Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • He was one of four former top executives from Sam Bankman-Fried's firms to plead guilty to charges.View the full article
    • The private submersible industry was shaken after the implosion of the OceanGate Titan sub last year.View the full article
    • further polished WS using above suggestions and also included couple of more modifications highlighted in orange are those ok to include?   Background   1.1  The Defendant received the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the 06th of January 2020 following the vehicle being parked at Arla Old Dairy, South Ruislip on the 05th of December 2019.   Unfair PCN   2.1  On 19th December 2023 the Defendant sent the Claimant's solicitors a CPR request.  As shown in Exhibit 1 (pages 7-13) sent by the solicitors the signage displayed in their evidence clearly shows a £60.00 parking charge notice (which will be reduced to £30 if paid within 14 days of issue).  2.2  Yet the PCN sent by the Claimant is for a £100.00 parking charge notice (reduced to £60 if paid within 30 days of issue).   2.3        The Claimant relies on signage to create a contract.  It is unlawful for the Claimant to write that the charge is £60 on their signs and then send demands for £100.    2.4        The unlawful £100 charge is also the basis for the Claimant's Particulars of Claim.  No Locus Standi  3.1  I do not believe a contract with the landowner, that is provided following the defendant’s CPR request, gives MET Parking Services a right to bring claims in their own name. Definition of “Relevant contract” from the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4,  2 [1] means a contract Including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land between the driver and a person who is-   (a) the owner or occupier of the land; or   (b) Authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land. According to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44   For a contract to be valid, it requires a director from each company to sign and then two independent witnesses must confirm those signatures.   3.2  The Defendant requested to see such a contract in the CPR request.  The fact that no contract has been produced with the witness signatures present means the contract has not been validly executed. Therefore, there can be no contract established between MET Parking Services and the motorist. Even if “Parking in Electric Bay” could form a contract (which it cannot), it is immaterial. There is no valid contract.  Illegal Conduct – No Contract Formed   4.1 At the time of writing, the Claimant has failed to provide the following, in response to the CPR request from myself.   4.2        The legal contract between the Claimant and the landowner (which in this case is Standard Life Investments UK) to provide evidence that there is an agreement in place with landowner with the necessary authority to issue parking charge notices and to pursue payment by means of litigation.   4.3 Proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and country Planning Act 1990. Lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under this Act and no contract can be formed where criminality is involved.   4.4        I also do not believe the claimant possesses these documents.   No Keeper Liability   5.1        The defendant was not the driver at the time and date mentioned in the PCN and the claimant has not established keeper liability under schedule 4 of the PoFA 2012. In this matter, the defendant puts it to the claimant to produce strict proof as to who was driving at the time.   5.2 The claimant in their Notice To Keeper also failed to comply with PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 section 9[2][f] while mentioning “the right to recover from the keeper so much of that parking charge as remains unpaid” where they did not include statement “(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)”.     5.3         The claimant did not mention parking period, times on the photographs are separate from the PCN and in any case are that arrival and departure times not the parking period since their times include driving to and from the parking space as a minimum and can include extra time to allow pedestrians and other vehicles to pass in front.    Protection of Freedoms Act 2012   The notice must -   (a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;  22. In the persuasive judgement K4GF167G - Premier Park Ltd v Mr Mathur - Horsham County Court – 5 January 2024 it was on this very point that the judge dismissed this claim.  