Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you for your responses. As requested, some more detail. Please forgive, I'm writing this on my phone which always makes for less than perfect grammar. My Dad tries but English not his 1st language, i'm born and bred in England, a qualified accountant and i often help him with his admin. On this occasion I helped my dad put in his renewal driving licence application around 6 weeks before expiry and with it the disclosure of his sleep apnoea. Once the licence expired I told him to get in touch with his GP, because the DVLA were offering only radio silence at that time (excuses of backlogs When I called to chase up). The GP charged £30 for an opinion letter on his ability to drive based on his medical history- at the time I didn't take a copy of the letter, but I am hoping this will be key evidence that we can rely on as to why s88 applies because in the GP opinion they saw no reason he couldn't drive i need to see the letter again as im going only on memory- we forwarded the letter in a chase up / complaint to the DVLA.  In December, everything went quiet RE the sleep apnoea (i presume his GP had given assurance) but the DVLA noticed there had been a 2nd medical issue in the past, when my father suffered a one off mini stroke 3 years prior. That condition had long been resolved via an operation (on his brain of all places, it was a scary time, but he came through unscathed) and he's never had an issue since. We were able to respond to that query very promptly (within the 14 days) and the next communication was the licence being granted 2 months later. DVLA have been very slow in responding every step of the way.  I realise by not disclosing the mini stroke at the time, and again on renewal (had I known I'd have encouraged it) he was potentially committing an offence, however that is not relevant to the current charge being levied, which is that he was unable to rely on s88 because of a current medical issue (not one that had been resolved). I could be wrong, I'm not a legal expert! The letter is a summons I believe because its a speeding offence (59 in a temp roadworks 50 limit on the A1, ironically whist driving up to visit me). We pleaded guilty to the speeding but not guilty to the s87.  DVLA always confirmed to me on the phone that the licence had not been revoked and that he "May" be able to continue to drive. They also confirmed in writing, but the letter explains the DVLA offer no opinion on the matter and that its up to the driver to seek legal advice. I'll take the advice to contact DVLA medical group. I'm going to contact the GP to make sure they received the SAR request for data, and make it clear we need to see a copy of the opinion letter. In terms of whether to continue to fight this, or to continue with the defence, do we have any idea of the potential consequences of either option? Thanks all
    • stopping payments until a DN arrives does not equal automatic sale to a DCA...if you resume payments after the DN.  
    • Sleep apnoea: used to require the condition  to be “completely” controlled Sometime before June 2013 DVLA changed it to "adequately" controlled. I have to disagree with MitM regarding the effect of informing DVLA and S.88 A diagnosis of sleep apnoea doesn't mean a licence wont be granted, and, indeed, here it was. If the father sought medical advice (did he?) : this is precisely where S.88 applies https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/64edcf3a13ae1500116e2f5d/inf1886-can-i-drive-while-my-application-is-with-dvla.pdf p.4 for “new medical condition” It is shakier ground if the opinion of a healthcare professional wasn’t sought. in that case it is on the driver to state they believed they met the medical standard to drive. However, the fact the licence was then later granted can be used to be persuasive that the driver’s belief they met the standard was correct. What was the other condition? And, just to confirm, at no point did DVLA say the licence was revoked / application refused? I’d be asking DVLA Drivers’ Medical Group why they believe S.88 doesn’t apply. S.88 only applies for the UK, incidentally. If your licence has expired and you meet the conditions for S.88 you can drive in the U.K., but not outside the U.K. 
    • So you think not pay until DN then pay something to the oc to delay selling to dcas?    then go from there? 
    • think about it, if you don't pay the full amount, what more can they do , default you  they've already registered a default notice by that point.  why have you got to await sale to a DCA.... for what?  
  • 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

Thanks CAG, you are the best


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5886 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

How come so many people on this forum state legal verse that simply prove the opposite to which you claim, with descriptive words of summary such as, "[problem], racket, crooks, extortion" ect.

