Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have also found this:  D.2 Service of a PCN by post: 54) There are some circumstances in which a PCN (under Regulation 10) may be served by post: 1) where the contravention has been detected on the basis of evidence from an approved device (approved devices may only be used in limited circumstances) 2) if the CEO has been prevented, for example by force, threats of force, obstruction or violence, from serving the PCN either by affixing it to the vehicle or by giving it to the person who appears to be in charge of that vehicle 3) if the CEO had started to issue the PCN but did not have enough time to finish or serve it before the vehicle was driven away and would otherwise have to write off or cancel the PCN 55) In any of these circumstances a PCN is served by post to the owner and also acts as the NtO. The Secretary of State recommends that postal PCNs should be sent within 14 days of the contravention. Legislation states that postal PCNs must be sent within 28 days, unless otherwise stated in the Regulations. This from London Councils Code of Practice on Civil Parking Enforcement.  The question is what is an approved device? Certainly, he had the opportunity to place the ticket on my car and I didn't drive away.  I looked further and it seems that an approved device is a CCTV camera - It seems that the photos taken were not actual film but images and it is not clear if they are taken from a video or are stills. I'm guessing if it was moving images then the SAR would have stated this.    From the Borough of Hounslow website: "There are two types of PCN issued under the Traffic Management Act 2004, which governs parking contraventions. The first is served on-street by a Civil Enforcement Officer, who will observe a vehicle and collect evidence before serving the PCN either by placing it in a plastic wallet under the windscreen wiper, or by handing it to the driver. The second is a PCN served by post, based on CCTV footage taken by an approved device, which has been reviewed by a trained CCTV Operator."   From Legislation.gov.uk regarding approved devices: Approved Devices 4.  A device is an approved device for the purposes of these Regulations if it is of a type which has been certified by the Secretary of State as one which meets requirements specified in Schedule 1. SCHEDULE 1Specified requirements for approved devices 1.  The device must include a camera which is— (a)securely mounted on a vehicle, a building, a post or other structure, (b)mounted in such a position that vehicles in relation to which relevant road traffic contraventions are being committed can be surveyed by it, (c)connected by secure data links to a recording system, and (d)capable of producing in one or more pictures, a legible image or images of the vehicle in relation to which a relevant road traffic contravention was committed which show its registration mark and enough of its location to show the circumstances of the contravention. 2.  The device must include a recording system in which— (a)recordings are made automatically of the output from the camera or cameras surveying the vehicle and the place where a contravention is occurring, (b)there is used a secure and reliable recording method that records at a minimum rate of 5 frames per second, (c)each frame of all captured images is timed (in hours, minutes and seconds), dated and sequentially numbered automatically by means of a visual counter, and (d)where the device does not occupy a fixed location, it records the location from which it is being operated. 3.  The device and visual counter must— (a)be synchronised with a suitably independent national standard clock; and (b)be accurate within plus or minus 10 seconds over a 14-day period and re-synchronised to the suitably independent national standard clock at least once during that period. 4.  Where the device includes a facility to print a still image, that image when printed must be endorsed with the time and date when the frame was captured and its unique number. 5.  Where the device can record spoken words or other audio data simultaneously with visual images, the device must include a means of verifying that, in any recording produced by it, the sound track is correctly synchronised with the visual image.
    • Hearing took place today.  Case dismissed with costs awarded. Neither UKPC or a representative turned up.  Apparently they messaged the court on 7 May asking for their case to be considered on paper.  Never informed me, which was criticised by the judge as not following procedure.  I was really annoyed as I would have preferred for the case to be thrown out before the hearing, or at least face them in court and see them squeal.   They are just playing a numbers game and hope you blink 1st!   Ended up having to change my flight, but  the costs awarded softens the blow. Was asked to confirm it was my signature on both the witness statement and supplementary statement.  Wasn't asked to read them, said she could see my arguments made and the signs were insufficient and no contract formed. Took maybe 10 mins in total.  Judge did most of the talking and was best for me just to keep quiet or confirm any statements made. Happy to have won as a matter of principle and have costs awarded. Maybe not worth all the time and hassle for any newbies or the technologically challenged.  But if you are stubborn like me and willing to put in the time and effort, you can beat these vultures! I big shout out to everyone who helped on the thread with their advice and guidance, special mention to FTMDave, thank you sir!  Really appreciate everyone's efforts. All the best!
    • I plan to be honest to avoid any further trouble, tell them that the name should be changed to my official name
    • There is no evidence that I was issued a PCN that was placed on the car and removed. It seems that I was issued a £60 PCN on the 8th of March (the parking date) but it was never placed on my car, instead,  they allege that they posted the PCN on the 13th of March and deemed delivered on the 15th. I never got this 1st £60 PCN demand. I only know about all of this through the SAR. I only received the second PCN demanding £100, which was deemed delivered on 16/04/2024 - that is 39 days after the parking incident.  I did a little research and "Legislation states that postal PCNs must be sent within 28 days, unless otherwise stated in the Regulations." as per London Councils Code of Practice on Civil Parking Enforcement.  The main issue is that I was not aware of the 1st £60 PCN as I didn't receive it - I'm not sure how this relates to the 28-day rule because that rule applies to the initial £60 PCN. PCM could say that "we sent him the letter by post and it was deemed delivered on the 15th of March" therefore the 28-day rule does not apply.  As regards the safety of the parking attendant, that is clearly something he chose to feel and he made the decision that his safety was threatened - I didn't even see him or had any interaction with him. I'm nearly 50 and I definitely don't look aggressive 😊  
    • okay will do. I'll let you know if anything transpires but once again - many thanks
  • 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

