Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Shein has been linked to unethical business practices, including forced labour allegations.View the full article
    • Hi I have to agree with @unclebulgaria67 post#3 For the funding side of moving to a new area and it being private supported accommodation I would also suggest speaking to private supported accommodation provider about funding but also contact the Local Council for that area and have a chat with them about funding because if you are in receipt of Housing Benefit certain Supported Accommodation that meets a certain criteria is treated as ‘exempt accommodation’ for Housing Benefit purposes but you need to confirm this with that relevant Council in your new area especially since it is Private Supported Accommodation as each Council can have slightly different rules on this. If you have a certain medical condition look up the charities and also have a wee chat with them as they may be able to point you to different Grants to assist with moving costs and your question about funding for private supported accommodation as well.
    • Hi Just to be clear a Notice to Quit is only the very start of the Housing Association going down the Eviction route there is a long process to go. Also to be clear if you leave at the Notice to Quit date only and go to the Council claiming you are Homeless they will more than likely class you as Intentionally Homeless therefore you have no right to be given temporary housing by the Council. The only way that works is when the Court has Granted a Possession Order then you can approach the Council as Homeless with the Court Order. As for the Housing Association issuing the Notice to Quit because there investigation has proved it's not your main residence but you have witness statement to prove otherwise. From now on with the Housing Association you need to keep a very good paper trail and ensure to get free proof of posting from the post office with anything you send to them. You now need to make a Formal Complaint to the Housing Association and please amend the following to suit your needs:   Dear Sir/Madam FORMAL COMPLAINT Reference: Notice to Quit Letter Dated XX/XX/2024, Hand Delivered on XX/XX/2024 I note in your letter that you stated that the Housing Association has carried out an investigation into myself and came to the conclusion that I am not using this property as my main residence and have evidence of this and have therefore issued a 'Notice to Quit' by XX/XX/2024. I find the above actions absolutely disgraceful action by the Housing Association. 1. Why have I never been informed nor asked about this matter by my Housing Officer. 2. Why have I never been given the opportunity to defend myself before the Housing Association out of the blue Hand Delivered a Notice to Quit Letter. 3. I have evidence and witnesses/statements that prove this is my Main Residence and more than willing provide this to both the Housing Association and the Court. I now require the following: 1. Copy of your Complaints Policy (not the leaflet) 2. Copy of your Customer Care Charter (not the leaflet) 3. Copies of your Investigation into this not being my main residence.    As well as the above you need to send the Housing Association urgently a Subject Access Request (SAR) requesting 'ALL DATA' that simple phrase covers whatever format they hold that in whether it be letters, email, recorded calls etc. The Housing Association then has 30 calendar days to respond but that time limit only starts once they acknowledge your SAR Request. If they fail to respond within that time limit its then off with a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office (ICO).     
    • Hi Sorry for the delay in getting back to you The email excuse and I do say excuse to add to your account and if court decide LL can't recoup costs will be removed is a joke. So I would Ask them: Ask them to provide you with the exact terms within your Tenancy Agreement that allows them to add these Court Fees to your Account before it has been decided in Court by a Judge. Until the above is answered you require these Court Fees to be removed from your Account (Note: I will all be down to your Tenancy Agreement so have a good look through it to see what if any fees they can add to your account in these circumstances)
    • Thank you for your responses. As requested, some more detail. Please forgive, I'm writing this on my phone which always makes for less than perfect grammar. My Dad tries but English not his 1st language, i'm born and bred in England, a qualified accountant and i often help him with his admin. On this occasion I helped my dad put in his renewal driving licence application around 6 weeks before expiry and with it the disclosure of his sleep apnoea. Once the licence expired I told him to get in touch with his GP, because the DVLA were offering only radio silence at that time (excuses of backlogs When I called to chase up). The GP charged £30 for an opinion letter on his ability to drive based on his medical history- at the time I didn't take a copy of the letter, but I am hoping this will be key evidence that we can rely on as to why s88 applies because in the GP opinion they saw no reason he couldn't drive i need to see the letter again as im going only on memory- we forwarded the letter in a chase up / complaint to the DVLA.  In December, everything went quiet RE the sleep apnoea (i presume his GP had given assurance) but the DVLA noticed there had been a 2nd medical issue in the past, when my father suffered a one off mini stroke 3 years prior. That condition had long been resolved via an operation (on his brain of all places, it was a scary time, but he came through unscathed) and he's never had an issue since. We were able to respond to that query very promptly (within the 14 days) and the next communication was the licence being granted 2 months later. DVLA have been very slow in responding every step of the way.  I realise by not disclosing the mini stroke at the time, and again on renewal (had I known I'd have encouraged it) he was potentially committing an offence, however that is not relevant to the current charge being levied, which is that he was unable to rely on s88 because of a current medical issue (not one that had been resolved). I could be wrong, I'm not a legal expert! The letter is a summons I believe because its a speeding offence (59 in a temp roadworks 50 limit on the A1, ironically whist driving up to visit me). We pleaded guilty to the speeding but not guilty to the s87.  DVLA always confirmed to me on the phone that the licence had not been revoked and that he "May" be able to continue to drive. They also confirmed in writing, but the letter explains the DVLA offer no opinion on the matter and that its up to the driver to seek legal advice. I'll take the advice to contact DVLA medical group. I'm going to contact the GP to make sure they received the SAR request for data, and make it clear we need to see a copy of the opinion letter. In terms of whether to continue to fight this, or to continue with the defence, do we have any idea of the potential consequences of either option? Thanks all
  • 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

