Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Aesmith - Thank you for your recent interest in my issues.  Input on people's topics can be most useful from specialised experts or those that have similar experiences.  Some people really struggle with knowing what to do (I certainly do) - so it is most useful and helpful and reassuring when solid sensible advice is offered.  I have found there to be some very kind, helpful, supportive and legally knowledgeable people here on cag over the years - who give sound legal advice for people to roll up their sleeves and follow up on.   Of course, sometimes it can be quite challenging sifting the wheat from the chaff.  I don't have lawyer or barrister.  I sometimes attend pro-bono legal clinics for help.  And sometimes have access to barristers via a pro-bono service called Advocate.  Both ad-hoc. Pro-bono means 'free'
    • The Judge was wrong. The keeper is only INVITED to say who was driving, there is no obligation for them to say.
    • Member of the Question Time audience asks Richard Tice about Donald Trump.    
    • I hope Lord Frost is OK. Islamists and the woke Left are uniting to topple the West ARCHIVE.PH archived 18 Apr 2024 19:12:37 UTC  
    • Ok you are in the clear. The PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 for two reasons. The first is that in Section 9 [2][e]  says the PCN must "state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper— (i)to pay the unpaid parking charges ". It does not say that even though it continues correctly with blurb about the driver. The other fault is that there is no parking period mentioned. Their ANPR cameras do show your arrival and departure times but as that at the very least includes driving from the entrance to the parking space then later leaving the parking space and driving to the exit. It also doesn't allow for finding a parking spot: manoeuvering into it avoiding parking on the lines: possibly having to stop to allow pedestrians/other cars to pass in front of you; returning the trolley after finishing shopping; loading children disabled people in and out of the car, etc etc.  All of that could easily add five, ten or even 15 minutes to your time which the ANPR cameras cannot take into account. So even if it was only two hours free time you could  still have been within the  time since there is a MINIMUM of 15 minutes Grace period when you leave the car park. However as they cannot even manage to get their PCN to comply with the Act you as keeper cannot be pursued. Only the driver is now liable and they do not know who was driving as you have not appealed and perhaps unwittingly given away who was driving. So you do not owe them a penny. No need to appeal. Let them waste their money pursuing you . 
  • 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

Swift Advances. Secured Loan Charges reclaim


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4902 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

  • Replies 3.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

This is what I will be using against Mark White when he stated Swift do not pay commission and do not operate agencies........and furthermore in the signed statement of truth in the Disclosure CPR objected to me seeing the correspondence between THEIR AGENTS

 

 

case KJM Superbikes v Hinton [2008] EWHC 1280

 

KJM appealed to the Court of Appeal against the judge’s decision refusing permission to bring contempt of court proceedings against Mr Hinton. Lord Justice Moore-Bick allowed the appeal and Lady Justice Arden and Lord Justice Mummery agreed with his reasons for doing so. The primary question was whether it was in the public interest for the contempt of court proceedings to be pursued against Mr. Hinton. He stated that “a witness who knowingly makes a false statement in the course of giving evidence orally or in an affidavit does not expose himself to an action for damages at the suit of anyone injured as a result, but he does expose himself to the risk of prosecution for perjury and as such is publicly accountable for his attempt to interfere with the course of justice.” He said that giving a private person permission to pursue proceedings for contempt “allows that person to act in a public rather than a private role…….to pursue public interest”.

 

 

 

This case therefore serves as a timely reminder to signatories to statements of truth and those advising them to ensure that the facts stated in the document concerned are true. A failure to do so can expose the signatory to criminal proceedings for contempt of court and if convicted, the sentence can include imprisonment, a fine and/or a seizure of assets. Not only that, but the credibility of the signatory as a witness will be destroyed and the Court is unlikely to accept as true other parts of his or her evidence. Witness statements and statements of case should therefore be read thoroughly before signature and amendments made to ensure that the document is factually correct.

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

The public interest is ....................that Mark White has made similar untrue statements in other courts of law.......... and on his statements peoples property have been possessed......... and it must stop ........those people who have had them possessed on his statements containing falsehoods should have the full value of thei property paid back to them in compensation.

