Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks for posting the CPR contents. i do wish you hadn't blanked out the dates and times since at times they can be relevant . Can you please repost including times and dates. They say that they sent a copy of  the original  PCN that they sent to the Hirer  along with your hire agreement documents. Did you receive them and if so can you please upload the original PCN without erasing dates and times. If they did include  all the paperwork they said, then that PCN is pretty near compliant except for their error with the discount time. In the Act it isn't actually specified but to offer a discount for 14 days from the OFFENCE is a joke. the offence occurred probably a couple of months prior to you receiving your Notice to Hirer.  Also the words in parentheses n the Act have been missed off. Section 14 [5][c] (c)warn the hirer that if, after the period of 21 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to hirer is given, the amount of unpaid parking charges referred to in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(f) or 9(2)(f) (as the case may be) has not been paid in full, the creditor will (if any applicable requirements are met) have the right to recover from the hirer so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Though it states "if any applicable ...." as opposed to "if all applicable......" in Section 8 or 9. Maybe the Site could explain what the difference between the two terms mean if there is a difference. Also on your claim form they keeper referring to you as the driver or the keeper.  You are the Hirer and only the Hirer is responsible for the charge EVEN IF THEY WEREN'T THE DRIVER. So they cannot pursue the driver and nowhere in the Hirer section of the Act is the hirer ever named as the keeper so NPC are pursuing the wrong person.  
    • This is simply a scam site.  It's been shown to be a scam in the national press and on national TV. Please fill in the the forum sticky and upload the invoice you've received. In fact what you have is an invoice, not a fine, a private company doesn't have the power to issue fines.  
    • Moved to the Private Parking forum.
    • Good afternoon, I am writing because I am very frustrated. I received a parking fine from MET Parking Services Ltd , ( Southgate park Stansted CM24 1PY) . We stopped for a quick meal in Mcdonalds and were there fir around 30 mins. We always do this after flights and never received a parking fine before.  Reason: The vehicle left in Southgate car park without payment made for parking and the occupants southgate premises. they took some pictures of us leaving the car. i did not try and appeal it yet as I came across many forums that this is a scam and I should leave it. But I keep getting threatening letters.  Incident happened : 23/10/2023 I did contact Mcdonalds and they said this:  Joylyn (McDonald’s Customer Services) 5 Apr 2024, 12:05 BST Dear Laura, Thank you for contacting McDonald’s Customer Services. I’m sorry to hear that you have received a Parking Charge Notice following your visit to our Stansted restaurant.   We've introduced parking restrictions at some of our restaurants to make sure there are always parking spaces available for customers.   We appreciate that some visits such as birthday parties or large group visits might take longer and the parking restrictions aren't intended to stop this. If you think your stay will exceed the stated maximum parking time then please speak to a manager in advance.   Your number plate is scanned by our Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) system when you enter our car park, and then again when you leave. If you have overstayed the maximum time allowed, you will not be notified straight away- a Parking Charge Notice will be sent to you via the post.   If you feel that a Parking Charge Notice has been issued in error, please contact our approved contractors who issued the charge in order to appeal the charge. Unfortunately McDonald's are unable to revoke parking tickets- the outcome of the appeal is final and cannot be overturned by McDonald’s.   Many thanks for taking the time to contact McDonald’s Customer Services.   Can someone please help me out and suggest what I should do next?  Thank you 
  • 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

Locked in car park


Patma
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4606 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

Ok,

 

So I have been following this thread for a while and I think TLD and Patma have been doing some sterling work to get Fred through this stinking mess of ****(my asterisks as I couldn't print what I would call it!!)

 

What I want to ask is - I know there is now a date to be in court in November but I am confused - is Fred also in court tomorrow as originally planned?

 

Feebee_71

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I wonder what the "a couple of legal actions" that were underway in 2006 were.... And if any of them has been discussed further with the audit committee yet.

