened (now i realise that was a bad move) and they put the proceedings on hold while they got a copy of the Charge Notice which they sent to the office (220 miles from where i am based!).

 

They still maintain the debt is due but will allow the reduced rate of £45 instead of £80 to be paid as I didn't have the Charge Notice to be able to pay it early.

 

If i wish to appeal they have told me to write them a letter.

 

I have since checked and there are signs about parking in the coach bays and the fines etc. at the entrance.

 

Can I appeal because he didn't actually give me a ticket or put it on my car?

 

I assume that i can't use the angle about who was driving as I have already told them i was.

 

What should I do? Fight it or pay £45?

I think they use very underhand tactics.

 

 

Read my paper at the top of the page, the sticky. Email me and I'll help you through it. From what I read it sounds as though there are a few defences to be relied upon.

 

Regards,

 

PJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Thanks for the offer Pete but it looks like nothing can be done.

 

I have read lot's of interesting advice on the forum but my bosses on the other hand were not convinced. As the car belongs to the company, they have paid the fine and it will come out my wages:(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on how much of a fuss you are willing to make. Unless specifically detailed in your contract, your employer cannot make unauthorised deductions from your wages. Awkward I know, but you may have every right to challenge them on this.

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the offer Pete but it looks like nothing can be done.

 

I have read lot's of interesting advice on the forum but my bosses on the other hand were not convinced. As the car belongs to the company, they have paid the fine and it will come out my wages:(

 

I've encountered this problem before and I can solve this problem so that you don't pay out. There is plenty that can be done. Get hold of my email address, which for the moment is at this site - PePiPoo: Helping the motorist to get justice in the articles section, look for the Private Parking Guide. Email me and we can solve this problem. Your company may have paid the ticket but that was very much their mistake. You are not obliged to pay.

 

Regards,

 

PJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

on 11th December 2007 CP Plus placed £60 Charge Notices on two out of three cars parked in a four-car bay. They claimed on my ticket that my vehicle was "parked in 2 bay" (sic) but quoted reason 08, which is actually "Causing an obstruction to other users". The two cars they ticketed were at each end of the bay. Another vehicle (not ticketed) was parked immediately next to mine (no obstruction there, then) then there was a space, and then the other ticketed vehicle. Luckily I had my camera with me and took many photographs to illustrate the lunacy of issuing charge notices in these circumstances. I knew the drivers of both of the other vehicles and we all kept our parking tickets to confirm the date and time, which also appears on my digital camera. I appealled the Notice the same day, enclosing photographs, and on the 14th December CP Plus wrote indicating that they were expecting payment despite my appeal. I wrote to them again on the 20th December, with a copy to English Heritage, their employers - as suggested by CP Plus. By 25th April I had received no response from either English Heritage or CP Plus and so I telephoned them to ask when I could expect a letter confirming that the appeal had been upheld. They told me that papers had been forwarded to Trethowans on 18th January 2008 and suggested that I telephone them. I did so and learned that because DVLA checks had quoted my vehicle colour as "brown" - which it is not - the documents had been (I quote) "ditched". I requested that Trethowans should write to me confirming that the Notice was negated, as they told me, and gave them my address, which - of course - they did not have, presumably because of the aforementioned "ditching". Slightly phased that my vehicle details were incorrect I then checked the DVLA website myself and found that my vehicle colour was, quite correctly, recorded as "silver". I am still waiting for the letter from Trethowans. Does anybody know if there is a time limit on Penalty Notices since I would quite like to get rid of the photographs on my camera card but am loathe to do so unless I can be SURE this matter has been dropped by Trethowans and CP Plus!

Link to post
Share on other sites

ignore the troll. It is trite law that penalties are unenforceable in contracts - and thats for cases where the contract exists.

And third parties cannot be held to a contract.

PPC invoices are con - they work on threats and misrepresentation. all of it rubbish that prey on people who don't know the reality. folks on here do know the reality. thats what the trolls turn up.

Now if the PPCs went for actual losses it would be a different question.

for a free car park that is zero and or a paid car park it is the price of a ticket covering the period. But of course that would be the landowner's losses so the few pence available would be due to the landowner. Hey presto ! the reality means there is no business for the PPCs. Which is why their model relies on deceit. there is a recent post of mine on here detailing just some of the statutes they habitually transgress. Just ignore them (sorry Geral).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Geral's sentence is correct if taken literally. The conclusion is the opposite of what he is hoping to imply however. This is a legal, penalty, charge, and is therefore not enforceable. :)

Post by me are intended as a discussion of the issues involved, as these are of general interest to me and others on the forum. Although it is hoped such discussion will be of use to readers, before exposing yourself to risk of loss you should not rely on any principles discussed without confirming the situation with a qualified person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Geral.

 

The IEA is entirely entitled to issue a charge for unauthorised parking.

 

Am fro cuderth near barnsla, an if tha recons am bana stump up all that brass for summat that writen on bog paper thaz as much chance on gerrin it as thy as on me votin fer thatchers

Tha wonts to cum in arta rein as thas gerrin wet wen will tha learn wot we saying to tha.

 

wot part on f*c off dunt tha get?

Onny road am of't club cos comedian iz on an iz name iz geral slowcoach. am teld iz az daft as soft mick an thats daft.

Uncle Fed fro cuderth.(Joke)

Link to post
Share on other sites

ata orieght barnsla boy.

tha might no me uncle fred, he wore on't railway at cuudy shed on neets 6 til 6.

Onny road he wore up midland road, in royston wen e saw a bloke in a yeller at daubin a mini wiwot the calls a penulty ticit.

onny road uncle fred thowt that onny penulti he new abaht wa wen miss smiff gid im undred lines for talkin in't class tha noz wen he wore i'standud fower in't infants scoil.

wen iz mam fun owt she leathered im wi me grandads pit belt an med is bum red.

Int dark tha cud see im coming a mile away wi is bum on fire.

fred teld me i'dunt like these ere pakin fims coz thes robbin gits and e recons booby bird ought to rattle em rand lug oil wi his cape .

onny road al see thi int'alex e'royston for a sneck lifter on sunda dinna.

Tha noz worra mean

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...