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another Document I have got that I didn't have to use in my previous Court case Swift took against us is a screen shot taken off the Agents/Brokers computer system..........it has a box that asks on it have any other lenders been contacted.......ITS BLANK ..meaning this Agent went straight to Swift ..............and didn't shop around for a better deal for us..............another screen shot shows a box with the the word Commission Paid ....guess what ........its filled in showing Swift did pay them commission.....another document to show Mark White did not tell the truth under oath ...you can't dispute documentray evidence can you. These agents went bust in April 2008

 

Commission is only paid to AGENTS of the Lender.Borrowers don't pay commission direct the lender does, all this exra evidence is for the big hearing I'll request, I've got loads of it

 

sparkie

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Appollo18,

 

I have only got to pove just one of the many false misleading statements by Mark White to the Court .......and I am convinced I will ..........he will then feel the full weight of the Court will fall on him, but what follows from that is that every case that he has given evidence in and stated the same in can be called into question...... because he goes into a pre-hearsed oral recitation in the witness box....and everyone can then use it to have their judgements overturned. ........the consequences of this I leave to everyones thoughts

 

I know Swift will put up a fight................ but they are up against TOO much damming evidence to show that he does not tell the truth under oath let alone in his statements of truth, I will be using one of his own CEO Mr John Webster statements to prove it.

 

sparkie

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I will be using against Mark White when he stated Swift do not pay commission and do not operate agencies........and furthermore in the signed statement of truth in the Disclosure CPR objected to me seeing the correspondence between THEIR AGENTS

 

 

case KJM Superbikes v Hinton [2008] EWHC 1280

 

KJM appealed to the Court of Appeal against the judge’s decision refusing permission to bring contempt of court proceedings against Mr Hinton. Lord Justice Moore-Bick allowed the appeal and Lady Justice Arden and Lord Justice Mummery agreed with his reasons for doing so. The primary question was whether it was in the public interest for the contempt of court proceedings to be pursued against Mr. Hinton. He stated that “a witness who knowingly makes a false statement in the course of giving evidence orally or in an affidavit does not expose himself to an action for damages at the suit of anyone injured as a result, but he does expose himself to the risk of prosecution for perjury and as such is publicly accountable for his attempt to interfere with the course of justice.” He said that giving a private person permission to pursue proceedings for contempt “allows that person to act in a public rather than a private role…….to pursue public interest”.

 

 

 

This case therefore serves as a timely reminder to signatories to statements of truth and those advising them to ensure that the facts stated in the document concerned are true. A failure to do so can expose the signatory to criminal proceedings for contempt of court and if convicted, the sentence can include imprisonment, a fine and/or a seizure of assets. Not only that, but the credibility of the signatory as a witness will be destroyed and the Court is unlikely to accept as true other parts of his or her evidence. Witness statements and statements of case should therefore be read thoroughly before signature and amendments made to ensure that the document is factually correct.

 

now now sparkie no way on earth will those rats cope with you this time last time you had NOTHING not even a breakfast

yet ended up ALL DAY taking the **** out of those twits

BUT NO WAY COULD THEY LET YOU WIN AS I ALWAYS SAID HOW WOULD IT LOOK IN NEWS AT 10

 

MAN WALKS INTO COURT OF STREET AND WIPES OUT TOP LEGAL TEAM

AM 100% THIS TIME IT WILL BE ON MORE THAN NEWS AT 10

pick up a penquin two systems for the price of one:?:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Two little birds are standing in line at a bank when armed robbers burst in. While a few of the robbers take the money from the tellers, the others line the customers up against a wall and proceed to take their wallets, jewelry, and any other valuables they may have.

 

While this is all taking place, one wee birdy puts something into his colleague's hand. Without looking down, the second lawyers whispers, "What is that?"

 

"It's the £100 I owe you," replies the first wee birdy.

pick up a penquin two systems for the price of one:?:

Link to post
Share on other sites

that not a joke matie it true just like this I

 

Just got from a wee birdy about one of their wee birdy friends

 

A co workers husband speaks frantically into the phone, "My wife is pregnant, and her contractions are only two minutes apart!"

"Is this her first child?" the doctor queries.

"No, you idiot!" the wee birdy shouts. "This is her husband!"

pick up a penquin two systems for the price of one:?:

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4902 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...