 

http://owl.pcad.ac.uk/files/documents/corporation/1h.%20%20Audit%20Committee%20Minutes/Audit%202006%20-%206%20December%20Final.pdf

That's very interesting AT. I'll do some more digging into that. Did you notice in that report it also says one insurance claim was incurred in that year. We know what that was;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok,

 

So I have been following this thread for a while and I think TLD and Patma have been doing some sterling work to get Fred through this stinking mess of ****(my asterisks as I couldn't print what I would call it!!)

 

What I want to ask is - I know there is now a date to be in court in November but I am confused - is Fred also in court tomorrow as originally planned?

 

Feebee_71

Thankyou Feebee,

The hearing due to take place tomorrow has been adjourned until 17th November, on the advice of Devon and Cornwall Police's Senior Legal Adviser, who is being very helpful.

The claimant's didn't like it at all but the judge gave them no choice.:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The hearing due to take place tomorrow has been adjourned until 17th November, on the advice of Devon and Cornwall Police's Senior Legal Adviser, who is being very helpful.

The claimant's didn't like it at all but the judge gave them no choice.:grin:

 

What they probably like even less is the fact that the Police now seem to have sided with Fred.

 

Game Over me thinks....

Link to post
Share on other sites

dont let the barrier hit them on the way out....

Please note:

 

  • I am employed in the IT sector of a high street retail chain but am not posting in any official capacity,so therefore any comments,suggestions or opinions are expressly personal ones and should not be viewed as an endorsement or with agreement of any company.
  • i am not legal trained in any form.
  • I have many experiences in life and do often use these in my posts

if ive been helpful kick my scales, if ive been unhelpful kick the scales of the person more helpful :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Patma,

 

I was trying to get my head around all the information which has been added to this site in the last couple of weeks - while I was away on holiday - and didn't want to have to go back over everything to work out where things were.

 

Now I am going to have to wait until I am back from my holiday in November to find out what happens as I go off to the Canary Islands on the 16th November!!

 

Feebee_71

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what the "a couple of legal actions" that were underway in 2006 were.... And if any of them has been discussed further with the audit committee yet.

 

http://owl.pcad.ac.uk/files/documents/corporation/1h.%20%20Audit%20Committee%20Minutes/Audit%202006%20-%206%20December%20Final.pdf

 

 

I think that two students were injured on the campus and made personal injury claims against the college in the previous year. When you look at the recent photos we took and see the ramshackle manner in which the paths, roadways car parks and barriers are maintained at that college it's probably not surprising but we don't actually have any details of either of these two personal injury claims other than that both were being defended by-------->------->-----> The college and their insurers!!:eek::eek:

You have the right to food money.

If you don't mind a little investigation, humiliation, and if you cross your fingers rehabilitation..............

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Just to reassure everyone that we haven't disappeared down a black hole, just waiting for news at the moment and having a few days catching up with life.

I sent Plymouth College of Art's Finance Director(George Dexter) :D a FOI request on 24th August, which he carefully ignored till I cc'd a reminder a week later to the person with overall responsibility for FOI and then I got a terse acknowledgment from Mr Dexter informing me he had instructed a colleague to deal with it.

I'd asked for Plymouth College of Art's Procurement and Disposals Policy, so it will be interesting to see what the document reveals and how their "official "policy tallies with what happened with the barrier.

FOI's have already produced some very valuable information that have shown up some rather big porkies :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes its another bullet in Freds armoury ;)

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand another FOI request has also been made of the college. This one is concerned primarily with establishing the Data Protection policies with respect to the CCTV recording, and the audit policy to be followed when a potentially criminal incident is captured on CCTV and any captured images are to be used for evidential purposes. The applicant has also I believe requested confirmation that the entire VHS tape from which PCAD took the 5 minutes when Fred was at the barrier has been securely stored in its original format with a view to forcing the college to release the footage which shows the penultimate and any other preceeding students/lecturers exiting the car park that day. Imagine the problems it might cause Plymouth College of Art if the person before Fred also had to lift up the broken barrier manually?

