Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks everyone. Will speak with the manager first chance I get later today and let you know.
    • own topic created  tnx the info. dx  
    • this debt: MBNA Bank of Scotland Card debt- LInk got a CCJ - now want payment review - MBNA - Consumer Action Group and a barclaycard loan - did you ever send the a CCA in all these years.....when was it taken out?    
    • Welcome to the Forum. The PCN must be subject to Bye laws as the warning near the bottom of the PCN does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Under Section 9 [2][f[] of the Act it should say: (f)warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given— (i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and (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; Their version states they are pursuing you as the driver [because of the Bye laws they cannot transfer the liability from the driver to the keeper] even though you are the keeper. Should it go to Court Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. Obviously on many occasions another member of the family may be driving instead of the keeper. Indeed anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your car. if any of the three cars were not driven by the keeper they are not liable to pay the PCN only the driver is.  as long as they do not divulge who was driving those lovely people at Alliance haven't a hope of winning against them in Court. What a shame. However while those keepers who were not driving are in the clear all is not lost for the other keeper drivers. Alliance still have to prove who was driving which is difficult providing those keepers do not appeal.  It is quite often that on appeal the keeper may say "I entered the car park at....."  immediately giving away that they were the driver. Plus even if you appeal it won't be accepted as a] they lose £100 straight away and b] mostly all the major car parking companies are dishonest scrotes. In the meantime you will be on the receiving end of threatening letters from Alliance, unregulated debt collectors and fifth, sixth or even lower rated solicitors all trying to frighten the life out of you to cough up. They can all be safely ignored since if you don't contact any of them they don't know who was driving so have no information that the can use in Court to identify the driver. Some time in the future they may send you a Letter of Claim which must not be ignored. Just let us know and we will advise a suitable snotty letter to send them which will show that you are not afraid of them and are happy to turn up in court knowing that you will win. Sorry it was a bit long winded.  
    • He’s still At it from a bungalow on Haslingden Road. Changed name to Bamberbridge cars with a Preston based phone number (01772) but dodgy dealings at the bungalow are still a go.
  • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Equity release?

Guest ChloeJane
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5971 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


Start your own new thread

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



Recommended Posts

Guest ChloeJane

I had no where else to post this question and need some advice!

Also anyone that may have had experiences in this area, would be greatly appreciated for any input.


We are in a situation whereby we are needing money for legal fees. We have secured a QC on a matter and now trying to fund it.


As we do not have the money, our inlaws have kindly offered to assist. In doing so they are looking at either a mortgage over their property or an equity release program.


The property value is £250,000 and we require £30,000. The house is to be split between my partner and his brother and we are only using the inheritence early, but don't know which way to go. The silly thing is we require the money for less than 6 months till the case is ended and then will pay it all back!


So what I want to ask by any financial guru, is what way we should go. Equity release or mortgage and which will allow us to repay the money quickly afterwards with very few penalties.


At the end of the day, it is thought that we are only using the inheritence money early, and only for a short amount of time. So is a mortgage the way to go? Or is equity release?


Any advice welcomed. Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn;t advise them to secure anything on their property, however well intentioned, what happens if you can't pay this back in 6 months? And if you can afford to repay after 6 months what is the asset you are realising or are you basing the repayment on the hopes you will win the court case?

Can you not raise a secured loan on your own property?

Consumer Health Forums - where you can discuss any health or relationship matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest ChloeJane

We don't have a property we own.


His parents thought of equity release but perhaps not from what we have read. Will keep hunting for solutions as maybe a secured loan with the property as gaurantee is the way to go?


We don't have a choice though with having a QC now and funding them the only issue. Might phone tomorrow and speak to a financial advisor as has been stated.


Run out of ideas...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest ChloeJane

The QC said our chances were 75%. So we sort of banked on that. I am going to try the Pro Bono Unit first, this is just a final last minute option but we need to arrange it by Mid January, hence looking at options.


You don't think it a good idea?

