Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • NewsBot
      The insect farmers turning to AI to help lower costs

      By NewsBot · Posted

      Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • lookinforinfo
      CEL PCN Claimform - Appealed - Red Lion Car Park, Wetherby LS22 6LR

      By lookinforinfo · Posted

      Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Nick
      CEL PCN Claimform - Appealed - Red Lion Car Park, Wetherby LS22 6LR

      By Nick · Posted

      Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. 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 simply contracted by the landowner 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. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • dx100uk
      Parking Eye ANPR PCN Petrol Station PAPLOC now claimform - overstay - Welcome Break Leicester Forest East (North)

      By dx100uk · Posted

      pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • dx100uk
      CEL PCN Claimform - Appealed - Red Lion Car Park, Wetherby LS22 6LR

      By dx100uk · Posted

      well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

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

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Time of Photos v Time of PCN

Bernie_the_Bolt
 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5946 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

Bernie_the_Bolt

Bernie_the_Bolt

Posted
Posted

I have today received from the LA their bundle of evidence for a PATAS hearing. Irritatingly they have provided no rebuttal to my point by point argument that both the PCN and NTO are non-compliant.

 

But what they have provided is the PAs photos including one that seems to show the PCN on my windscreen. The thing is they show the time that they were taken as 16:07 and 16:08 - but the PCN states first seen at 16:10 and issued at 16:10.

 

Is this a "slip" or a fatal problem for the LA?

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
patdavies

patdavies

Posted
Posted
I have today received from the LA their bundle of evidence for a PATAS hearing. Irritatingly they have provided no rebuttal to my point by point argument that both the PCN and NTO are non-compliant.

 

But what they have provided is the PAs photos including one that seems to show the PCN on my windscreen. The thing is they show the time that they were taken as 16:07 and 16:08 - but the PCN states first seen at 16:10 and issued at 16:10.

 

Is this a "slip" or a fatal problem for the LA?

 

The Slip Rule applies to Magistrates' Court proceedings.

 

I would say that it is not fatal in itself because

1) There is no requirement for photographs, and

2) It is a small disparity between the clock settings of the two machines (camera and ticket machine), and it is obvious that if the picture shows the PCN on the windscreen, then it must have been there prior to the taking of the photograph.

 

However, it does point to an element fo carelessness on the part of the Council and allows you to infer doubt as to the competence of the rest of their actions

Link to post
Share on other sites
B.A.Ts

B.A.Ts

Posted
Posted
I have today received from the LA their bundle of evidence for a PATAS hearing. Irritatingly they have provided no rebuttal to my point by point argument that both the PCN and NTO are non-compliant.

 

But what they have provided is the PAs photos including one that seems to show the PCN on my windscreen. The thing is they show the time that they were taken as 16:07 and 16:08 - but the PCN states first seen at 16:10 and issued at 16:10.

 

Is this a "slip" or a fatal problem for the LA?

Had the same problem

have a read here it makes interesting reading :)

 

Seaman Arts | Traditional, digital artworks, photography

Link to post
Share on other sites
green_and_mean

green_and_mean

Posted
Posted
I have today received from the LA their bundle of evidence for a PATAS hearing. Irritatingly they have provided no rebuttal to my point by point argument that both the PCN and NTO are non-compliant.

 

But what they have provided is the PAs photos including one that seems to show the PCN on my windscreen. The thing is they show the time that they were taken as 16:07 and 16:08 - but the PCN states first seen at 16:10 and issued at 16:10.

 

Is this a "slip" or a fatal problem for the LA?

 

A well used ploy by 'dodgy' PAs is to photograph the envelope on the screen before issuing PCN incase you come back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bernie_the_Bolt

Bernie_the_Bolt

Posted
  • Author
Posted
A well used ploy by 'dodgy' PAs is to photograph the envelope on the screen before issuing PCN incase you come back.

 

This is what I wondered. But does it make it invalid?

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bernie_the_Bolt

Bernie_the_Bolt

Posted
  • Author
Posted

It's all good stuff.

Part of my appeal is that the PCN was not properly served. So far this has been on the basis that the envelope has a message to the PA to remove the paper from the sticky strips "if required to affix to vehicle".

My reading of the RTA is that the PCN has to be fixed to the vehicle if it is not handed to the person in control. As it wasn't handed to me it should have been fixed and as the sticky strips weren't used it wasn't.

So if council say photo of PCN on windscreen is of PCN having been fixed to vehicle I say but it cannot be as the photo was taken before the PCN was issued.

Therefore the Council have no evidence that the PCN was correctly served (apart from the fact that I got it because I made an informal challenge).

The reality is that I agree that what this does is to add to a slap-dash approach to compliance.

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
green_and_mean

green_and_mean

Posted
Posted
Therefore the Council have no evidence that the PCN was correctly served (apart from the fact that I got it because I made an informal challenge).

 

Isn't that a bit of a contradiction, you either got it or you didn't. I think the sticky strips argument is a dead duck, they are not a legal requirement. You would not expect them to be used if it was handed to you, would you? The pcn needs to be fixed in some way to the vehicle, the fact you got it proves it was served in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Michael Browne

Michael Browne

Posted
Posted
So far this has been on the basis that the envelope has a message to the PA to remove the paper from the sticky strips "if required to affix to vehicle".
This could be interpreted as 'use the sticky strips if it can't be attached to the vehicle in any other way' eg under the wipers. Not necessarily as 'you have to use the sticky strips to affix it to the vehicle'
Link to post
Share on other sites
Bernie_the_Bolt

Bernie_the_Bolt

Posted
  • Author
Posted
This could be interpreted as 'use the sticky strips if it can't be attached to the vehicle in any other way' eg under the wipers. Not necessarily as 'you have to use the sticky strips to affix it to the vehicle'

 

Thanks, I'm aware that it's not a "slam-dunk" argument.

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
lookinforinfo

lookinforinfo

Posted
Posted

I have to say that I think you have a stronger argument over the times than with the sticky strips. Casting doubt on when the ticket was issued-was the

camera not showing the right time. When was the last time it was checked?

And what about the meter? If the camera was wrong and checked recently,

could the meter be wrong as quickly too?

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...