Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I found that the parkin attended has a car with CCTV camera on it, however as I stated earlier, it seems that he did not take video of my car otherwise they would have stated so in the SAR. parking car .pdf
    • The rules state that "approved devices may only be used in limited circumstances"  I was not a threat. I was not present. I did not drive away. I think he has not fulfilled the necessary requirements justifying issuing me a PCN by post therefore the PCN was issued incorrectly and not valid.  What are your thoughts?  
    • 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
  • 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

RBS, defaults, DCA's and SAR - answers please?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3154 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

UPDATE:

 

sent them a LBA last week, to both CMS and regulatory risk, also sent get stuffed letter to green & co. Letter arrived today from customer care team telford saying investigation instigated and they will reply within 10 days.

 

Is this another stalling tactic? Should I wait, with even more patience, for their "results" or just press ahead with court action to make them hand over the many, many missing documents?

 

opinions appreciated

 

I think Sparkie will advise further on whether to start legal action for non compliance.

 

How are they applying the interest to your accounts?

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 285
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I think Sparkie will advise further on whether to start legal action for non compliance.

 

How are they applying the interest to your accounts?

 

not a clue about the interest, sorry

 

have had no notification about this from them as it was missing from the SAR, I don't have my own copies of paperwork re this as its from 2001

Link to post
Share on other sites

not a clue about the interest, sorry

 

have had no notification about this from them as it was missing from the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request), I don't have my own copies of paperwork re this as its from 2001

 

I take it RBS have failed to produce statements for both accounts.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

I take it RBS have failed to produce statements for both accounts.

 

they provided 3 statements for the account, 1 dated 30sep 2002 showing outstanding loan and overdraft amount combined, 1 dated 21sep 2007 showing balance forward and 1 dated27may 2008 showing unscheduled credit of £**** transaction date 10apr 2008 and my monthly payment transaction date 30apr 2008

 

as per my previous post, I cannot believe how incomplete the paperwork they have sent me is, its just not on. They've sent me virtually nothing, just a few scrappy bits of "bank speak" and the other bits mentioned in my previous post. I can't do anything with anything they've sent me - if I were to even try to corrolate a spreadsheet to instigate my claim it would just all be guesswork and wildly innaccurate. I simply cannot believe the breathtaking arrogance of these people, how could they possibly hope to get away with this? I can post scans of what they've sent me if it would help but I won't have access to a scanner until later in the week. One interesting figure (I think) that I have spotted in what they sent me is on one of the "bank speak" sheets - it shows the PRINCIPAL amount, along with CHARGE FOR CREDIT (which I presume is the interest) INSURANCE PREMIUM (PPI?) and ARRANGEMENT FEE. I can post figures for the above if helpful?

Edited by spaspeckerthedull
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would hang fire on the legal action - it wouldn't look good if they said they were investigating and you pressed ahead with action anyway.

 

If, however, the 10 days are up and nothing is forthcoming, I would personally instigate proceedings.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Under The New Fraud Act 2006 it is an offence to with hold any document that you are legally entitled to......

 

Sec 3 Of The Act

3 Fraud by failing to disclose information

A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a) dishonestly fails to disclose to another person information which he is under a legal duty to disclose, and

(b) intends, by failing to disclose the information—

(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

 

sparkie:cool:

 

can I send them a letter quoting this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What was the combined balance in 2002 compared with the statement in April.

 

I find it hard to believe that RBS actualy think they'll get away with not supplying your last six years statements.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

What was the combined balance in 2002 compared with the statement in April.

 

I find it hard to believe that RBS actualy think they'll get away with not supplying your last six years statements.

 

combined balance from 2002 compared with april statement?

 

april statement showed corresponding outstanding balance brought forward from 30sep 2002, less something called UNSCEDULED CREDIT and that months payment (made by me on due date) ending with a new outstanding balance

Link to post
Share on other sites

combined balance from 2002 compared with april statement?

 

april statement showed corresponding outstanding balance brought forward from 30sep 2002, less something called UNSCEDULED CREDIT and that months payment (made by me on due date) ending with a new outstanding balance

 

Don't understand - what was the balance in 2002 and what is the balance now in pounds and pence?