 

A lot of people say the same about Council tickets, congestion charge etc which are clearly legal by statute. If you were a member of the British Parking Assoc forum I expect a different point of view would be expressed on their boards. I expect Banks consider charging £20 for going overdrawn, if stated when you open your account is fair and legitimate contrary to opinion on this site. I'm not siding with PPCs just stating that that a forum set up to challenge unfair parking tickets is not exactly going to give a balanced view on the subject.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of people say the same about Council tickets, congestion charge etc which are clearly legal by statute. If you were a member of the British Parking Assoc forum I expect a different point of view would be expressed on their boards. I expect Banks consider charging £20 for going overdrawn, if stated when you open your account is fair and legitimate contrary to opinion on this site. I'm not siding with PPCs just stating that that a forum set up to challenge unfair parking tickets is not exactly going to give a balanced view on the subject.

private parking tickets are unenforceable fact

Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of people say the same about Council tickets, congestion charge etc which are clearly legal by statute. If you were a member of the British Parking Assoc forum I expect a different point of view would be expressed on their boards. I expect Banks consider charging £20 for going overdrawn, if stated when you open your account is fair and legitimate contrary to opinion on this site. I'm not siding with PPCs just stating that that a forum set up to challenge unfair parking tickets is not exactly going to give a balanced view on the subject.

 

I think you have somewhat missed my point :-

 

Where is the 'legal verse' supporting your view, I have not found anything to support PPC activities under contract law - as for bank charges this has been recently ruled an illegal activity with the banks forced to refund millions of pounds - it is only a matter of time before PPC's will suffer a similar fate I guess, seeing as they are affecting so many peoples lives as did the banks.

 

PPC's only act as they do currently because they find they can get away with it - as did the banks until it was formally challenged.

 

It did not make it right that the banks did what they did until legal action forced them to mend there ways - as it is not right in the way the majority of PPC conduct themselves currently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i go out of my way to get private parking tickets and have never contacted them or payed them.they send threatening letters debt collectors letters threatening court action if not paid in 7days etc etc all bluff.did you no that there is no such law for double yellows/parking bays/disabled bays/parent&toddler bays on private land there just markings put there by the land owner and dont mean nothing in law

Link to post
Share on other sites

i go out of my way to get private parking tickets and have never contacted them or payed them.they send threatening letters debt collectors letters threatening court action if not paid in 7days etc etc all bluff.did you no that there is no such law for double yellows/parking bays/disabled bays/parent&toddler bays on private land there just markings put there by the land owner and dont mean nothing in law

 

....and you wonder why people employ PPCs!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

the reason been i took my wife shopping in my work van and the offside wheels where just over the white parking bay lines as the car next to me was parked on the edge of the bay next to me.hence 60.00 unenforceable ticket.and you think thats right?dont think so.ill fight them all the way they no anyone who stands up to them and knows how to deal with it in court would win

Link to post
Share on other sites

Says who??

County Court Mansfield: Excel vs Victoria Heatherington

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

County Court Mansfield: Excel vs Victoria Heatherington

 

That is one case which hinged on the lack of signage it does NOT mean that ANY claim by a PPC is invalid, which is what is being claimed. A percentage of Council and Police traffic offences/contraventions get overturned in Court it doesn't mean that automatically any motoring offence is unenforceable!! One thing the case you mention DOES prove that most people on the forum seem to have overlooked is that it DID go to Court, despite the numerous posts stating PPCs never go to Court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing the case you mention DOES prove that most people on the forum seem to have overlooked is that it DID go to Court, despite the numerous posts stating PPCs never go to Court.

 

I think that most of us recognise that on rare occasions that PPCs do go to court. That said based on the postings here even you would have to concede that it is a rare thing for them to go to court.

 

However I stand by the assertation that the majority of them are notoriously court shy.

 

Remember

  1. They are on an extremely dodgy legal footing and they know it.
  2. There are easier ways to make a quid then going to court.

Bearing in mind all the problems identifying who the driver actually was and the strength of any contract unless someone incriminates themselves then it is easier to move on to other targets. There are unfortunately plenty of people who pay up either through ignorance or through fear or both.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes!

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

-------------------------------------------------------

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

------------------------------------------------------

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...