Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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 4608 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

Like I said in an earlier post- PCAD has sowed the wind and now they will reap the tornado.

 

I understand that the courts do not encourage perjury.

 

Well Noomy the claimant will also have received along with the application copies of two letters originating from the Police legal services.

There's a line in the one letter which will make rather uncomfortable reading stating as it does that the bundle of evidence supplied to the police by the defendant is 'meritorious of further investigation'.:eek:

 

Obviously we could not comment on an ongoing criminal case if such existed but Fred has been assured that the police will wait until the civil case is concluded before starting any such investigation.

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

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Wow this is an incredible development. I understand a bit better now why you all seem so positive.

 

Just when you thought this case couldn't get any weirder.

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

*Repetition as we all know is one of the simplest forms of brainwashing and other mind control techniques.

 

Repetition as we all know is one of the simplest forms of brainwashing and other mind control techniques.

The REAL Axis of evil: Banks, Credit Card Companies & Credit Reference Agencies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said in an earlier post- PCAD has sowed the wind and now they will reap the tornado.

 

I understand that the courts do not encourage perjury.

 

Like I said in an earlier post- PCAD has sowed the wind and now they will reap the tornado.

 

I understand that the courts do not encourage perjury.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I mention how confident Fred must now feel to discover that the claimant has rested their case on something that does not exist?

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

Did I mention how confident Fred must now feel to discover that the claimant has rested their case on something that does not exist?

And lots of other things we've disproved too:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am speechless - Yet another example of astonishing behaviour.

 

I was just taking a quick look back to how this all began and remembered this from the previous hearing:

The judge spent some time trying to persuade Fred to drop his counterclaim

 

Egg - Face - Splat

 

Well done TLD / Patma et al.

 

Dad

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Dad but frankly most of the credit must go to PCAD and Lyons-Davidson who had to retire so much 'evidence' from their bundle that they were forced to bulk it out with all manner of documents and letters which for the most part were stamped as 'Irrelevant' but actually contained deep down the real truth behind the caution.

 

Without PCAD and Lyons-Davidson and the recent rather helpful assistance from their barrister we might never have been able to use the fact the caution does not exist in Freds defence and we musn't underestimate the part played by the late Universal Security (UK) ltd in providing Fred with much useful evidence either.

 

Is that a round of applause I'm hearing or just the sound of a bell tolling?

Edited by Toulose LeDebt
  • Haha 1

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

So, the judeg has stayed this for a further two months- could this be to allow the Police to do their investigation, I wonder?

 

 

No the stay is primarily because the Solicitor heading the Force Legal Dept. could not formally finalise confirmation of 'the caution not existing' at such short notice, and without consulting the Chief Constable. Unfortunately it reached him as an appeal against the caution and so certain formalities have to be met first. Had it just been a simple confirm or deny then as before when Lyons-Davidson contacted them lastyear it would have been a simple denial and game over next wednesday.

 

Basically we're waiting for a response from the Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall to rubber stamp it and until this actually happens the lawyer wont put his name against it and make it 'Official'.

 

Hopefully this process will not take too long as the letter to the Chief Constable was dictated in the presence of Fred last thursday.

 

 

Any investigation conducted by the police into behaviour of parties to the civil case will be implemented upon conclusion of the civil proceedings.

Edited by Toulose LeDebt

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

Two months is a long time. It would be prudent to consider what might or might not happen in that time. What do they say about a snake being most dangerous when cornered?

 

I suppose that if the confirmation arrives quickly, Fred could apply to have the stay lifted early?

 

H

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Two months is a long time. It would be prudent to consider what might or might not happen in that time. What do they say about a snake being most dangerous when cornered?

 

It certainly is a long time but in Freds favour is the fact that the stay was issued so late in proceedings that all documents for both hearings have already been filed at Court. It's all a bit too late in the day for the claimant to produce anything new or attempt to change anything and any such attempt will be contested in the same manner as the last which appears to have caused the claimant rather a large amount of angst resulting in a blubfest of staggering proportions.

 

We shall as always be monitoring closely, any monkey business will be spotted and dealt with. Remember it's not just our eyes watching the claimant now, it's the Judges, the Police, the SRA and Plymouth City Council amongst others8-)8-) They are under far more scrutiny right now than Fred ever was when they assigned a Private eye to him.

 

Oh and todays surprise was not the final card in the hand by any means. I understand they face one more quite large and rather ugly surprise when they enter Court and a veritable avalanche of smaller yet pertinent problems in addition to those they already are aware of.

 

We have kept a not inconsiderable amount of Freds powder dry for any hearing.;)

Edited by Toulose LeDebt
'F' in or that's 'for' not slang for a female PCAD employee.

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

I suppose that if the confirmation arrives quickly, Fred could apply to have the stay lifted early?

 

H

 

It is important when making 'Plymouth Crock Stew' that once all the ingredients are brought to the boil they are left to simmer and tenderise for a period of not less than two months.;)

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

Just wanted to say you are all amazing!!

 

I had a considerable amount of help from fellow Caggers a couple of years ago, and applaud all of you who have helped Patma and Fred get this far, and what soon can only be an utlimate victory!!!

 

Well done all of you!:D

den3371:p

Link to post
Share on other sites

congradulations look forward to november - stick it to them.

 

wish the guests would leave comments tho so we could get there thoughts, or do you think it would overload the swearfilter

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

I would love to be in the Lyon's Davidson office, or indeed in the office when Plymouth College of Art and Design has to tell the local authority legal department about this latest development.

 

I think I said right back at the beginning that the reason this was being persued was arrogance... they didnt think anyone would stand up to them.. how wrong they were.

 

Well done Fred, Pat, and especially TLD who I think is a shining example of what CAG is all about.

Edited by natalie
abbrevs

If you find my post helpful please click on the scales at the top. Thank you

FAQ SECTION HERE

 

Halifax Bank Claim filed and settled

Halifax Credit Card settled

Argos Store Card settled

 

CCA requests sent to

Halifax Credit Card

LLoyds TSB Credit Card

Capital One

Moorcroft (Argos)

NDR

18/06/09

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to be in the Ld office, or indeed in the office when PCAD has to tell the local authority legal department about this latest development.

 

Now the strange thing natalie is that PCAD appear not to have gone through the local authority legal dept as you might expect but have conducted these proceedings more as very much a one man crusade against Fred.

It must be slowly dawning on them that they've been set up by their insurers to make this claim, handed the insurers rather expensive solicitors to represent them then placed out into the line of fire whilst the co-claimant or should that be 'real' claimant retreats to a safe distance.

 

I don't think for one moment that the local authority legal advisers would have sanctioned these proceedings but they were until quite recently completely unaware of their existence. To say the Plymouth City Council members I've spoken too were shocked to learn what has happened is a crass understatement.

 

Whatever happens in Court or afterwards I can see a direct formal complaint being lodged at both the college and the City Council against the member of staff who has pursued this personal vendetta raising questions about his suitability to hold the position he currently holds when five days a week he is in the company of young and otherwise vulnerable people.

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

Well done Fred, Patma and TLD

 

Oh and the biggest round of applause to LD and PCAD who between them have made the biggest balls up I have ever had the pleasure of reading all these weeks :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4608 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...