Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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

Council tax - I am being made an example of


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5787 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

2 Months ago I had Jacobs bailiffs on my doorstep, I wouldn’t let them in and sent the letter that was posted on CAG. It was referred back to the council and I thought that it could be sorted out and I could make an arrangement to pay it back at a reasonable amount.

I spoke to a lady at the council and she told me that I needed to fill in the income expenditure form. Then she could work out how much we could pay. I completed the form truthfully and sent it back. A couple of days later I received a letter from the council in which she told me that I would have to pay £100 a month on top of the £133 we pay for this years. I told her that we just can't manage to pay this at that rate and asked her to half it to £58 a month. This would mean it would take 10 months to pay back what we owe. She said no - she said that we had been given enough time to clear it and had to pay it now or face the bailiffs. She was downright rude.

I was very angry on when I cam of the phone so I wrote everything sown and made a complaint about her attitude and the way I felt I had been treated. I have every intention of clearing the council tax but to pay it back at this amount is going to mean we will fall behind with everything else.

Yesterday we got a response to my complaint - The Head of the revenue department said after a in-depth investigation he had come to the conclusion that the council had every right to deal with me in the way they had. His in depth investigation was so true that he has made errors.

The arrears are for 3 properties one of which is my partner when he moved into my house brought his arrears with him. The council official said that I had had arrears for several years on all 3 properties. Only a minute technical error but still I am being accused of something that is not true.

Secondly it went onto say that I had been in constant arrears and had cancelled an arrangement that had been set up in April - not true as the council only sent the income expenditure form to me on the 27th of the month and during April I had paid £100 of the bill. During all communication to them and them to me an arrangement had not been made as they required the income expenditure form, I paid it any way. But during this time they applied for a liability order and slapped £58 on my arrears so that has wiped out the £100 I paid.

Our monthly expenditure show is not regarded as low - true but we have a £810 a month mortgage, a secured loan of £146, gas and electric is £168, I can list all the things that they call priority and it still leaves us with only £240. Take of the additional £100 and we have £140 to pay everything else.

He believes the council tax office acted correctly - "The principal local tax officer feels that considerable amount of time and resources has been devoted to this lady case over many years and there have been times when she has not adhered to the arrangements" "in view of all this the council must now take a firm stances on recovery of this debt in fairness to the mast majority of council tax payers who pay their council tax instalments"

I admit I have struggled for years to pay the arrears, nut the reason I fell behind was due to a marriage break up, my own personal illness and spending 5 years caring for my grandmother at home and having no financial support. I tried to work and look after her and my 2 young children, but I had to work part time so that I could get home to her. I saved the authrorities thousand in having Gran at home and not in a home. But what good did it do as far as they are concerned it make no difference and I owe them and they want it.

 

The previous departmental manager knew me and supported me. I had almost cleared them when this happened in April and they got Bailiffs involved. Now I feel that I am being made an example of because I complained. 2 years ago I owed £2500 and have done everything I could to clear the arrears. This year Hoped that they would honor the arrangemtn that had been made previously.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Old_andrew2018

this reply is to bump your thread, however you could consider seeing your local councillor most hold regular surgeries, ask them to look in to your concerns,

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Following this posting, I filled in a complaints proceedure that was on the internet. My complaint went to the hief Execuitive. I told him that I had been treated unfairly and treated with a lack of understanding from a dpartment that are supposed to be there to help you.

 

After 14 days of enquiry he wrote back to me, h had done a full investigation of the situation and he felt that the department could have been a little more understanding. He has made a new arrangement for me which has knowcked £50 of the monthly payments. Before he stepped in I was asked to pay £233 I am now paying £183.

 

I don't now if complaining would make a difference to anyone elses problem, but i did help mine. I feel that even though this is a compulsory tax we are still a customer and we deserve customer services.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...