Moorcroft unable to provide agreement


221b
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5904 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

Moorcroft chasing me for £1800 debt that thief of my phone abroad ran up.

 

Been in dispute with Voda over this for 1 1/2 years as they did nothing to stop thief's phone calls accelerating to this level in less than 24 hours.

 

Voda referred to Capquest Debt Recovery first of all.

 

I stupidly paid £500 as I got scared what with threats over the phone etc.

 

Didn't know what I know now!

 

Capquest gave up when I asked for copy of CCA and DOA. They provided neither and referred me back to Voda.

 

The next day (!) a letter came from Moorcroft Debt RA.

 

I sent off request for CCA and DOA to them. Actually not sure CCA relevant as it's a mobile phone contract...

 

They have written back outside of the 12 days saying they don' t have access to this info and that upon consultation with Voda, they have confirmed that I will have to contact Phones 4U for a copy of the agreement as my original contract was with them and as I originally took the handset out with them - back in 1999!

 

Do Moorcroft have to provide the DOA themselves and if they can't it's unenforceable? Would appreciate advice on this point.

 

Also, strictly, contract was never signed by me, but my dear old Mum (who's now 73) who got the phone for me as a gift back when I was a student.

 

Appreciate all advice and wisdom!

 

Many thanks

 

221b

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Moorcroft are attempting to collect monies due under and agreement, then they are responsible for furnishing you with a copy of the agreement, or forwarding your request on to the original creditor, irrespective of whether it is governed by the CCA or not.

 

if they don't have the agreement, what exactly is it they are enforcing?

 

Stand your ground, make them prove that they have a right to collect on the debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alas, mobile phone contracts are not regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974, so there is no point in making a s.77/78 request.

 

However, if it is the case that you did not sign the contract then on what basis are they pursuing you? Unfortunately, however, if you go down this road, they may well end up going after your mother!

 

Usually mobile phone contracts include a clause that limits the customer's liability if the phone is stolen, provided it's reported to them within a predefined time. You'll need a copy contract to determine if this is the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that, Scarlet Pimpernel!

 

They are pursuing me (rather than my Mum) becuae the bills have always been paid by me, yet I have to admit they are constantly addressing all correspondence to my Mum, but at my address.

 

Now, I don't for one moment want them to go after my Mum obviously.

 

I asked Voda over a year ago for a copy of the original agreement, but they have never given it.

 

My very first contract (or my Mum's to be specific) was actually with Phones4U, though it was a Voda airtime contract and was so for the next 7 years.

 

So, my questions are:

 

1 Who do I now write to and ask for what?

 

2 Also, what do I do about Moorcroft - do I write back to them, and if so, saying what?

 

It does seem like everything is grinding to a halt, I must say, but would like to bring this to a conclusion. It's been occupying my headspace for 18 months now :(

 

Advice so far - most thankful to all.

 

I'd appreciate help on the above points.

 

Best wishes

 

221b

Link to post
Share on other sites

you need to get them to prove they have a right to the debt, so write to the people who are demanding payment, the agreement is what they are trying to enforce. ask for a copy of the signed agreement and also a copy of the final statement from Voda, to prove that no unlawful charges have been applied.

 

If the original creditor cannot supply you with the agreement, then it's doubtful that Moorcroft will be able to.

