Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yep, I agree with what you are saying, I only mentioned the governing body code of practice as a nod to the fact that I wasn't dismissing the BPA or whoever out of hand, thought that would go in my favour before a judge. I wrote a long post about the BPA CoP earlier but then deleted it because I realised I wasn't talking about points of law but a set of guidelines drawn up by one bunch of charlatans for another bunch of charlatans. It is ludicrous that the 5 minute consideration period doesn't apply if the motorist parks, such nonsense. As for legislation, I was referring to the government legislation (if it is legislation?) document which has been withdrawn. Does that stand until it has been reintroduced? In the explanatory document it is quite clear. Otherwise, how does one hold them to the consideration and grace periods? Or is that at the discretion of the judge?
    • Thank you all   JK, I agree; if they were to accept my full claim today, then the interest would be around 8-9 pounds. If I were them, I would have offered to pay the interest and said no to the 12 pounds for the letters. These have not been mentioned, which is my mistake.   As you pointed out, if the judge were to award at 4% and I did not get the letters, I would get less.   Bank, thank you. I do hear what you are saying. If I am to continue with this, then I will need to pay an additional trial fee of £59. If I win everything, then great, but if I win less the claim and court fee, then I lose out. I am not sure what the judge will think about the interest. I think we have to remember that I won the item and, therefore, did not pay a penny for it. Yes, I have had to purchase an additional one, but maybe the judge will hold this against me. I am content that this is a win. I have not signed any non-disclosure clauses, and they do not ask for this either in their offer. 
    • Are you saying that both businesses were closed? Yet you stayed there for over two hours. . If both were closed than to charge £100 is a penalty since Horizon had no legitimate interest in keeping spaces clear for the company. sake as there were no customers..
    • Well you would think that would be the case. Sadly i doubt there is one honest broker within the BPA or IPC and most of their members. they are there to take as much money as they can from motorists regardless of PoFA.   Take the Consideration  period for example. This is a minimum of 5 minutes to allow motorists to find a parking space, read the T&Cs giving them enough time to leave the car park without having to pay if they decide not stay. Simple. Well it would be simple if it were any other company than BPA [or IPC who have now fallen into line with BPA's "reasoning"].  You see if you decide to stay then despite the fact that during the Consideration period when you still weren't classed as parking , once you accept the terms [with all the underhand little tricks designed to trip you up] that five minutes is now included in your parking time. [No not the parking period because the poor dears who ANPR cameras are apparently unable to work out what the exact parking period is since their ever so infallible cameras [yeah right] are incapable of tracking cars once they are in a car park]. After 12 years they still haven't worked out a way of doing it. Some of them fudge and the majority [with a wink fro their ATA [Accredited Trade Association though it should be Discredited Trade Association] just ignore the parking period all together. This is what BPA claim is the Consideration period Entrance grace period: This is for when motorists enter a car park, read the signs and/or attempt to make payment then leave. In these instances, motorists must be offered a reasonable amount of time before an operator takes enforcement action, but we do not define this time, due to the variance in size and layout of car parks. An entrance grace period for a small, permit-only car park could be below 5 minutes, whereas for a large multi-story this could be 15. But  heaven forbid that anyone should leave 6 or 7 minutes after entering  their member's car parks. . They are dutybound to receive a PCN. This is regardless of how busy the car park would be [Christmas eve for example ] .Our minimum is their maximum. Moving on to Grace periods. Again BPA gobble degook. Exit grace period: This must be a minimum of 10 minutes and this is when a motorist intends to stay – for example, if you paid for an hour but spent a total of 1 hour 10 minutes on-site, you will not receive a PCN. It is important to note that the grace period is not a free period of parking however and should not be advertised as such. If that ten minutes in not free parking what is it. their members all think they can send out PCNs for anything after 1 minute after the exact time never mind ten minutes. Our snotty letters have stood the test of time. Do not try to reinvent the wheel -especially with DCBL . They don't even know what a non compliant PCN is for goodness sake! You already know more about PoFA then they do. However if you include that they will find a way to disabuse the Judge of your logic and the law. So don't give them the chance.  I am sure you have the Parking Prankster going on about the rogues misusing the rules on planning permission by lying and stating that they had "retrospective permission". There is no such thing in English law yet Judges were swallowing it until one Judge pulled up Parking Eye about one of their Witness Statements alluding to "rp" by claiming it was "tantamount to perjury".  It wasn't tantamount,it was plain and simple perjury. Parking Prankster: The great private car park planning approval scam PARKING-PRANKSTER.BLOGSPOT.COM Guest blog from shuteyepark, from the Consumer Action group forums In December 2013 my daughter received a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) fro... Hope it wasn't too long winded Nicky Boy.🙂
  • 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

Nationwide taking court action


1littleduck
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4555 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.... an update on this case..

