Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

ppc now going for boy racers too


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5753 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

A new 'local'ppc has sprung up on the south coast over the last year, and I have been watching as slowly the signs have spread around most of the private car parks.

 

About a week ago, extra signage popped up in a local retail park - stating that ' anti social driving will result in the issue of a parking charge notice '

 

In smaller writing it explains that the site cctv will be used to record anti social driving, and the drivers face etc.

 

Although its a good idea to solve the problem whilst keeping the retail park open to traffic - what else will they branch into ??

All opinions & information are the personal view of the poster, and are not that of any organisation, company or employer. Any information disclosed by the poster is for personal use only. Permission to process this data under the Data Protection act is NOT GIVEN to any company, only personal readers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are acting not only unlawfully but also illegally.

 

The most they can do is report anti social behaviour to the police who may issue a FPN or they can make a citizens arrest if they see a criminal act being committed ............. that would be fun to watch

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its the standard parking charge '£75' for any 'offence' in the car park. The other sign is the usual 'contractual agreement'type, no disabled bay, park in marked bays, yada yada.

 

The company themselves is called parktech - can't find any google stuff about them.

 

Seems to of scarred off the boy racers though - ordinarily I will explain the legalities of a 'ticket' to people I see in a car park, and point them towards here. Might give this lot a miss though.!!

All opinions & information are the personal view of the poster, and are not that of any organisation, company or employer. Any information disclosed by the poster is for personal use only. Permission to process this data under the Data Protection act is NOT GIVEN to any company, only personal readers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't see any phone number on the posters.

 

Jonchris - when you say illegal, do you mean any more than usual ?. I'm assuming the anti social driving clause is simply another term and condition of parking, and as the ppc's would say 'contractual agreement ' of parking / entering the car park. I can't see how its any more or less illegal than what they currently do !!

Surely (in theory) they could say ' all drivers must wear red hatsn parking charge 90 for failing to do so' and then issue charges - I know they are uninforceable etc, but is there anything in law to restrict what conditions they can put ?

All opinions & information are the personal view of the poster, and are not that of any organisation, company or employer. Any information disclosed by the poster is for personal use only. Permission to process this data under the Data Protection act is NOT GIVEN to any company, only personal readers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice lamma. Love absurdities being exposed.

 

Since when did policing offences under the RTA become the responsibility of the growing army of pretend police? Guess this lot will soon be wearing anti stab and bullet proof jackets.

 

If you can't act like a copper, at least try and look like one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha ha lamma - never thought of that !. But legally, can they do that ?

All opinions & information are the personal view of the poster, and are not that of any organisation, company or employer. Any information disclosed by the poster is for personal use only. Permission to process this data under the Data Protection act is NOT GIVEN to any company, only personal readers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With these PPC who is going to issue the naughty boy racer with an NIP.

If they dont pay this so called penalty charge, will it be heard in the Mags Crt or Civil Crt.

Always remember that this would fall outside the remit of the local council as prosecutions under RTA are crimminal offences

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I was in our local Staples Car park today, and it had a PPC "controlling " it, one of the things that made me laugh was that they said that they would fine the Registered Keeper, not the driver, also, you will be fined if you go into Staples and then go somewhere else, leaving the car there, also (and I find this most interesting) that they will issue a fine to anyone who isnt displaying a valid Road Fund Licence Badge, would love to see them try lol

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should I remove my tax disc whilst there also :D

 

 

LOL I cannot remember the company, and I was there parked right in front of it, I ws going to go in, but the monkey was asleep so I didnt, instead I sat there pulling their signage to pieces (in my head of course) and sent Mr Lula off to the sports shop to get his ankle straps (poor begger is falling apart!), so you never know, I might actually be in line for one of these lovely letters.

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Tickets for no tax disc" where in Gods name do these people come from.

 

Are they going to report their 'find' to the appropriate authorities

 

Someone should write to Staples & warn them about the hornets nest they are about to uncover

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you know, it is private land, the bobbies cant have me for not displaying on private land now can they? and I could just put it back before I left the car park ................... I will try and get back there tomorrow and take a picture of the signage, they really have tried to make it as legit sounding as possible, using phrases like "implied terms etc" I have to admit I did laugh a bit :-)

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct lama you can be arrested for a driving offence on private land with public access. You can also be clamped on PL for not being taxed. In the case of social housing your untaxed vehicle can even be removed by the local authority who work hand in glove with the DVLA

Link to post
Share on other sites

To enforce an invoice for anti-social driving they would have to show that they provided consideration for the contract. This would mean licensing the use of their land for anti-social driving in return for a fee. Such a contract would be void for illegality and being against public policy.

Edited by Zamzara

Post by me are intended as a discussion of the issues involved, as these are of general interest to me and others on the forum. Although it is hoped such discussion will be of use to readers, before exposing yourself to risk of loss you should not rely on any principles discussed without confirming the situation with a qualified person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are we really hurting the PPC's that much with 'don't pay' that they are having to branch into more 'creative' areas !!.

 

Perhaps I need to go and put up some contractual signs on my car 'place any piece of paper to this car, and you are agreeing to pay £95 charge per piece of paper'.

 

Anyone care to design some 'tickets' (sorry, I mean 'invoices') for me, or do I need to contact a PPC and ask them to do it ??!!

All opinions & information are the personal view of the poster, and are not that of any organisation, company or employer. Any information disclosed by the poster is for personal use only. Permission to process this data under the Data Protection act is NOT GIVEN to any company, only personal readers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...