Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I left Dubai 8 years ago and intended to return. However a job prospect fell through. I’d been there for 15 years. Anyway I decided to pay my credit card and the bank had frozen my account. There is no means to pay the CC so completely unable to pay when I wanted to other than the bank advising me to ask a friend in the UAE to pay it on my behalf!  fast forward bank informs there is a police case against me for non payment. Years later IDR chased me and after months/ years they stopped. Now Judge & Priestley are trying their luck. Now I have received an email in English and Arabic from JP saying the bank has authorised them to collect debts. Is this the same as IDR although I didn’t receive anything like this from them. Just says they are authorised?
    • The neighbour's house is built right on the boundary so the side of their house is effectively the 'wall' in our garden separating the two properties. It's a three storey house and so the mortar poses a potential danger to us. Because of the danger, we have put up an interior fence in our garden to ensure we don't risk mortar dropping on us. That reduces the garden by 25% which is not only an inconvenience, but it's the part of the garden where we had lined up contractors to install a patio and gazebo which we will use for our wedding reception in less than 2 months. We have spoken to the neighbour's caretaker who is on the case, has spoken with a roofer and possibly a scaffolding company, but there are several issues. They don't seem to understand the urgency. As long as there is a risk of falling mortar, we can't carry out any work in the garden, and unless they hurry up, we're looking at cancelling our wedding as it's not viable to book a venue because we can't use our own garden! Also, they want to put the scaffolding up in our garden which would be ok with us if it was a matter of a few days and they hurried up, but there is a tree (most likely protected by the conservation area), so most likely they can only reach part of the roof with the scaffolding if they put it up in our garden. We suggested a roofer with a cherry picker but they seem to want to use a company they've used before. Any and all comments, suggestions, advice is more than welcome.  PS. does it make any difference that the neighbour is a business (ltd) and not a private dwelling?
    • No apology needed, thank you for what you do I am glad to hear they paid. well done on getting back what is yours
    • Apologies all for the late reply and info, i have been away with the Army. They have paid I accepted the offer on the 5th of May, and they paid on the 17th of May.
  • 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

Locked in car park


Patma
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4644 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

Not sure if has been asked before but following the supposed 'damage' to the barrier did the operator have an INDEPENDANT engineer provide a report?

 

In addition I find it strange (I am an engineer myself but not on car park barriers but have dealt with level xing barriers), that lifting the barrier would cause so much damage. From the systems I have dealt with I would expect that something such as a locking pin to fail which may render the barrier inoperative but stops major damage to the machinery - prehaps the barrier expert could confirm? If this is the case then replacing the pin (or whatever they use), should be a relatively simple matter.

 

Just my 2p worth!

 

Yorky.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi again Patma,

 

You said your friend had taken pics of the barrier, does it show the machine manafacturer on them? If not is the barrier still there and he can check?

 

I had a flash of inspiration last night and I did a bit of 'googling' on barriers and there are loads out there (brand new ones for £1k!!!), and alot have manuals you can download with them so your friend may be able to find out how they work.

 

Failing the google search he could always call the manafacturer direct and ask them how they operate (pretend to be a prospective customer, etc). Ask specifically about what happens if it is forced as he wants to put it somewhere this could be a problem.

 

It sounding to me like this unit could have been life expired and they are after a new machine.

 

In addition, how does a quote of £1274+VAT from the company become £2952+VAT from the solicitors for exectly the same service? Keep as evidence as they appear to be artificially inflating prices.

 

Yorky.

Edited by Yorky2008
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Patma,

 

Unfortunately cant see any details of barrier machine, did you take any close up pics?

 

One thing is for sure though, they have not repaired the barrier - they have replaced it! That is betterment and will explain the huge bill you have been sent.

 

Yorky.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
The ones I've inspected are compressed woodchip (MDF) dipped in uPVC with reflective decals. Plasic barriers 'bend' and are relatively useless.

 

To be honest this is what you want, in fact the preferable result is they physically snap off. This is how LX barries are designed & manafactured that I mentioned earlier, the reason being that it someone does drive into them by accident or wilfully you do not want them so strong that they wreck everything with nothing salvagable - also there is the safety consideration such as decapitation or in the case of LX barriers, retaining the car the wrong side of a barrier should someone have jumped the lights which would result in a collision with a train.

 

Yorky.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

From an engineers point of view, I would ask for...

 

- Machine make and model

- Diagram of machine

- Manafacturers maintencence schedule

- Owners maintenance log (v important, it may show it was already knackered or inadequately or completely unmaintained!)

- Safety features of sytem installed

- Failure modes (i.e. what it does in particular degraded modes such as barrier lift failure)

- Anti vandal measures.

 

Yorky

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Patma,

 

Right finally got chance to view the video you emailed me, my initials thoughts, obviously based purely on visual evidence from the footage.

