Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • Hi everyone, Apologies for bringing up the same topic regarding these individuals. I wish I had found this forum earlier, as I've seen very similar cases. However, I need your help in figuring out what to do next because we've involved our partners/resellers. I work as an IT Manager in a company outside of the UK. We acquired a license from a certified reseller (along with a support agreement) and also obtained training sessions from them. The issue arose when we needed to register two people for the training sessions, so we used an external laptop for the second user to keep up with the sessions for only a month. During this period, the laptop was solely used for the training sessions. After two weeks, my boss forwarded an email to me from Ms Vinces, stating that we are using illicit software from SolidWorks. Since this has never happened to me or anyone we know, I went into panic mode and had a meeting with her. During the meeting, we explained that we were using an external laptop solely for the training sessions and that the laptop had not been used within the company since her email. She informed us that for such cases, there are demos and special licenses (though our reseller did not mention these types of licenses when we made our initial purchase). She then mentioned that we had utilized products worth approximately €25k and presented us with two options: either pay the agreed value or acquire SolidWorks products. We expressed that the cost was too high, and our business couldn't support such expenses. I assured her that we would discuss the matter with the company board and get back to her. After the meeting, we contacted the company reseller from whom we purchased the license, explained the situation, and mentioned the use of an external laptop. They said they would speak to Maria and help mediate the situation. We hoped to significantly reduce the cost, perhaps to that of a 1-year professional license. Unfortunately, we were mistaken. The reseller mediated a value €2k less than what Maria had suggested (essentially, we would need to acquire two professional lifetime licenses and two years of support for a total of €23k). This amount is still beyond our means, but they insisted that the price was non-negotiable and wouldn't be reduced any further. The entire situation feels odd because she never provided us with addresses or other evidence (which I should have requested), and she's pressuring us to resolve the matter by the end of the month, with payment to be made through the reseller. This makes me feel as though the reseller is taking advantage of the situation to profit from it. Currently, we're trying to buy some time. We plan to meet with the reseller next week but are uncertain about how to proceed with them or whether we should respond to the mediator.
    • Thanks London  if I’ve read correctly the questionaire wants me to post his actual name on a public forum… is that correct.  I’ve only had a quick read so far
    • Plenty of success stories, also bear in mind not everyone updates the forum.  Overdale's want you to roll over and pay, without using your enshrined legal right to defend. make you wet yourself in fear that a solicitor will Take you to court, so you will pay up without question. Most people do just that,  but you are lucky that you have found this place and can help you put together a good defence. You should get reading on some other Capital One and Overdale's cases on the forum to get an idea of how it works.  
    • In both versions the three references to "your clients" near the end need to be changed to "you" or "your" as Alliance are not using solicitors, they have sent the LoC themselves. Personally I'd change "Dear ALLIANCE PARKING Litigation Dept" to "Dear Kev".  It would show you'd done your homework, looked up the company, and seen it's a pathetic one-man band rather than having any departments.  The PPCs love to pretend they have some official power and so you should be scared of them - showing you've sussed their sordid games and you're confident about fighting them undermines all this.  In fact that's the whole point of a snotty letter - to show you'd be big trouble for them if they did do court so better to drop you like a hot potato and go and pursue mugs who just give in instead. In the very, very, very, very unlikely case of Kev doing court, it'd be better that he didn't know in advance all the legal arguments you'd be using, so I'd heavily reduce the number of cards being played.
  • 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 
        • 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

fined twice for no tax


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5942 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

Hello there all.

yes I do know you should'nt drive a car whithout tax on it,but this is what happend and dont think it is right

the police stopped me and gave me an on the spot fine of £60 or face going to court so I payed the £60

 

lone behold a month later the dvla write to me and say I must pay £131 or face going to court is this right?

 

and I thought threats of you pay me this or go to court is somthing that can be challenged in the human rights act?

 

any help here please

Link to post
Share on other sites

they gave me a very long piece of paper and the on the spot fine went to central fines at rugely which they stated they would not be giving a reciept for you can use your state ment as evidence this was payed

 

the dvla then wrote to me which i recieved today

pay £131 or go to court

 

date of offence 03 12 07

 

this was reported by the police although they said if the first £60 was payed no action would be taken.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks to me that the police ticket was given for the offence of failing to display your tax disc. A report will go to DVLA and if they find that the vehicle wasn't taxed they will then take action for that as well. It should have the offence that you were given the ticket for on the piece of paper the police gave you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so in other words it would have been better to of gone to court in the first place rather than pay an on the spot fine?

