Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • @Man in the middle I've been searching the forum and you seem very knowledgeable. Would you mind giving a look at my query please? Thanks in advance!!
    • Thanks for this! I'm still not clear if I'm facing more than 6 points on my license though. Can you explain any further please? When I accept the 2nd speeding ticket, will they just charge me £100 and 3 points, or will they be more severe concenquences since that offense took place the following day of the 1st offense? Similarly, when I accept the 3rd offense, will they look at my record or just charge me with the £100 fine and 3 points?
    • Yes of course. That's why it says cc:: BIg Motoring World at the bottom. Don't imagine that this solves the issue. It doesn't. He not have to force the finance company and big motoring world to accept the rejection to give your money back. I suggest that you get the letter off tomorrow. And let us know what you hear but on Friday you should then send a threat to the finance company.   Have a look what I have said here about your options and read the whole thread as well.  
    • Been perusing the actual figures on the polls above wondering where the '16% claimed for deform comes from? I understand that there are 'weighted' end results based on secret calculations ...   Probably going to repeat this later, but remember that the ukip/brexit/reform/deform party has ALWAYS had poll speculation FAR better than their actual  performance at elections - by large margins. SO: The labor and Tory votes come largely from simply the people who say they will vote for them - sorted Lab 43% Tory 20%, with maybe another small 1-2% coming from the weightings of the 'not sures' Greens largely get what is declared from 'other' , although with another declared green bit from the 'pressed' question   So as the share of the voting displayed in 'other' granted to reform/deform is around 11%, where does the '16% too often being reported come from? Seems that reform has been granted as beneficiary of effectively ALL the don't knows and wont says, who when pressed didn't actually declare for someone else ... effectively adding 40%+ to their reported polling % - rather strange given their consistent under-performance compared to polling - or perhaps that is the cause of the higher rating eh?   Now I admit the possibility (probability?) of wingers being ashamed of declaring their support for the yuckey lemon end of the spectrum ... but surely  that should affect the 'Torys as well? Maybe the statisticians have simply weighted in that deform wingers are simply more likely to lie?   But - without 'weightings' and assumptions that faragits will get everything that isnt declared as a definite and unequivocal 'not that Piers Morgan' - reform is on around 11% it seems.   Add to that the history of polling a lot less than the hype - and the simple fact that faragit wingers seem to be spread across the country (presumably skulking in their moms spare room despite being 45+) and greens and lib dems seem to be community minded - I think two seats will be an epic result for farage. Hardly the opposition - far more raving wingnut party.   and importantly - Has farage got a home in clacton yet?
    • "as I have no tools available to merge documents, unless you can suggest any free ones that will perform offline merges without watermarking" (which you don't) ... but ok please upload the documents and we'll go from there
  • 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

WJ Parking Fines


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5587 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

Hey guys, this is my first post and just want to be sure I'm doing the right thing here. I've read through the advice and think I'm ok but some personal reassurance would be great.

 

I recently rejoined a chess club where I used to play several years ago.

 

Back then I always parked in an empty business park down the road from the club for 3 years without problems.

 

In September though when I parked there as usual I came back and discovered I had a £100 fine reducable to £70 on behalf of WJ Parking for parking without a permit. I hadn't seen the signs or even considered looking to be honest as its where I always parked.

 

After speaking with the guys in the chess club they advised me to park in the public library carpark round the back in future.

 

So the following week I parked there, again an almost empty carpark.

 

However when I returned I had got another ticket and £100 from WJ Parking as I had parked in the wrong bay. It seems only 5 of the spaces were for the library and the rest, (around 30) were private permit holders only and completely empty of cars.

 

So in 7 days I had two £100 fines. After coming on here I was pursuaded that they had no legal powers to enforce and decided to fight them, well actually ignore them.

 

£100 is just ridiculous for parking at night in an empty carpark for a couple hours so I'm not going to pay them without a fight, that's for sure.