 

Your post seems to suggest therte's been no interest applied.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't understand - what was the balance in 2002 and what is the balance now in pounds and pence?

 

Your post seems to suggest therte's been no interest applied.

 

sorry, I misunderstood

 

OK, the info as supplied is this (I think I see where you're going with this) I've tried to replicate the statement:

 

 

2001

BALANCE FORWARD 28sep 10069.24DR

2002

IBP D/LINE 960.76 16apr 9108.48DR

IBP D/LINE 2.00 17apr 9106.48DR

 

 

 

2002

962.76 30sep 9106.48DR

 

 

 

 

 

then the next:

 

2002

30sep 9106.48DR

 

 

2007

21sep 9106.48DR

 

 

 

then the next:

 

 

 

2007

BALANCE FORWARD 21sep 9106.48DR

2008

IBP UNSCHEDULED CREDIT 5120.68 10apr 3985.80DR

BAC **** MR CURPL 90.00 30apr 3895.80DR

 

 

 

2008

5210.68 27may 3895.80DR

 

that's it for the statements

 

I have a sheet of payments that shows my payments diary since august 2002, it says that it is page 5 of 6 and 6 of 6 and has information both sides. This shows payments made by me into the account and is NOT a statement. It shows an opening balance, my list of payments with dates, then a closing balance which does not corrolate with the UNSCHEDULED CREDIT (by my maths its £45 down/missing) plus it also shows 2 charges on the account, one in 2004 and one in 2005 almost a year later.

 

I hope I've explained myself clearly, apologies if not

Link to post
Share on other sites

can I send them a letter quoting this?

 

 

Yes I would do just that , and tell them just because they attempt to "hide" behind the weak Data Protection Act, you submit your request under the New Fraud Act 2006 (section then you 3) and if they fail to supply the docs then you will take further action under this section of the Act.

 

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I would do just that , and tell them just because they attempt to "hide" behind the weak Data Protection Act, you submit your request under the New Fraud Act 2006 (section then you 3) and if they fail to supply the docs then you will take further action under this section of the Act.

 

 

sparkie

 

any good letters knocking about with this quoted?

Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE:

 

6 days ago received a letter from RBS re my CCA explaining that they are currently unable to furnish a "true copy" of my loan agreement as due to the age of agreement it is held in "a secure offsite facility and will take some time to recover"

 

received 2 letters from RBS yesterday, one apologising for passing account to green & co informing me account now on hold, and the other is a response to the CCA re my loan.

 

The CCA one is interesting, they claim it is a "true copy" of my loan application, but all it is really is an office generated document that has inaccuracies in it - they have my address incorrect in that my name is there but they haven't put the house number, just the road name. Also, they have entered a different figure in the APR box to that which is printed on the original document (I have in my posession an unsigned copy of the agreement from the day I applied for the loan that has "BRANCH COPY" printed on it, I have no idea how I managed to take this away from the bank with me on the day) also, the "true copy" they have sent me is unsigned (of course) and nowhere on the document are any dates at all, which I find strange. Also, the text on my original "BRANCH COPY" does not correspond with the text on the "true copy" they have sent me, there are parts that have been amended in places. They have also got my name incorrect in that on the original "BRANCH COPY" it is made to me in my christian and surnames, the "true copy" has these but for some reason my middle name now appears.

 

seems to me some "editing" has been going on

 

opinions please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE:

 

6 days ago received a letter from RBS re my CCA explaining that they are currently unable to furnish a "true copy" of my loan agreement as due to the age of agreement it is held in "a secure offsite facility and will take some time to recover"

 

received 2 letters from RBS yesterday, one apologising for passing account to green & co informing me account now on hold, and the other is a response to the CCA re my loan.