 

the police also said to me that if the on the spot fine was paid no further action would be taken but now that seems to be bull suet it clearly states that the police reported it....I guess there is no way out of this one?

Link to post
Share on other sites

so in other words it would have been better to of gone to court in the first place rather than pay an on the spot fine?

 

No because there are 2 separate offences. The first is not displaying a tax disc, and by paying £60 you would not be taken to court. The second is from the DVLA for not having any tax at all.
Link to post
Share on other sites

You could write in and complain stating that if you had in fact gone to court you could only have been reported for the more serious of the two actual crimes, and have been fined accordingly (weeks wages or so I think?), and that as such the police officer acted incorrectly by giving you a ticket for the less serious offence in order to deal with it on the spot....

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could write in and complain stating that if you had in fact gone to court you could only have been reported for the more serious of the two actual crimes, and have been fined accordingly (weeks wages or so I think?), and that as such the police officer acted incorrectly by giving you a ticket for the less serious offence in order to deal with it on the spot....

 

Not only that, as there was no receipt given then he might just have pocketed the money.

Just because they are the police makes them no more trustworthy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could write in and complain stating that if you had in fact gone to court you could only have been reported for the more serious of the two actual crimes, and have been fined accordingly (weeks wages or so I think?), and that as such the police officer acted incorrectly by giving you a ticket for the less serious offence in order to deal with it on the spot....

 

No.

 

There are two offences here. One - failing to display - is a criminal matter and has been dealt with by FPN. An FPN is simply a mechanism to admit guilt and pay a fixed fine instead of attending Magistrates' Court.

 

The second offence is having no VED - this is dealt with by DVLA as a civil matter. It is either from a report to DVLA by the PC or picked up from the continous licencing regime. The charges thatthey can make are laid sown in legislation. Odd amounts occur since they are allowd to charge a penalty, plus the back VED

Link to post
Share on other sites

what ever...I supose you never make mistakes :eek:

 

I don't think leaving it for a second month after receiving a fine is making a mistake. Paying a fine doesn't entitle you to continue driving without tax.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think leaving it for a second month after receiving a fine is making a mistake. Paying a fine doesn't entitle you to continue driving without tax.

you are one real EDITED arnt you the car has not left my drive since the offence and pat davies has pointed out what I needed to know thank you pat

however when you did not get paid enough to see you through xmas for working as a sub contractor for the first time and still not seeing a penny and strugling to get in a job..... keep making your comments conniff...EDITED we are here to help each other not put one another down!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read through this and it doesnt make sense. The long form that you were given by the Police, was this an EFPN (endorsable Fixed penaulty ticket). The Police dont issue on the spot fines. They issue forms to produce documents and pay the fine within 28 days to the address (normally central ticket office etc) What was the offence code on the ticket. If it was an EFPN then you would have produced and recieved points on your licence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rugley is very close to west mids and they use similar forms. Failing to display is non endorsable, non endorsable tickets cover a number of motoring offences and carry a £30 fine. However they do carry details of the excise licence which the details of which are forwarded to DVLA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you are one real EDITED you the car has not left my drive since the offence and pat davies has pointed out what I needed to know thank you pat

however when you did not get paid enough to see you through xmas for working as a sub contractor for the first time and still not seeing a penny and strugling to get in a job..... keep making your comments conniff...EDITED We are here to help each other not put one another down!

 

Nowhere does it say your car is on your drive since the FPN. I am not the one who drove without tax, I am not the one that never declared SORN, I am not the one now paying out a fine that comes to more than having tax.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nowhere does it say your car is on your drive since the FPN. I am not the one who drove without tax, I am not the one that never declared SORN, I am not the one now paying out a fine that comes to more than having tax

at the end of the day what has been done has been done thanks for help folks I do put my hand down and say it was my fault as the opening (1)

thanks conniff regardless (still think you are an EDITED and would try to help you without making sarcastic remarks)

 

Thanks again folks for helping me as the police did not explain properly and niethier did the DVLA....cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...