Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So I just found a couple abandoned traffic cones locally by some bins.   A bit squished but free!  So have placed them on the land.  Will wait to see if the cones get moved and signs ignored again this week before I consider rocks/ boulders.
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later the your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. So if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place and park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and then unload the children followed by reloading the children getting seat belts on etc before driving to the exit stopping for cars, pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (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; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
    • New version after LFI's superb analysis of the contract. Sorry, but you need to redo the numbering of the paras and of the exhibits in the right order after all the damage I've caused! Defendant's WS - version 4.pdf
    • Hi  no nothing yet. Hope it stays that way 😬
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

Bryan Carter What A Coincidence !!!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5127 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

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Sorry if you misunderstood me Brummie but Bryan Carter is a branch of Crellins Carter based at Freds nerbve centre in DeHavilland Drive, Weybridge. The Law Society website shows no partners or solicitors are based there. Head office is Crellins Carters, 111 Queens Road, Weybridge, KT13 9 UW

 

Surprisingly the firms website makes no reference to the branch. It states the firm "operates from a single modern office in Weybridge"

 

They claim to be "a Surrey based niche private client practice with a national reputation" - that is perfectly true alyhough the reputuation may not be one that others wouldlike!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Carter has had his 28 days to reply to my complaint, now its time to go looking for him via SRA and others ie the ombudsman etc.

 

Watch this space

 

BB

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ODC

 

personally i wouldnt bother reporting him to the FOS, they have no teeth,and as far as i can see there is little they could do to carters

 

i would report him to the people who deal with professional conduct of solicitors like the SRA for starters

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst I agree that the FOS appear to have no teeth I still feel its important that the actions of this mand are brought to the notice of as many 'official bodies' as possible. I believe that some time someone in these bodies will grasp the nettle and deal properly with all these people who break the rules

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutley, but i would go for the throat, Trading Standards, OFT, Law society, SRA, Member of Parliament , Ministry of Justice

I have been advocating contact with your MP for some time now,

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Update,

 

Finally got a response from BC regarding my letters to them after 12 weeks!!!!!.

 

Letter say that "We have discontinued proceedings for commercial reasons and the debt remains outstanding"

 

Also states that they are "no longer instructed in connection in this matter" with any further queries directed to OC direct.

 

Also enclosed was a copy of their complaints procedure!!! with specific names of people to write to and appeals procedure etc.

 

This means they have admitted defeat, and so it goes back to Egg.

 

Time to write a nice letter regarding time wasting, abuse of procedure and charge for my time me thinks.

 

Beau

 

Now is this a first

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

BB you have broken the rules. Were you not aware that you were just suppose to roll over and let Bryan get Judgement by Default. I think you have been grossly unfair to him. He will probably have to claim his fees from Egg.

 

Make sure you report him to the SRA

Link to post
Share on other sites

BB you have broken the rules. Were you not aware that you were just suppose to roll over and let Bryan get Judgement by Default. I think you have been grossly unfair to him. He will probably have to claim his fees from Egg.

 

Make sure you report him to the SRA

 

He has only broken the rules of the Bryan Carter empire, not the law of the land, therefore i support him wholeheartedly

Please note i have no legal training any advice i give comes from my own experience and from what i have learned on this site

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

Hi BB, Its Q, you may not remember me, its nice to see you are still around CAG.

 

Any update to the contents of your post # 60?

 

We never heard another thing from BC after he got a CCJ on my OH and he had only sued for his fees. CCJ was satisfied he tried to get the balance, I confronted him on the phone and told him to put his request in writing, he never did and we have never heard another thing. That was a year ago now.

 

I have a CCJ awarded a year ago from a bottom feeder company and they have done the same thing.

Only sued for part of the balance. I'm trying to get it sorted so I can pay by installments and satisfy this ccj.

 

I was just wondering how you got on with your complaints.

 

cheers Q.x.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BB, Its Q, you may not remember me, its nice to see you are still around CAG.