5.4  A the PCN does not comply with the Act the Defendant as keeper is not liable.  No Breach of Contract   6.1       No breach of contract occurred because the PCN and contract provided as part of the defendant’s CPR request shows different post code, PCN shows HA4 0EY while contract shows HA4 0FY. According to PCN defendant parked on HA4 0EY which does not appear to be subject to the postcode covered by the contract.  6.2         The entrance sign does not mention anything about there being other terms inside the car park so does not offer a contract which makes it only an offer to treat,  Interest  7.1  It is unreasonable for the Claimant to delay litigation for  Double Recovery   7.2  The claim is littered with made-up charges.  7.3  As noted above, the Claimant's signs state a £60 charge yet their PCN is for £100.  7.4  As well as the £100 parking charge, the Claimant seeks recovery of an additional £70.  This is simply a poor attempt to circumvent the legal costs cap at small claims.  7.5 Since 2019, many County Courts have considered claims in excess of £100 to be an abuse of process leading to them being struck out ab initio. An example, in the Caernarfon Court in VCS v Davies, case No. FTQZ4W28 on 4th September 2019, District Judge Jones-Evans stated “Upon it being recorded that District Judge Jones- Evans has over a very significant period of time warned advocates (...) in many cases of this nature before this court that their claim for £60 is unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process and is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme Court v Beavis which inter alia decided that a figure of £160 as a global sum claimed in this case would be a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore unenforceable in law and if the practice continued, he would treat all cases as a claim for £160 and therefore a penalty and unenforceable in law it is hereby declared (…) the claim is struck out and declared to be wholly without merit and an abuse of process.”  7.6 In Claim Nos. F0DP806M and F0DP201T, District Judge Taylor echoed earlier General Judgment or Orders of District Judge Grand, stating ''It is ordered that the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverabl15e under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in Parking Eye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4)) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998...''  7.7 In the persuasive case of G4QZ465V - Excel Parking Services Ltd v Wilkinson – Bradford County Court -2 July 2020 (Exhibit 4) the judge had decided that Excel had won. However, due to Excel adding on the £60 the Judge dismissed the case.  7.8        The addition of costs not previously specified on signage are also in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, specifically paras 6, 10 and 14.   7.9        It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant in this case has knowingly submitted inflated costs and thus the entire claim should be similarly struck out in accordance with Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4).   In Conclusion   8.1        I invite the court to dismiss the claim.  Statement of Truth  I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.   
    • Well the difference is that in all our other cases It was Kev who was trying to entrap the motorist so sticking two fingers up to him and daring him to try court was from a position of strength. In your case, sorry, you made a mistake so you're not in the position of strength.  I've looked on Google Maps and the signs are few & far between as per Kev's MO, but there is an entrance sign saying "Pay & Display" (and you've admitted in writing that you knew you had to pay) and the signs by the payment machines do say "Sea View Car Park" (and you've admitted in writing you paid the wrong car park ... and maybe outed yourself as the driver). Something I missed in my previous post is that the LoC is only for one ticket, not two. Sorry, but it's impossible to definitively advise what to so. Personally I'd probably gamble on Kev being a serial bottler of court and reply with a snotty letter ridiculing the signage (given you mentioned the signage in your appeal) - but it is a gamble.  
    • No! What has happened is that your pix were up-to-date: 5 hours' maximum stay and £100 PCN. The lazy solicitors have sent ancient pictures: 4 hours' maximum stay and £60 PCN. Don't let on!  Let them be hoisted by their own lazy petard in the court hearing (if they don't bottle before).
  • 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