Link to post
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by ChloeJane viewpost.gif

I am so sorry I am posting this here...but had no where else to post and had such a bad that I couldn't be much lower if I was honest. Ever had one of those days, where you wish the world would stop turning for a minute, so you can get off. I think today is that day. So going to post my rant and hope for a hug !


Firstly, I cannot go to Manchester as my partners father has fallen critically ill. Then, to top my day off....I receive finally a reply from the QC Chambers in my current case with a complaint I made about misleading the court.


So you write, stating an injustice is occuring....this was their reply.....


Dear Miss **



Mr. G has asked me to reply as follows.

Mr. K has shown Mr. G your letter to him dated 3rd December 2007. Mr. G has also received your letter dated 5th December 2007, addressed to “Head of Chambers”.



He has now also received your follow up letter of 7th December 2007.



Mr G has asked me to acknowledge receipt of these letters, and to provide you with a copy of Chambers Complaints Procedure, which I attach.



However Mr G has also asked me to explain that, as he understands the position, you are currently a party to litigation which is taking place before a judge of the High Court, in which you are representing yourself and Mr K is representing the Claimant. Your complaints appear to be directed at the manner in which Mr K is conducting that litigation on behalf of his client.

The litigation is continuing.



In the circumstances, Mr G believes that you should make your complaints to the judge. It would not be appropriate for these Chambers to attempt our own investigation or invoke our own Complaints Procedure, with regard to matters which are currently before the High Court.


Your sincerely


Your kidding right????



My reply



Thankyou for your reply.


If I was not a litigant in person the tactics and complaint would not have arisen as I am sure such conduct would not be displayed.


Due to Mr K dishonesty I don't get an opportunity nor have I had to bring the matters before the Judge. I tried when we were at court on the 28th.


Obviously, it appears that Justice is only afforded by those with Money which does in fact make a mockery of the law, if a QC and Solicitors can deceive and mislead the Court.


I have brought to you a genuine complaint about conduct. Whether litigation is ongoing or not, I fail to see that this has any bearing on a complaint made of misconduct and misleading the Court.


I have asked that the misleading of the Court and misconduct cease and be investigated. From your reply, you are stating that investigations cannot be completed until after litigation. In a complaint of the court being misled and misconduct, the outcome of the investigation is imperative to ensure an injustice does not occur.


By your reply, failure to investigate such a complaint would have you party to the misconduct and misleading of the Court at this stage by all matters of legal argument.


I am rather astounded by your reply. Such misconduct can have me losing my case, whereby I will then be forced through to the appeals process and another year gone, when I have simply asked you to investigate the claim.


QC K refuses to acknowledge a complaint and further refuses to investigate the matter with the conduct of O C Solicitors.


This is rather a big circle isn't it. An injustice must occur to gain answers for an injustice that could have been prevented at the onset if the complaints investigated.


Upon your advice I will raise the matter with the Court. Please be advised, that if I do in fact lose my case due to dishonesty by QC K and the very reasons this complaint has been brought to your attention, any appeal process I will supply this letter to the court as evidence and will look to mitigate my loss with a claim for further loss against the Chambers which, by all arguments would clearly have prevented such a process would you have investigated my complaint at the onset.


I am sure that would be a point arguable in law.


While extremely disappointed with your reply and believe that you are not addressing the matter as it appears "closing ranks", I will seek to do all I can to bring this matter to Justice. Dishonesty, by such powerful advocates as yourselves, does not excuse such conduct afforded at the price of money to the highest bidder. An element of Justice and professionalism must prevail.


Kind Regards,

Now, I think the law is an A** !!! I hate the British law system it is a farce and only those with money can fight big battles or you get abused by the very system you seek to find justice in!!!


ALL HUGS please place in my hug pot...need them.




It would be prudent if somebody were to advise chloe jane that she is already the subject of 2 court injunctions. It would appear that cag is allowing her to use this forum to publicise her action. This is most unwise. She should remember why she is being sued in the first instance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...