The nationwide seem to have changed their solicitors and I have received the following.. any advise would be welcome.

http://i534.photobucket.com/albums/ee344/gangsta_caz/Shed.jpg

http://i534.photobucket.com/albums/ee344/gangsta_caz/Shed1.jpg

http://i534.photobucket.com/albums/ee344/gangsta_caz/Shed2.jpg

http://i534.photobucket.com/albums/ee344/gangsta_caz/Shed3.jpg

http://i534.photobucket.com/albums/ee344/gangsta_caz/shed4.jpg

I have posted up the envelope because it does not make any relevance to the contents being from a solicitors and could easily have been binned as junk mail.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 137
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Eversheds are not a nice firm of solicitors. Be careful dealing with them.

 

Nationwide cannot apply to extend the stay because there isn't one. The claim has been struck out, and I'd suggest you write to the court, cc'ing eversheds to that effect.

 

Eversheds can apply for the claim to be reinstated, or they can just start again. They are however the type of firm who will ignore the law, and things like facts and the truth and file misleading documents in the hope that the court will not notice.

 

One thing I have not understood from all this, and I've read it with interest, is why you do not think the amount claimed is due? If the matter gets to a hearing you might have to explain.

Link to post
Share on other sites

further it is not true that the test cases seek to resolve whether an agreement is enforceable if the prescribed terms are not in the signature document

 

the absence of the prescribed terms within the signature document is set in law and it is not within the authority of the courts to change the law in this respect.

 

If your nationwide agreement is like mine there is no argument that the prescribed terms are anywhere within the signature document let alone whether they are on the front page or the reverse

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

hello all

 

lets all have a fab 2010 and keep positive as always informative info posted on this thread that i can again learn from:-)

 

thanks to all laters angel x

Im happy to help with support and my own thoughts, but if I offer any thoughts to your problems please take it as from my life experience only and not of any legal standing. Always take further advice from the legal experts in your final action.:)

 

my new motto is,,,",Taking back control of your life and home - such peace is priceless"

 

This is all due to truecall device , have a serious peek at this you will be thankful like I am x laters angel :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

to save re reading the post - what stage are you at

 

what you don't want to do is nothing- if the court has indeed struck this claim out you should have had an official notification from the court

 

you need to clarify this again with the court and demand written confirmation from them if you have not had it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wholeheartedly agree, you must do something to move this forward, at least contact the court to find out the status of the claim, and get back to us, so we can advise on further action

Please note i have no legal training any advice i give comes from my own experience and from what i have learned on this site

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Hi all...

Nationwide are at it again.

They have sent me a letter stating they are taking me to court again.

I have moved address so this has been forwared to me.

Should I just start the whole process again?

Should I give them my new address?

Link to post
Share on other sites

A slightly tricky one for you. If you do nothing then Nationwide will eventually enter judgement in default and presumably the occupier of your previous address will be able to tell the bailiff where you have gone! It is also quite easy to find your new address from credit reference agencies etc.

 

My immediate reaction is that you need to address this as and when, and indeed if the county court claim arrives. It is quite possible that they will just start the whole thing all over again in which case you could just ask the court to apply it's previous decision re disclosure etc. Currently I presume you just have a letter threatening action?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Paul,

Thanks for the reply.

I have just e-mailed them with a hard copy due to be posted tonight.

I have sent them another 'failed to respond' letter and have inserted the dates back to 28th September 2008. I have informed them that they only sent a copy of a application form which is not a legal document therefor the origional fee I paid.. £1.00 still stands until my request is satisfied.

I think they have found out that I have moved, and are just chanceing that the letter would not reach me, therefore a judgement would be granted to them. but I have had my post re-directed. The new owners of the house do not know where I live.

I never heard from sheds again and I guess, if they want to start it over again, then unless the law has changed, I'll use all the previous letters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...