Red castle & choice cat debt


jumpjet
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5778 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 all,

 

We have decided that it is now time to write to our creditors and push them a bit before stopping payments to CCC's and going it alone. We have sent letters to each creditor, altering each letter to suit to see the reactions we get back and post them up so that we can hopefully get some feedback on their responses.

 

We sent this to Red Castle on tuesday:

 

 

 

 

Red Castle Recoveries

3rd Floor,

20 St. James’s Street,

London.

SW1A 1ES.

 

Dear Sir/madam,

I refer you to your letter of 22/01/2008.

My Position regarding this alleged debt remains unchanged. To date, you have failed to supply the requested documentation. These documents should be readily available as proof of your legal right to collect an account. You have not provided the documentation that entitles you enforce this aleged debt and you are still in default of my Consumer Credit Agreement request.

You are not entitled to under Section 77(1) and Section 78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 to take any action on this account until you have produced the proof of your entitlement to do so, and as you have not, any attempt to obtain monies for this alleged debt is also a breach of the Act, and constitutes Harassment.

Your company Committed a criminal offence by not adhering to the 30 day deadline as per the Act and as such, I do not recognised any liability in this matter. Agreeing to a review of this alleged debt would suggest that I agree to be liable for the same and without evidence to the contrary, I do not.

I now require the following :

 

1. With immediate effect, you contact the CCC’s and inform them that you no longer wish to collect payments on this account.

2. All payments made to date to this account should be refunded in full, including interest at the rate of 8% per annum.

3. Removal of all defaults entered by you to any credit reference agencies. Note: this is to be a complete deletion and not merely an amendment.

4. I look forward to compensation under Section 13 of the Data Protection Act 1998 to be offered for the processing of my data in the manner it has been done.

5. After a full refund of all payments with interest and compensation are received by myself, you will be required under Section 10 and Section 12 of the Data Protection Act 1998, to cease and desist all manual and automatic processing of my data within your company and any other company within your group.

6. Your confirmation that all of the above action has been taken.

 

In reference to the above, I acknowledge you may require time for departmental transfer of this correspondence and to this end, I will now allow you a further 14 days in which to satisfy these requirements. If no response is received within this period, I shall take action without further reference to cease payments via the CCC’s and it shall be assumed that you have no further interest in this matter. Furthermore, should you not respond, a full transcript of all correspondence and payments will be sent to your regulatory authorities, as the basis of a formal complaint.I may also consider a claim at my local county court in order to facilitate my requirements.

With the exception of point 1& 3 above, upon receipt of your confirmation that these actions have been taken, this matter maybe closed.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

They telephoned tonight and basically asked

 

"Are we going to keep Payng?"

"If you don't keep paying you will be liable for additional costs and charges"

"We don't need to have a credit agreement cos the T&C's are in the catalogue" (they put "the account on hold because they could'nt provide one in the time frame")

And "Credit agreements are not worth the paper they are writen on" (I wonder why they have them in the catalogue then!).

 

Then it was "Are your going to keep paying" again and "We are just contacting you for your protection so you don't get further charges"

 

"We have consulted our legal team and we will not be aceeding to any of your requests"

 

We just said put it in writing!

 

It'll be interesting to see if they do, but meanwhile, all input gratefuly recieved.

 

Scampjet.

 

PS. I can't remember whose letter 've pinched bits out of..but than you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they ring again, just say, "I will on discuss this in writing only." then hang up. Then wait and see if they produce something in writing.

 

It's likely they'll just keep sending computer generated threat-o-grams. If they do, send a letter headed "Formal Complaint" Outlining why you're not happy, and what you expect them to do about it.

 

I've found this works for me, as it then takes them a week to reply, saying they are investigating your complaint. Then a month later they'll reply with a load of feeble excuses, and failing to address bout half of the things you're not happy with. Then write back saying your're not happy, and why and give them one final chance to address the problems. Then theu should give a final answer. Then you can take your complaint to the OFT.

 

Make sure you keep records of all correspondence, times, dates, etc.

Don't dicuss anything on the phone, as you need everything in writing as evidence for the OFT to investigate them.

These are video links to show how I deal with Debt Collectors.

 

Fly fishing for C.A.R.S

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zPtzK8FqE6k&feature=related

 

Frederickson International don't accept my card type

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=eiZBULlWW6Q&feature=related

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks fizzbobble,

 

this is what I am hoping for. I'm trying to get a definitive answer form creditors who have addmitted they have no agreements, in order gain enough ammo so that a complaint to OFT T.Standards caries more water. We need to establish exactly who we have to pay when we dump the CCCs and we will not have sufficient income to continue the plan at the next review so it they dump us, we will only have to make arrangemnts with those who do have agreements.

 

At least, thats the plan!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are doing the right thing.

