Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)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; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
  • 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

Goods not recived via private internet purchase?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5727 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 guys,

I bought a car cover for £130 off a guy on a car website in april, and it still hasn't been delivered. It was a private one-off sale, and I paid by direct bank transfer as I trusted the guy :-x... Now he has said royal mail have lost it, blah blah blah, but he did not insure it so cannot claim the money back. Ever since I have been fobbed off with lame excuse after lame excuse.

 

I called the police as it has been 4 months now, they paid him a visit on the grounds of obtaining money by decepiton, but he has convinced them that he admits he owes me £130, and it is all in hand.

 

I am loosing patience now, as I have been messed around for too long, is small claims court the way forward, as the guy is claiming he is off work due to a bike accident, so only has £60 a week. He lives with his parents, so even if I win in court could the baliffs legally enter the property to recover the debt?

 

Any advice would be great, I was going to follow the bank charges model, send him 2 letters then file on moneyclaim online, would this be acceptable? Also can I claim the interest on the initial £130 and the cost of all the phonecalls etc?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes - if you've already sent several requests for a refund then simply send him a final LBA, give him 14 days, then submit a claim.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Did you ask him to get the postal insurance?

Does he have proof of posting?

 

If he is on benefits you are going to get very little from him if you take court action and win.

The bailiffs can only enter his property if he doesn't pay what the court orders and if he lets them in. If he doesn't answer the door to the bailiffs they will eventually give up. If he doesn't let them in they can't force there way in. As its his parents home I imagine he will say everything belongs to them so I don't think bailiffs would be very successful in this set up.

I hope I don't sound like I'm on the guys side I'm not.

This is the problem with buying off the net, you have to be so careful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you didn't ask him to insure the parcel, you can only claim compensation up to the maximum allowed by Royal Mail, which is a lot less than £130. From the Royal Mail site:

"This compensation is subject to the maximum payable being the lower of the market value of the item and statutory maximum of 100 x 1st Class stamps at the first weight step."

 

In order to do that, you will need proof of posting which he should provide. If he can't provide this, then he should compensate you as there is no way of telling the item was ever sent!

 

If he does give you proof of posting, then I'm afraid you don't have a case against him. You'll have to get compensation from Royal Mail. It's not too late, you have 12 months from the date of posting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you didn't ask him to insure the parcel,

 

In order to do that, you will need proof of posting which he should provide. If he can't provide this, then he should compensate you as there is no way of telling the item was ever sent!

 

If he does give you proof of posting, then I'm afraid you don't have a case against him. You'll have to get compensation from Royal Mail. It's not too late, you have 12 months from the date of posting.

 

Exactly, You are spot on.

thats why I asked the OP if they had asked for an insured delivery and if the seller had proof of posting.!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys,

 

 

I called the police as it has been 4 months now, they paid him a visit on the grounds of obtaining money by decepiton, but he has convinced them that he admits he owes me £130, and it is all in hand.

 

you were lucky the police went round to visit the guy, surely they must have asked to see the proof of posting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest joe.inom

you know what , it aint the fault for the sellers.

Cause you know what , i have orderd a Shoe pair from eBay , and they took it to deliver here in florida after a month .

I have sent them millions and millions of letters , emails and i almost murderd the bank manager on the phone.

Then almost at the month end of the order , the guy comes in with the delivery report and gives a ltter.

the letter says that they are already busy with millions such orders , when my number came in , i got my delivery.

This is the case with you too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OP, if he has no money, I think the best you could get out of him is a very small sum each week, unless his parents do the decent thing and pay you back.

 

Until the OP actually says that the seller has NOT got any proof that he actually sent the item then no one knows for sure that he didn't.

 

The OP said "The guy is off work at the moment." which would make one presume that the guy is an adult, over sixteen at least.

Why would the guys parents have to do the Decent thing, and pay him back.

No one has any way of knowing if the parents knew anything about this.

Once children are over sixteen, the parents are not responsible for their actions.

If the seller was a child then I would agree. I think it can be gleaned from the OP that the seller is an adult. So I don't see that the parents should even be bought into the picture.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Still not had any joy with this, whats the maximum sentance for GBH? :mad::mad:... Incidently, the bank (HSBC) say they cannot do anything as the payment was made by myself, even though the guy is a fraudster, they refuse to help!

 

Also, Can I claim 8% interest on this if I go through the small claims court?

