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.
      • 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

FIRE and doorstep Agent threat


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5776 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

Hi again all

 

Can someone help me out with a letter to FIRE to tell them to get stuffed basically.

 

They are saying that they may either:

 

commence legal proceedings (:lol::lol::lol:)

 

or

 

a Doorstep Agent will call.

 

As my 14 year old son is at home whilst I am at work I would rather they didnt bother him. They would get very short change if they did it whilst I was there.

 

Can one of you kind ppl therefore help me with a letter please. :)

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed if you can give us a little more detail...but send this by recorded delivery...

Dear xxxx

 

Account Ref xxxx

 

Please be advised that I will only communicate with you in writing. I have noted your repeated attempts to contact me by telephone over the past few weeks/months and these have been duly logged by time and date.

 

Furthermore, should it be your intention to arrange a “doorstep call”, please be advised that under OFT rules, you can only visit me at my home if you make an appointment and I have no wish to make an appointment with you.

 

There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.). Therefore take note that I revoke license under Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and if you do so, then you will be liable to damages for a tort of trespass and action will be taken, including but not limited to, police attendance.

 

Yours faithfully/sincerely

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and thanks

 

Approx. 8 years ago the abusive relationship that I had been in for 4 years came to an end. It wasnt just physical but also mental violence and such that I was made to take out loans and credit cards in my name.

 

Luckily for me (and our 2 children) the animal ran off with another woman (a friend unbelieveably) but left me with a considerable amount of debt.

 

Some of the debts I managed to pay with help from my father. Some of them I wrote to and explained that I had no money, two small kids and wasnt working. We (my father and I) made offers but didnt always get a response.

 

On top of this, about 7 years ago we had a house fire that basically destroyed all original paperwork and lots of other personal stuff.

 

For years I have heard nothing from these DCA's.

 

Then in 2003 I started receiving the usual letters from Cabot etc. and I managed to pay two more of the smaller amounts off.

 

I have copies of all letters that I sent dating back to 2003. I have in the past asked for a copy of my CCA etc and yet I have never had the courtesy of a proper reply, just more of the threatening letters.

 

For some unknown reason the letters and calls stopped around 2005. Until recently.

 

I had one the other day (see other thread) from MacKenzie Hall regarding a debt from 1997.

 

I have now received a letter from FIRE regarding a debt that they state was originally for Bank of Scotland credit card that was sold to Cabot. This is the first correspondence I have received regarding this particular debt.

 

The real problem is that I dont remember (tbh there were so many and I wasnt that 'stable' for a while) when the card was taken out, when it was defaulted on etc. Although I am certain it would be over 6 years ago now. According to the letter the amount is £3914.42, whether this includes charges etc I really dont know.

 

HTH (and a choccy for getting this far).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well something along the lines of this will do for starters.

 

Dear Sir/Madam

Re:− Account/Reference Number 4563210025897412

With reference to the above agreement, we would be grateful if you would send me a copy of this credit agreement.

I understand that under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (Sections 77−79), I am entitled to receive a copy of my credit agreement on request. I enclose a payment of £1.00 which represents the fee payable under the Consumer Credit Act.

I understand a copy of my credit agreement should be supplied within 12 working days.

I understand that under the Consumer Credit Act creditors are unable to enforce an agreement if they fail to comply with a request for a copy of the agreement under these sections of the Act.

Please also be advised that I will only communicate with you in writing. I have noted your repeated attempts to contact me by telephone over the past few weeks/months and these have been duly logged by time and date.

Furthermore, should it be your intention to arrange a “doorstep call”, please be advised that under OFT rules, you can only visit me at my home if you make an appointment and I have no wish to make an appointment with you.

There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.). Therefore take note that I revoke license under Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and if you do so, then you will be liable to damages for a tort of trespass and action will be taken, including but not limited to, police attendance.

 

REMEMBER DO NOT SIGN THIS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The likelihood of a doorstep agent calling are remote but not unknown. It costs money to send an agent out and spending cash is something all debt collectors hate.

 

If an agent calls you tell him/her to go away. If they don't leave when requested you can call the police and tell them a breach of the peace is likely. Make that call in the agent's hearing and watch them scuttle off back under their stone. Make sure you record their description, clothes, height, hair colour etc (pi would be ideal) and note the car registration number.

 

If pc plod does not appear you are entitled to lodge a complaint about the agent's behaviour with the company and the usual agencies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...