 

You can use letter N from the templates library but you will need to amend it to remove the CCA references (as mobile debts are not covered by the CCA)

 

 

if this has been helpful, please feel freee to tip the scales

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there

 

Many thanks for your reply Spamheed

 

I've already asked them for copy of the original agreement and the deed of assignment (as mentioned in post 1) and they have referred me to Phones 4U as both they and Voda don't have it.

 

I have already sent them the template letter along with my request for the above, so I don't really want to send the same letter again!

 

Can I ask them for it again, then? And if so, how do I couch the letter?

 

Many thanks

 

221b

Link to post
Share on other sites

Going back to the theft...As mentioned in a previous post, you should only be liable for a very limited amount as long as you reported it in a timely fashion. What answers have you had from then regarding this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear!

 

Floodgates. Opened. Etc.

 

Been in wrangles with Voda since the incident happened - I was pickpocketed abroad having just had an operation. No phone. No money.

 

I rang within 24 hours of the theft - the minute I landed on UK soil in fact.

 

They say that bottom line is I should have called them immediately otherwise I'm liable. They don't have any anti-fraud software and they 'prioritise' all the alerts they do receive - clearly nearly 2 grand in less than a day isn't important enough ;) They sent a text to my phone when it reached £500 and that was it, despite me never really going above £35 a month for the last 7 years...

 

Got BBC involved. Appeared on Working Lunch programme. Got Otelo involved (they are worse than useless, quite frankly and in the pay of the Mob companies so no surprise there).

 

Bill brought down to £800 odd by endless letters and the above.

 

Me still saying they should have done more to protect me.

 

Them denying any responsibility or duty of care.

 

Then the Debt RAs start with first Capquest then Moorcroft.

 

Voda no longer communicating on the dispute front. They send me the occasional bill showing that I've paid £500:mad: . Part of the £2,300 they're after is a lovely £500 they charged me for leaving them! Priceless!

 

They've never provided me with a copy of the original agreement.

 

Anyway, back to Moorcroft and the current situ! :)

 

What letter next and to whom?

 

Many thanks all!

 

221b

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is turning into one of moorcroft and the mobile companie's silly soaps :rolleyes:

 

Of course you did everything you were supposed to do. How can you call them with NO money? They do have a duty of care and could easily have suspended the line. Every account has a credit limit and this should have kicked in automatically on thier systems when the call charges reached it.

 

The only flimsy 'defence' they might have is that when calls are made abroad it takes a bit of time for the foreign carrier to pass the info. to the UK carrier. But their admition of sending a text to your phone when it reached £500 in charges would negate this :rolleyes:

 

Did you report the theft to the foreign police and notify your travel insurance company?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't have TI :-(

 

Reported to Station authorities - not sure if they were Police ( I was pickpocketed at Bruxelles Centrale) and filled out a form just before I started to make my way home but Voda not interested in that. They didn't seem to care whther I reported it or not, just that I pay up.

 

Have been through the rights and wrongs of it all a zillion times with Voda and they aint budging...

 

Just need to know who to write to, and what next!

 

Thanks so much...

 

221b

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't unfortunately...

 

I was a little dazed and in shock from the theft/recent op and aware I was about to miss my train connecting me to my onward journey home.

 

At that point I thought perhaps I had dropped my things and hadn't really considered I'd been pickpocketed :rolleyes:

 

In hindsight I'd have got a copy of the form had I been thinking straight.

 

Voda don't really care whether I reported it or not. They just want me to pay up...

Link to post
Share on other sites

My best advice is to write to moorcroft advising that you have disputed the account explaining the grounds. Ask them for a statement of the account which is free of charge so you can check if they've added any charges.

 

Also write to the mobile company asking for a copy of their complaints procedure.

 

Send these letters recorded and keep copies of them for future reference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been through Voda's complaints procedure already - last year in fact - that's how I got to Otelo (the mobile ombudsman).

 

Voda say they have exhausted the complaints procedure which is why they've handed over to a debt recovery agency.

 

I get a bill from Voda from time to time - all the charges are for the phone calls the thief made plus the termination fee of £500 whacked on top.

 

HTH.

 

Thanks

 

221b

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok...Time for other avenues.

 

MP

 

Trading Standards:

 

Trading Standards Central - Trading Standards and Consumer Protection information for the UK

 

Still write asking what I suggested to moorcroft. You never know, pigs might fly and they may see sense :rolleyes:

 

Office of Fair Trading:

 

The Office of Fair Trading: making markets work well for consumers

 

Financial Ombudsman Service:

 

Financial Ombudsman Service

 

Advise in your letter to moorcroft that you're contacting these people ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...