Alternative to Clamping. A landowners view


Guest pdyke14856
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5738 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 116
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Now you are really showing that you know nothing about running a business.
I never pretended otherwise, dear. :-D

The only thing the barrier can be offset against is TAX

 

It still needs to be paid for and the money has to come from somewhere. Just because he's running a business doesn't mean he's got an infinite amount of money to "offset" it against.

Fair enough. Then surely what you need to do is find the cost of that method and work out how that would compare in terms of actual business loss/gains? The same way you would do for any spending on the business? You don't need a business degree to think on that one, just good ol' common sense, btw. ;-)

 

You know, you can try to justify using illegal clampers and fake parking tickets all you like, it's not going to make the reality go away, so maybe you should try to factor in the cost of being made jointly liable for breaking the law into your expenses and compare that to maybe using a legal alternative. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, you can try to justify using illegal clampers and fake parking tickets all you like, it's not going to make the reality go away, so maybe you should try to factor in the cost of being made jointly liable for breaking the law into your expenses and compare that to maybe using a legal alternative. :-)

 

I never advocated the use of illegal clampers, however I would on a cost basis recommend using legitimate clampers instead of a barrier.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not making effort to appear as anything.

 

I'm confused as to why my not being a lawyer precludes me from expressing even quasi-legal opinion, yet your not being a lawyer allows you to do the same.

 

I'm sure that you are correct though - owning a club is not an offer to treat.

 

However, having a club, playing music, providing a bar, having flashing lights and leaving the door open is an offer to treat. It's saying "Come here, I'm a club, have some fun".

 

Much as a car park says "I'm for parking cars, look at my marked bays, come park here".

 

In the same way that every door has a handle and so must be there to open?

 

Wrong, next?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I never advocated the use of illegal clampers, however I would on a cost basis recommend using legitimate clampers instead of a barrier.

 

All of them failing to see the point that was made from the start: You can operate a clamping operation as long as you comply with the law and the rules within your industry, how is that difficult to understand?

 

Operate lawfully and your "inconsiderate buggers" won't have a leg to stand on to get their money back. Operate unlawfully, cut corners and entrap and you'll lose out. Surely it's not that difficult a concept to comprehend, even for knuckles draggers? :rolleyes:

 

Hmmm... :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Y

 

The point is that you are drawing on your own experience, and extrapolating to reach a conclusion, which then becomes you assumption. Whereas the only accurate assumption that you can make is that if _you_ were to park without permission, _you_ would be doing so because _you_ were being lazy.

 

I wouldn't dare to criticise you for your views on parking, but I will pull you up on drawing unjustified conclusions about others parking habits.

 

 

I would argue that in most cases when people get clamped that there is some free and legal parking a short walk away which wouldn't have got them a clamp. You only have to look at the pictures posted for the thread which started this thread. Specifically look at the picture marked 'This is it from the opposite wall, you can see how high up it is.'

 

You can clearly see that there is a parking space on the main road. So here is another assumption! The guy went to subway, all the on street parking was taken and so he chanced it on some private car park - afterall it was outside thier opening hours and no clampers were in sight and it was only going to be for a couple of minutes.

 

If it had been me, I would have driven around the corner and left it on a side street and walked back to Subway - but that takes effort.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP has requested opinion on his options. If other users wish to bicker and score points with each other, your posts will be moderated and this thread closed.

 

Users are reminded that if you have a different point that you wish to raise, start your own thread.

..

.

 

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

If your drive is blocked by someone parked on the public highway, then that is illegal and the Police can ticket/remove the vehicle.

 

There is your remedy. In your scenario, clamping is very definitely not the answer as this would only extend the period of obstruction.

 

Meanwhile back in the real world, when the police arrive,if indeed they bother to do so, the car has long gone, and I am late for work.

 

Some of the replies on this forum remind me of members of our Government.Very quick to offer solutions to problems that they personally will never experience; and thus will never suffer the inconvenience of their unworkable ideas.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile back in the real world, when the police arrive,if indeed they bother to do so, the car has long gone, and I am late for work.

 

If it is a continual/common occurrence, then your local cops can put in a presence (more likely PCSO) at start/chucking out time.

 

One or two FPNs for obstruction (ie criminal court matters) tends to get through to the parent body in my experience.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should have been towed and subject to a controlled explosion

 

Awww would that be you?