 

Being a FOI request concerning data protection and related issues the request also extends to the 'Data Retention Policy' of Plymouth College of Art. I personally struggle to believe that it is standard procedure for all records of an item which costs the college several thousands of pounds might be destroyed after three years, especially when such an item is subject to litigation and legal contest. I expect to learn that the data retention policy at Plymouth College of Art is actually far greater than three years, this was certainly the case for student records which implies to me at least that either this information is being witheld unlawfully or it has been destroyed deliberately and just as unlawfully.

 

This request is not being dealt with by George and the person making the request did have the common courtesy to serve notice upon the college that there might be some 'conflict of interest'. ;) I do hope that a certain department at Plymouth College of Art has not been trying to keep this matter some kind of sordid little secret and apologise on behalf of the person making the request if they have let the cat out the bag.

 

Our sources intimate that Lyons Davidson might be desperately racking up rather a large amount in further costs for Plymouth College of Art attempting to convince Devon and Cornwall Constabulary that they 'might have got it wrong'.:eek: Since Lyons Davidson spent almost the entirety of 2008 in dialogue with the police before finally being told point blank that no record of a caution exists we can only anticipate one outcome but since it was Lyons Davidson who appeared to invent the caution in the first instance on 5th September 2006 you can't blame them for trying to save their own skin in a matter which is likely to blow up spectacularly for them in any hearing.:D:D

 

Apart from that alls well and I'm filling the hours on a particularly taxing problem for another Cagger. TLD

You have the right to food money.

If you don't mind a little investigation, humiliation, and if you cross your fingers rehabilitation..............

Link to post
Share on other sites

now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of the party

the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog

swimming in the oggin the mermaid is for snogging/

 

I don't seem to be having a problem

 

Your keyboard is on strike for more pay.

 

And welcome back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it is Davenport-Lyons, as seen on Watchdog, who specialise in the copyright issues, and they have, as far as I know, no connection whatsoever to Lyons-Davidson, who represent Plymouth College of Art, or maybe Royal Sun Alliance, I have kind of lost the plot here. :razz:

 

Anyway, just to clarify that as far as we know, there are no connection between Davenport-Lyons and Lyons-Davidson. Incidentally, my home town is Lyon(s) in France, and there are no connections there either. :-D

 

Ive been watching this thread for ages now.. I logged on to see how it all went at the begining of sept, and Im gutted that its been put off for a couple of months.

 

but love the fact that its all going to be over very soon... Patma, TLD et all great job, and fantastic reading....

 

Lynne

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Patma

 

it hasnt been an anti climax, its been compulsive reading as far as Im concerned. I still cant believe that they are still going through with this.. I suppose its past the point of no return... but still, its all the stress and the work you, fred, TLD and everyone esle have put in. I still cant believe everything Ive read.. .mind you the best bit in my mind was watching the cctv footage... that was just classic... and I had to re-read loads of posts yesterday because I thought hang on Ive missed something...

 

I still cant believe that Fred wasnt cautioned...

 

Keep going, I just looking forward to you winning this now.

 

lynne

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well with all the info being passed to and fro DL must now that either Plymouth College has lied to them or they are willfully going along with a flawed case, either way they are in for a hammering themselves as I cannot see how they would have a defence themselves for the SRA.

 

If they had any sense once they 'realised' not all was as it seems they would have pulled the plug on PCAD, these pages will show at a future date that they were not unaware!!!!

 

Yorky

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep going, I just looking forward to you winning this now.

Thank bs0lth, we're determined to do just that :D

 

Well with all the info being passed to and fro DL must now that either Plymouth College has lied to them or they are willfully going along with a flawed case, either way they are in for a hammering themselves as I cannot see how they would have a defence themselves for the SRA.

I agree, Yorky, however we have to remember that solicitors do rather stick together and watch one another's backs. We'll soon see how this goes hopefully though. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4606 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...