Edited by will_cosworth
Link to post
Share on other sites

You still haven't said if the guy has proof of posting or not.!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will_cosworth. viewpost.gif

Still not had any joy with this, whats the maximum sentance for GBH? :evil::evil:...

 

You might just land yourself in alot of trouble with that attitude,

I don't think a court case is worth bothering with. As the guy you are after is unemployed you are likely to get a pound a month out of him, if your claim is successful.

I think that kind of outcome would wind you up and make you feel worse than you do now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of things:

 

1) Even if the sender had proof of posting, it is still his responsability. Whether he can claim off RM or not is not the OP's issue. OP entitled to get full refund for item non received.

 

2) Maybe the guy can pay, maybe he can't. There's no way to ascertain that and it's amazing the number of people who DO find they can pay up after all when faced with the possibility of a CCJ. There is the risk that OP might not recover his money + court fee, but the alternative is kiss goodbye to £130 without a fight. If it were me, I'd spend the money on the court fee and go for it. At worse, I'd lose £30 (£35 now?) and not get my money back, at best, I'd get it all back + interest.

 

If you do decide to go to court, yes, you can add 8% statutory interest (and your court fee on top). You can also claim "reasonable" costs for dealing with the case, at £9.25 an hour, but don't be greedy and over-inflate your costs, that does nothing for your credibility.

 

Yes, there is the risk that the guy will come out with a £1 a week judgment... IF he can convince the judge that that is all he can afford... But you know what? As far as I am concerned, it's always worth doing anyway if only for the moral victory, knowing that maybe he screwed you out of £130, but his credit rating is b*ggered for the next 6 years.

 

In the end, though, it has to be your decision, and no-one else's. ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Bookie on this wholly - not sure why it is assumed that it is the OPs issue if the compensation from RM is inadequate - the seller had a responsibility to ensure the goods were delivered and this includes adequate insurance on the item.

 

In addition, again agree with Bookie that to say it is pointless following a claim is just not true, certainly on the information we have. Baliffs are not the only form of enforcement of a CCJ(indeed, they are the worst IMO), and a garnishee order or AoE would probably work wonders in this case.

 

Good luck OP ;)

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bookworm,

Every thing I sell on line is covered by the royal mail comp which is free when I obtain a proof of posting certificate, I think it covers up to £36. roughly,I always obtain POP when I send an item I've sold.

If the item sold is worth more I give the buyer the opportunity to pay insurance.

Buyers usually wish to pay the insurance.

Are you saying that if the buyer chooses not to pay for the insurance and lets say the item is worth £100. and royal mail looses it then its up to me to refund the buyer in full?

Link to post
Share on other sites

But the seller didn't offer insurance in this instance, did he? Seller didn't insure goods, didn't offer to buyer to add insurance to purchase, so yes, it is totally 100% his liability and responsability to reimburse buyer. Furthermore, even if buyer were to want to pursue the matter himself (for reasons best known to himself), he couldn't as he doesn't have a contract with RM, the seller does.

 

Edit: As far as you are concerned, if you are charging your customers (not businesses, that's a different matter) insurance, you are in breach of the CPUT Regs 08:

If you are selling to a consumer, you are responsible for the risk of loss or damage in transit, until the goods are delivered. If you wish to take out postal insurance, this is your responsibility, not the consumer's. Postal insurance should therefore not be offered to consumers at an extra charge.
http://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/Images/ca12_tcm9-8175.pdf Edited by Bookworm
Link to post
Share on other sites

But the seller didn't offer insurance in this instance, did he? Seller didn't insure goods, didn't offer to buyer to add insurance to purchase, so yes, it is totally 100% his liability and responsibility to reimburse buyer. Furthermore, even if buyer were to want to pursue the matter himself (for reasons best known to himself), he couldn't as he doesn't have a contract with RM, the seller does.

 

sorry i probably didn't explain my self very well, not very articulate.:oops:

I was asking the question for myself.

I sell quite alot on Ebay.

As I said I always offer insurance , the buyer has to pay. If the goods are worth less than £36. this is covered for free for buyer through the POP which I always obtain. I also give them an option to purchase insurance.

If they decide they don't want insurance (which from memory only one buyer has & the value of item was £60) and RM looses the parcel are you saying I am responsible & have to refund them the full amount.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes you are is the short answer, as per Bookies edit above ;)

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...