 

The CCA one is interesting, they claim it is a "true copy" of my loan application, but all it is really is an office generated document that has inaccuracies in it - they have my address incorrect in that my name is there but they haven't put the house number, just the road name. Also, they have entered a different figure in the APR box to that which is printed on the original document (I have in my posession an unsigned copy of the agreement from the day I applied for the loan that has "BRANCH COPY" printed on it, I have no idea how I managed to take this away from the bank with me on the day) also, the "true copy" they have sent me is unsigned (of course) and nowhere on the document are any dates at all, which I find strange. Also, the text on my original "BRANCH COPY" does not correspond with the text on the "true copy" they have sent me, there are parts that have been amended in places. They have also got my name incorrect in that on the original "BRANCH COPY" it is made to me in my christian and surnames, the "true copy" has these but for some reason my middle name now appears.

 

seems to me some "editing" has been going on

 

opinions please?

 

The agreement they've forwarded has been recreated. Could you scan and post both copies or email them me.

 

Have you read the Guardian articles on RBSs creative exploits?

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the response - I don't have access to a scanner until tomorrow, I'll do it then.

 

I also need to know what happens now that they are in breach of my original SAR and also in breach of the LBA I sent them, the response to the LBA is that they are investigating my complaint and have given themselves 8weeks to do so?!? how many more extensions are they going to give themselves? realistically how much longer is it going to take them to comply with my SAR to allow me to compile charges which, incidentally, will be quite a bit but are from around 1998 - 1999? are they dragging their heels because they know this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

When the LBA time limit expires, I would personally start legal proceedings - eight weeks is how long they have to investigate a complaint before giving their final response, not how long they can allow themselves to respond to a SAR.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

fair enough, need to be very clear on this then. What's the first thing I should be doing? do I tell them to expect proceedings in due course or just hit them with it

 

You hit them - you've already forwarded "expect proceedings in due course" - the LBA.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE:

 

letter received today from RBS concerning my CCA request, their response has left me confused:

 

When responding to requests made under section 77 the bank may provide you with a "true copy" of your agreement in accordance with regulation 3(1) of the consumer credit (cancellation notices and copies of documents) regulations 1983. This means that under section 77 there is no obligation for the bank to provide you with a copy of the original agreement bearing your signature. A "true copy" does not need to contain any personal information relating to you as the debtor nor does it need to include a signature box, any signatures or dates of signature

 

am I reading this right? to me this reads that they can just make up any old document, saying "you owe us xxxthousand pounds, forget the signature matey so just pay up cos we say you owe us"

 

surely this can't be right?

 

opinions please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 days ago received a letter from RBS re my CCA explaining that they are currently unable to furnish a "true copy" of my loan agreement as due to the age of agreement it is held in "a secure offsite facility and will take some time to recover"

 

So, the RBS have a secret bunker somewhere, is this were they'll hide when the **** hits the fan, perhaps Sir Fred is already there.:)

 

The truth is more simple, but they won't admit it, they don't have your original agreement, in all probability it was destroyed years ago in one of there cost cutting exercises.

I think they can recreate your agreement, but without your signature they can't enforce it in court.If I'm wrong someone will correct me.

Debs

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, the RBS have a secret bunker somewhere, is this were they'll hide when the **** hits the fan, perhaps Sir Fred is already there.:)

 

The truth is more simple, but they won't admit it, they don't have your original agreement, in all probability it was destroyed years ago in one of there cost cutting exercises.

I think they can recreate your agreement, but without your signature they can't enforce it in court.If I'm wrong someone will correct me.

Debs

 

 

HI Debbbbsy and SPAS.

 

That is correct , but the "copy" should have your name and address on it....how can say its a true copy of YOUR agreement if it hasn't got your name on it????It could be a copy of mine, but then I haven't got one either:grin::grin: and never had one.

 

Paul Walton will love this.

 

sparkie

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI Debbbbsy and SPAS.

 

That is correct , but the "copy" should have your name and address on it....how can say its a true copy of YOUR agreement if it hasn't got your name on it????It could be a copy of mine, but then I haven't got one either:grin::grin: and never had one.

 

Paul Walton will love this.

 

sparkie

 

sparkie

 

Correct Sparkie - the"true copy" MUST include the debtor's name and address as per the 1983 regs.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...