 

Any update to the contents of your post # 60?

 

We never heard another thing from BC after he got a CCJ on my OH and he had only sued for his fees. CCJ was satisfied he tried to get the balance, I confronted him on the phone and told him to put his request in writing, he never did and we have never heard another thing. That was a year ago now.

 

I have a CCJ awarded a year ago from a bottom feeder company and they have done the same thing.

Only sued for part of the balance. I'm trying to get it sorted so I can pay by installments and satisfy this ccj.

 

I was just wondering how you got on with your complaints.

 

cheers Q.x.

 

Hi Q,

 

Nice to see you are still around on these forums too!!

 

Well BC replied to my complaint and mitigated with a couple of well rehearsed excuses, and I never pushed it any further which I know I should have done. All went quiet for a few months, then I had a letter from Lowell Portfolio asking for the full balance, so I have sent them the usual stuff "acc in dispute" etc.

 

Then Lowell came up with the agreement!!! but it is unenforceable. Just when they sent me the agreement and statements etc they also sent a seperate letter saying that they were no longer chasing for the balance!! very strange?? So that was about the start of Feb and I have heard nothing since, so if there are any more serious developments I will update the thread.

 

I have other problems more serious at the moment such as a High court Writ of Fi Fa against me which I am taking down the N245 Route at the moment to get a variation of a judgment for another one of my debts.

 

But one thing is for sure, I would not have had the confidence to deal with this stuff without all of the good caggers support and knowledge!!!

 

All the best to you.

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Long time since posting on this thread - but just to prove the account has never gone away,

 

I have a question for the legal bods,

 

Can Lowell legally issue proceedings to try to enforce payment - bear in mind that Bryan Carter have tried once and discontinued?

 

Getting alot of pressure from Lowell who I think are going to try to go CCJ route for enforcement.

 

Thanks

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep :(

 

if it's still with the OC they may have to get permission - not sure about that

but if Lowells have bought it they can bring a new action.

 

However if Lowells have bought it that obviously opens up a whole new line of investigation as well.

 

Generally BC only deals with 'faulty' accounts so, not having read your thread, there may be something wrong anyway.

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at your sig - it may be the Egg account - if it is, demand a copy of the DN :D - quite apart from the 'other issues' with Egg accounts

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at your sig - it may be the Egg account - if it is, demand a copy of the DN :D - quite apart from the 'other issues' with Egg accounts

 

 

Hi gh2008,

 

It is for an Egg account and a link to the DN is here :

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/138599-bryan-carter-what-coincidence-2.html#post1479986

 

I never had any opinions at the time of posting, as to validity of DN. Egg sold the account to Lowell around October 2008 I think.

 

I asked for the CCA (std s77/78request) in Jan 09 which they initially wrote and said they could not find the agg and the matter was closed!!. Then about a week later I had a copy of the agreement - on closer inspection, it is definitley not the original document but has been put together with my signature on it from an amalgamation of bits of Egg paperwork. The signature is genuine so they have reconstituted what it would have looked like.

 

So at this time the DN is about all I have to go on unless you know different?

 

Thanks for looking in

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are not allowed to reconstitute an agreement with your signature !!!

 

They also will not have a proper record when when and how the DN was sent.

 

Wait for them to act and get heavy and then pounce.

When you get a letter threatening a claim against you I would reply acknowledging their 'letter before claim' and state that in order for you to make a proper reply you need further info etc. Then make that letter into a CPR31.16 request for the agreement, DN, NOA DOA & statements etc. All absolutely required in order for them to prove an action against you and for you to answer them.

 

It *may* be an idea to get a SAR off to EGG - it is always surprising what these turn up .... (I would always send one off to the OC when you think court action may follow)

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

*****Update*****

 

Had a couple of further letters from Lowell with the usual threats and also yesterday from their in house collection dept "Hampton Legal"

 

Time for CPR 31.16 me thinks!!

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...