Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
  • 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

Experian - Even More Personal Info To Be Added To Your Credit File!


Pathway
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5618 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

Even more of your personal data to be added to your credit file info!

 

Experian will advise the balance each month on your credit card/store card

 

and

 

the amount you repay each month

 

and

 

the number and total value of cash advances you take on your cards

 

Where is all this personal data info going to end!!??

 

What privacy are we entitled to?

 

Does this breach our human rights?

 

All food for thought!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It will all stop when the financial system goes even more t*ts up than what it already has. :rolleyes:

We will get to a situation were every person in this country has a bad credit file/rating & no-one will get approved for anything anymore.

The government will have to bail the public out eventually the way things are going :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder we did not agree to this when we made our agreements what would happen if someone challenged them.

 

dpick

 

Apparenty a written agreemant is not needed, a reply to me asking a simaler question from one of the CRA,s

 

I note the contents of your e-mail and I would like to explain how we obtain the information we hold about people and how it is then passed onto other lenders.

 

When an individual signs a financial agreement (usually under the terms of the Consumer Credit Act), one of the terms and conditions of that agreement is that the company concerned reserve the right to pass details of the account to a credit reference agency. By signing that agreement, you are agreeing to those terms and conditions. Therefore, for us to hold financial information about you, you will have signed a contract consenting to that company passing information onto ourselves.

Please note, that if a company cannot provide you with any actual evidence of your initial consent, this does not necessarily mean that they have to remove the data from your credit report.

 

For example, if a company can demonstrate that an account was being paid on time for a number of months/years prior to falling into arrears, this is often seen as evidence that the individual concerned must have consented to the terms and conditions of the contract.

 

Furthermore, a company will only open an account if the applicant agrees to their terms and conditions so, unless the account was opened fraudulently, the account holder must have agreed to the standard terms and conditions for that type of account.

 

Therefore, as long as the company terms and conditions specify that they reserve the right to pass account information to a credit reference agency, a period of meeting contractual obligations, or simply opening the account, will often be deemed as evidence of consent to those terms and conditions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For example, if a company can demonstrate that an account was being paid on time for a number of months/years prior to falling into arrears, this is often seen as evidence that the individual concerned must have consented to the terms and conditions of the contract.

 

So in their eyes even a void contract isn't void?.....I think they ought to brush up on the law!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The way i read it it has nothing to do with any contract, just implied right given by a set of terms and conditions anywhere in a companys web site or documentation at the time you first ordered something.

 

You argue there where no such terms, the company says there where, and can no doubt find a piece of paper to back them up, but that does not prove you have even seen them, let alone agreed to them, but as absolute proof is not needed in civil matters, just the ballence of probebilaty it is down to a judge to decide which is most probeble so i have been told.

 

Its a joke, any company can claim you agreed and thats enough, no proof needed

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but don't the terms & conditions form the basis of the contract?

 

If for whatever reason the contract fails to be legally binding...surely so do the T&Cs as part of the whole?

 

Its a joke, any company can claim you agreed and thats enough, no proof needed

 

Following that logic, if I went into a shop and left without making a purchase, the owner could insist I bought something because I implied I was going to make a purchase by entering the shop in the first place.:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree its totaly mad, even if you did agree to generic terms on a web site for example, those generic terms cannot always include specific payment information and cannot form a binding contract that a breach, and therfore record of that breach can be justified on

 

 

The proof you made payments is not proof there was an agreemant to do so, nor more importantly what that agreemant was, without that agreemant how can you show someone has breached it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what the European Commisioner that governs human rights and the use of personal information would have to say. - under Human Rights ACt

 

hmmmmmmmm

 

That's one to follow up.

 

Perhaps Lord Mandy would know!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its already happening as the mobile phone industry are loosing 75% of their potential customers due to failing the credit rating. According to an Experian spokesperson "the first thing people cut back on are mobile phones..." in other words, they go for a Pay as you Go SIM card instead so we can't credit check them.

 

I wonder how long this will take to sink in, that people DONT cut back on phones but change their tarrifs instead!

 

Experian are really going to suffer now as people won't be applying for credit, they won't be doing as many credit checks so they have to 'invent' ways of selling existing data dressed up in new clothes.

 

Anyone ever heard of the story of the boy with his finger in the dyke? That describes them at the moment. I'm concocting an advert in their style

 

Why do you want a credit check?

 

1. Because I want all the DCAs to write to me

2. Because I know nothing should be going on my account but probably is

3. Because I'm stupid enough to want to take out a loan at the moment

 

I have a load more but some would get this forum into trouble if I posted them....

Link to post
Share on other sites

What has struck me as ironic is that much of the legislation that is designed to protect the 'citizen', actually emanates from Europe. I can only think that they have more experience of what can happen when 'The State' really does get out of hand.

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder how long it will be before we are all turned into credit criminals by this government? :eek:

Anyway..think about it, if you want anything in this country (house,car,money,new identity etc..) then its best to be criminalized by this government in whatever way you can ;)

Its the honest/law abiding people i feel sorry for :razz:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparenty a written agreemant is not needed, a reply to me asking a simaler question from one of the CRA,s

 

When an individual signs a financial agreement (usually under the terms of the Consumer Credit Act), one of the terms and conditions of that agreement is that the company concerned reserve the right to pass details of the account to a credit reference agency. By signing that agreement, you are agreeing to those terms and conditions. Therefore, for us to hold financial information about you, you will have signed a contract consenting to that company passing information onto ourselves.

 

That says that they can pass our details on to the CRAs but where does it say the CRA can then process the data?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...