 

1) The barrier is out of the cradle - as noted aleady

 

2) The barrier can be seen moving/swinging in the wind, this in itself would put stress on the barrier mechanism - especially if is as fragile as they claim!

 

3) The barrier is obviouslt not been maintained properly if it is missing the cradle on descent.

 

4) The angle of the rop appears almost consistent with that that Fred lifts it, suggests to me that more than likely a lot of play in already worn gear linkage system! Def put thispoint across again for the maintenace records!

 

5) Fred does not appear to force the barrier, a fact supported by the fact it appears he casually lifts it with one hand. If he was forcing it I would have expected to see him struggling and with two hands.

 

6) Unfortunately dont see footage of barrier dropping down again, do you have this? If so does the barrier go back into cradle or back to drooping position?

 

My initial 2p

 

Yorky

Link to post
Share on other sites

Patma,

 

If PCAD is subject to answering an FOI request then I would ask the following in addion to that already susggested about model, make, date of installation, mtce regime, etc

 

1) what exactly was the damage to the barrier (find out if it did all need replacing!).

 

2) how many times and for what reasons has the maintainer has been called out in the previous 24mths to fixed faults with the barriers, their nature and fault correction required.

 

Yorky.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This might explain why the damage has been described as 'to the motor and gear linkage', and also as 'to the mechanism' and also as 'damage to the motor casing' by various parties.

 

Interesting, just picked up this snippet. The motor casing is usually internal to the barrier housing - are they also therefore stating that Fred opened the housing and purposefully damaged the motor casing? Also these things are usally pretty solidly built so to damage one of those would take some force!!!

 

Yorky.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What they are saying is that by rotating the motor armature (rotor in the picture) the casing was subjected to enough force to break.

 

TLD, thats just it - the rotor is NOT connected to the casing by any means - if it was it would never rotate within its stator, it would be fixed solid.

 

I 'suspect' that any damage to the casing has probably been caused during maintanence trying to fix things with 'a bigger hammer' !

 

I think they have copletely shot themselves in the foot, principally by showing a lack of knowledge of their own equipment and consequently what they can accuse Fred of!

 

Yorky.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonCris viewpost.gif

Did the Mods take a screen shot of Bryans Anglo Saxon choice of words:shock: -----for production at his trial:p

 

there might be a copy in your email inbox, just found mine timed 19:19

 

Maybe you can trace his IP address to prove it was him - I hear there is a company called ACS:Law that can do this for you :)

 

Yorky.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yorky and TLD, this technical stuff about the barrier is really excellent I think. Thanks for getting your heads together and pinpointing the issues.

It goes over my head a bit, well more than a bit, I'm afraid, but I think I understand it now:confused::-)

 

No problem Patma, will keep checking back and adding if I think it will assist, although the legal side goes way over my head but sounds like TLD has that well in hand.

 

Yorky.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
I guess the urgency with which such replacements are conducted appears to differ according to who can be perceived to be footing the bill.

 

Could it be that the college is hoping to bring all the barries upto tiptop condition on the back of their winnings?

 

No 9 It says the incident occurred in the insured's premises during work....I presume that means working hours? However they keep trying to claim that classes finish earlier than they do. Don't know if there's anything here, but why do the insurers need to say it happened during work? Not sure about this.

 

I would hazard a guess, but could it be possible that insurance cover for outside normal office hours would be more expensive and therefore may not have been taken up, just a bog standrad 9-5 arrangement?

 

Yorky

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mabe this is the case but as this is a high profile case now and its costing them a small fortune in submission fees you would think that they would spend 5 minutes making sure that all their facts are correct before it goes before a Judge who wont be as forgiving - especially after the grief they have given Fred!!!

 

Yorky

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently the super duper £3500 top of the range RIB barrier which the college installed is now so poorly maintained and broken that it has no arm so I guess anyone could park their car in there nowadays......:rolleyes:

 

All ammunition for Fred! It obvious that either the estate manager is either not doing his job or PCAD is not interested in spending the required dosh to keep the thing maintained - either way its not good for PCAD.

 

Might be worth putting this info into the bundle to show PCAD attitude to maintaining is assets!

 

Yorky.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Some good news since I last checked this thread yesterday! They probably didnt expect this level of resistance to their claim so are panickingn ow and pulling out every trick in the book - including hiring of PIs!

 

You have got them on the run Patma, they didnt expect you to stand up against the big boys, but then the saying goes....How do you eat an elephant...one slice at a time... :) And you have certainly carved a few slices off PCAD!

 

Yorky.

 

P.S. cant stand cricket so the Yorkshire branch can stay open 24/7...except when SBK on :o)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It must be slowly dawning on them that they've been set up by their insurers to make this claim,

 

Interesting, and there was me thinking it was all PCADs doing to try and earn a few quid out of Fred. Why would their insurers want to encourage such a high risk gamble and then carry on even though the game is up??? Seems like someone doesnt know what they doing ....

 

Yorky.

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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4644 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...