 

Fitting a barrier is not always cost effective or practicle

 

1) Correct, agree.

 

2) Nope.

 

3) But is sometimes.

 

I apologise for repeating myself but I cannot understand why any landowner would employ a firm to keep "illegal" parkers off their land when it is in fact in the interests of that firm to have "illegal" parkers to prey on!

 

Given this fact you WILL have problems. Let us consider the damage done to a busness when a "legal" parker, say a valued customer, parks his BMW over the white bay markings because the bay is too small, or the clamper thinks he is not a bona fide customer. I am not refering to a shop or store but a "small business".

 

Remember the type of person who tends to run or own these companies. It is significant that when the government started to licence clampers they gave the job to the organisation which licenced "bouncers".

 

Get a barrier!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP has requested opinion on his options. If other users wish to bicker and score points with each other, your posts will be moderated and this thread closed.

 

Users are reminded that if you have a different point that you wish to raise, start your own thread.

 

 

An intelligent, reasonable moderator...

 

Nothing like that over at CUK, is there guys?:-|

If there was maybe it wouldn't be the childish carp site it is today.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest pdyke14856

So in conclusion based on the replies from posters on this board

 

1) Dont have a car park - Thanks very helpful

2) Put in an automatic barrier - Shared drive, cost running into £1000s, business owner pays(Tax is only paid when you make a profit, managing the car park in this way comes straight out of the individuals pocket)

3) Put up more signs and ask them to leave politely, the English are very polite you know - Not the feral proles who park, plus I pay again

4) PPN - Well thats not legal and anyone who can read will come here and challenge it. It's illegal you know you evil money grabbing landowner. But only the literate web users will know that and in fact, they're the ones who now get aggressive 'We know the law!!!'

5) Erect Fencing and Chains - Well yes, its about £400 to do. But will be ongoing costs to repair and without 4 (which you say is illegal) I will still have problems with people damaging it and parking in it.

6) Put spikes that go down on the way in - Great, so Im responsible for paying for the damage to the idiot who tries to get out, plus it's a shared drive

7) Put up clamping signs and let clampers do their thing. It costs me nothing and as long as the signs are big enough and they are SIA registered then it's all legal and costs me nothing. Eventually people will get the message.

 

Well thanks to all who have contributed. Well done, I truly think that this website has allowed me to make my decision. There doesnt actually seem a real alternative to clamping.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an office on a business park and we pay for 6 parking spaces. Next to our office is a garage and often people leave their cars in our spaces whilst they drop them off at the garage. We always ask people nicely to move and they understand and comply. Occasionally we do get people thinking they can park in what are clearly defined spaces and the way we deal with it is a standard sheet of A4 paper stating 'this is a reserved parking space for office please do not park here again'. We stick these to the windscreen on the drivers side using a glue that comes off with effort but would not cause damage. Its amazing how when people are inconvienced in return, scraping the paper off, they dont try it again. See there is an easy answer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We stick these to the windscreen on the drivers side using a glue that comes off with effort but would not cause damage. Its amazing how when people are inconvienced in return, scraping the paper off, they dont try it again. See there is an easy answer.

 

As far as I understand, it is illegal to stick something on a car windscreen which can obscure the driver's view that cannot be immediately removed. i.e. must peel straight off leaving no residue. The reason being that if a driver continued to drive without removing the notice and had a crash you could be cited as causing the crash.

 

You imply it "comes off with effort" which sounds like you may need to use a scaper or warm soapy water to remove, both of which would not be readily available at the site. I would suggest you check into this further before someone actually reports you for an offence. In the meantime it might be advisable to stick it on another window which would not be deemed to be obstructing the driver's view for safety. (eg rear window driver's side)

Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Dont have a car park - Thanks very helpful

If the only person allowed to reply must have a car park, I suspect this thread would have a fair bit of tumbleweed flying around.

 

4) PPN - Well thats not legal and anyone who can read will come here and challenge it. It's illegal you know you evil money grabbing landowner. But only the literate web users will know that and in fact, they're the ones who now get aggressive 'We know the law!!!'

 

Regardless of how you (wrongly) perceive the people on here and the advice they give, people do tend to go on the internet when they get one of these invoices and they do get told to ignore it. Nobody is going to tell someone to pay something when they are under no obligation to. To say otherwise is just wrong.

 

3) Put up more signs and ask them to leave politely, the English are very polite you know - Not the feral proles who park, plus I pay again

 

Well, since you haven't tried it properly, you can't knock it. And sarcasm regarding the advice I gave isn't on, is it?

 

7) Put up clamping signs and let clampers do their thing. It costs me nothing and as long as the signs are big enough and they are SIA registered then it's all legal and costs me nothing. Eventually people will get the message.

 

Bear in mind that as landowner, you could be jointly sued along with the clamping company and have to deal with writing defences and taking a morning or two off each year to go to court.

 

Just making you aware of the possibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5738 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...