Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • 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.
  • 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

unpaid PCN - appealed but never heard back - equita threatening to take car


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5754 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

OK - long story short[ish]:

 

i received a PCN in sept last year for a bus lane violation, which i decided to appeal as the lane in question wasn't properly marked and i didn't drive in it anyway [even the photo attached to the PCN shows this!]

 

anyway, i appealed the PCN at the time on the grounds that 'the offence didn't take place' but never heard anything back, so assumed it had been dropped. then a few months later i got the letter telling me an 'order for recovery of unpaid penalty charge' had been filed against me at northampton CC - along with the accompanying 'statutory declaration', which i intended to send back on the '...have had no response to my appeal' grounds, however, what with one thing and another, i never got around to submitting that form. [OK - i'll admit it. i forgot. i have the memory of a goldfish!]

 

now, another few months later, our lovely friends equita are sending me letters, threatening to take my car. i've pretty much ignored these up to now as i had this silly naive notion that stealing someone's car was actually a crime in this country. however, after perusing several threads on here, i see that this isn't the case. so i'm wondering what to do next.

 

i've heard that there may be some process for making a late statutory declaration. this seems to be the logical way to go, since the council never informed me they had rejected my original appeal - but i'm not sure how i'd backtrack things to that stage again.

 

i'd love to post the photo from my original PCN notice, which clearly shows that my car is not in the bus lane, but unfortunately i'm not allowed to post images til i've made five posts. but, on that score, is there any way to - admittedly very belatedly - to backtrack even further and make an appeal against the offence having taken place in the first place, since [to me and everyone i've shown it to] even the council's own photographic evidence shows that my car wasn't in the bus lane?

What stage did you appeal, ie was it at notice to owner stage, or informal reppy stage

Link to post
Share on other sites

i appealed at the first stage - where you get the PCN notice and are given 28 days to pay up, or lodge an appeal. i didn't hear anything back, so assumed they had dropped it, until i later got the letter saying that the unpaid notice had been lodged at the TEC northampton and giving me 21 days to appeal that. it was this 2nd appeal that i failed to lodge.

so you made represenatation but the LA failed to respond and you didnt get the notice to owner, AFAIK you have a challenge there are people on here more knowledgable than me on this, hopefully they will help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry. i'm not sure whatyou mean by 'notice to owner' as none of the documents i received are so headed:

 

* i originally received the PCN on 12 sept 2007

* i submitted an online appeal against this on 25 sept 2007

* i then heard nothing til 31st mar 2008 when i received a letter entitled 'order for recovery of unpaid penalty charge' that letter [is that the 'notice to owner'?] included a form called 'statutory declaration - unpaid penalty charge' which i could send to the TEC, after getting it witnessed by a solicitor. that form was the one i meant to return, - ticking the box 'i made representations about the penalty charge to the council concerned .... but did not receive a rejection notice' - but i forgot to send the form back.

 

hope that makes it clearer.

 

actually, looking at that form again, one of the other grounds for appeal says 'i did not receive the notice to owner / bus lane penalty charge notice' so i take it from that, that the 'notice to owner' = PCN, in which case 'yes' i did receive it and appeal it but got no reply.

 

phew! - got there eventually [i think!] :-D

Ok, me not absolutley sure about this subject that being that a postal pcn doubles as a notice to owner.However if you have appealed to it and didnt get a reply I think after 56 days it is taken that the LA accept by default thyat the contravention did not occur.

 

I think you need to fill out a statutary out of time declaration stating that you didnt recieve a reply to your representation. This should take you back to original pcn/nto stage. You can then challenge the ticket , obtain photographic evidence which the LA should keep on file then challenge that the contravention did not occur.

I thinkicon7.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Good luck to you with this.

 

I think you will be hard pressed to argue that the contravention did not occur unless you can successfully argue that the bus lane is not correctly signed.

 

I also think that you are, in the main the author of your own misfortune in failing to respond to papers.

 

From your annotated picture you crossed a hatched area bounded by solid white lines. That is a 3 point criminal offence, so a bus lane PCN gets you off lightly!

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

cctvpic01.jpg

[uPDATE02]

 

unfortunately the clamp 'fell off' after i accidentally brushed against it with an angle-grinder, while doing some DIY on the car and the car has temporarily gone to live in a lock-up garage belonging to a sympathetic friend.

 

Good luck to you with this.

 

From your annotated picture you crossed a hatched area bounded by solid white lines. That is a 3 point criminal offence, so a bus lane PCN gets you off lightly!

 

You may not get off so lightly here. You have effectively confessed to criminal damage and MCC can identify you from the reference on the CCTV photo you posted.

 

All they need to do is make the link here and you have a big problem!

 

Standard advice is to remove personal identifiers - for good reason.

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading this post it is clear that since the beginning of July you should have filed an Out of Time late StatutoryDeclaration.

 

You have GROUNDS to do so. Your case is VERY SIMPLE INDEED.

 

There is very little point in asking the LA to call off the bailiffs as they have a valid Warrant of Execution.

 

The ONLY way to resolve this is to file an Out of Time.

 

If you call the bailiff to tell him that you are doing this this morning, most bailiffs that our office deal with will remove the clamp later today.

 

If you want help in completing the Out of Time, then please PM.

 

You MUST act quickly as the bailiff will remove the car to the pound.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course you can.

 

Even if you have previously PAID a bailiff....even 2 or 3 years ago !! you can still file and Out of Time, which, if succcesfuly will revok the warrant and allow you to claim a refund from the local authority/bailiff company.

 

PS: I have NOT received a PM.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...