 

As soon as the 12 =2 and 30 days are up you can stop paying them

 

2. All payments made to date to this account should be refunded in full, including interest at the rate of 8% per annum

 

I do hope you know this won't happen and you cannot claim these back.

 

let us know how you get on

 

Idax

Please contact a member of the site team if you are offered help off the forum for a a paid or no win no fee service.

 

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

Click here to donate through PayPal (opens in a new window)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Sir,

 

please pass this to your legal team.

 

Any more frivolous threats by your organisation will be met by a claim in XXXXX County Court against your company, the grounds for such an action will be set out in accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules and CPR Pre Action Protocols

 

In addition, since you persistently fail to provide a copy of the contract which you allege gives a right of action, i may need to make a pre action disclosure application before the court to ensure that i have all the documents which are relevent to my potential claim

 

of course at the point where you fail to comply with the order of the court im sure you will be aware that my claim would succeed without question

 

therefore, please supply me a copy of the contract which you allege that i entered into with your organisation or the organisation which you claim to represent, doing so will avoid the necessity of making an application to the court for disclosure. please note that should it become necessary to make such an application i will produce before the court a copy of this letter when the issue of costs falls due.

 

 

if you do not wish to comply with my request , please withdraw your frivolous threats and confirm that this matter is now closed and no further correspondence will be forthcoming from your organisation

 

Regards

 

 

i would sling that at them, no need to talk about this and that, just tell them that you will bring a claim if they dont crawl back under their rock

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi adainfife. Thanks for posting

 

"I do hope you know this won't happen and you cannot claim these back".

 

Yes i do realise that it won't happen:(

The idea is see what they come back with in response. Hopefully I can get them to back off completely. But that probably won't happen either!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pt,

Thank you again!

I will certainly keep that in safe place till needed (and it will be!:D).

 

What is the procedure for making a pre action disclosure order?

I am aiming to try and get an answer from those without agreements by 25th of next month.(could'nt even think about it until CL finace was sorted).

I cannot not pay these people while with the cccs and really don't need the additional hassle of trying to fight them off while making an arrangement with other creditors who have agreements. If I can get rid of them, I can pay a slight increase to creditors with agreements and still ease my situation slightly.

 

Thanks again for the letter.

 

Scampjet,

Link to post
Share on other sites

doubt very much it will be needed but, you can under the Civil Procedure Rules make an application to the court to be disclosed documents which are vital to your case

 

dont worry about how to do it, we can talk you through it, should it even be needed, remember half these mcmuffins puff their chests out so as to make you think you are in the wrong but when you challenge them they tend to run away

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Paul,

 

It really is comforting to know all this help is available!

 

I know they are just "puffing their chests" But knowing how to deal with it correctly is another thing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

It's just DCA scare tactics in the vain attempt to scare you into paying up by quoting a load of legal jargon.

Just write back reminding them that they haven't provided an agreement, and you will refuse to respond to their letters and calls until they do. PT2537's letter above is a good one to send to them.

 

Before too long they'll realise they're onto a loser, and either pass it back to the Original Creditor or sell it down the chain to another DCA.

After 2 or 3 times they all seem to give up.

These are video links to show how I deal with Debt Collectors.

 

Fly fishing for C.A.R.S

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zPtzK8FqE6k&feature=related

 

Frederickson International don't accept my card type

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=eiZBULlWW6Q&feature=related

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have told you that the credit agreement isn't available. As a consequence they cannot enforce payment of the debt.

But they are correct in saying the debt still exists.

 

They also say they will continue to try and recover the debt although, without being able to take this court, any attempts to do so will be no more than moral persuasion.

 

It has been stated on here more than once that DCAs would gain more by being nice, considerate and co-operating with people rather than abusing, vilifying and harassing people. God help us all if they ever change.

 

Remember that old African proverb : Softly, softly catchee monkey... :)

I really do appreciate all those 'thank you' emails - I'm glad I've been able to help. Apologies if I haven't acknowledged all of them.

You can also ding my gong if you prefer. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...