 

Yesterday I got my first letter from them demanding payment. I just want to know if I should respond to this letter or ignore it completely?

 

Also what would my defense be if this came to court? Do I just do nothing and let them send out letters or should I reply with one of the templates already?

 

Thanks in advance for your help guys, hope you are all having a very merry Christmas! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Merry Christmas. Just Ignore them do not answer anything. Don't send any letters or call. Just wait it out. I am following that advice now. Lots of good advice on this site. Do not give them any info, and don't say too much about your location on here either, ps welcome to the site..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok thanks guys, will they eventually go away then?

 

If they were taken me to court what would happen then? Would I get a warning and time to react or would I just get a summons?

Link to post
Share on other sites

what phantom says is correct bin the tickets and ignore any threatening letters.

Dont bin them, put them in a drawer and if by some miracle they launch proceedings (99.999999999999999% sure they wont) then you can post back for a cast iron case against these idiots.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they wont take you to court as they have no case

 

They are relying on contract law which says that you agree that by parking in their place that you will pay any fees incurred.

 

1 you didnt see any signs so there can be no contract.

2 they cannot prove who the driver was (it has to be the driver as the RK can be entered into a contract by anyone other then themselves

3 Even if they prove you saw the sign and that you were the driver they would still fall foul of the RUCCT as an unfair term.

 

They will not take you to court.

 

However do not bait them by parking there repeatedly

Link to post
Share on other sites

they wont take you to court as they have no case

 

They are relying on contract law which says that you agree that by parking in their place that you will pay any fees incurred.

 

1 you didnt see any signs so there can be no contract.

2 they cannot prove who the driver was (it has to be the driver as the RK can be entered into a contract by anyone other then themselves

3 Even if they prove you saw the sign and that you were the driver they would still fall foul of the RUCCT as an unfair term.

 

They will not take you to court.

 

However do not bait them by parking there repeatedly

BTW . Happy xmas everyone !!icon10.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi guys, I got a second letter today this time from CCS Collect.

 

It says the following;

 

TAKE NOTICE if settlement of above sum is not received in this office by 12 NOON on Tue 13th Jan 2009, we are authorised to prepare legal documents for the issue of County Court proceedings against you. We have no doubt that legal fees, costs and interest will be added to the debt increasing substantionally the amount you must pay.

 

ONLY payment in full will dissuade our clients from taking further action.

 

 

 

So do I just continue to ignore them completely? Are they just bluffing?

 

Out of interests if they ever contacted me by phone and I just told them to go **** themselves would that jeopordise my case? Their threatening letters really **** me off to be honest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are bluffing

 

firstly on a small claim the only costs that can be added are the issuing costs - so them saying that legal fees will be added is pure bs (interest may be charged at 8%.

 

Secondly they would have to prove that

1 you were the one who parked there (not just someone else in your car)

2 that you saw the signs and therefore entered into the contract.

 

Thirdly they would have the RUTCC to contend with.

 

They know that if they take this to court they will lose so file it and forget it.

 

Always be polite when speaking to people on the telephone, however be firm -- refuse to discuss the matter and ask them to put any communication in writing. Advise them that you are recording the conversation (even if you are not) and that the recordings may be used as evidence in any complaints or procedings that you may decide to embark upon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

haha that is indeed comforting, I see you also got the exact same letter from CCS as me with warning about cash being delivered before high noon like they are some band of cowboys holding me to ransom.

 

Did you just ignore every single letter and not make contact with them once?

Link to post
Share on other sites

TAKE NOTICE if settlement of above sum is not received in this office by 12 NOON on Tue 13th Jan 2009, we are authorised to prepare legal documents for the issue of County Court proceedings against you.

 

Well that's a lie for a start. WJ can only commence legal proceeding, not the debt collectors. And why would they even bother with debt collectors in the first place if they were going to take it to court?

 

Of course, the literal way of reading it is that they will 'prepare legal documents'. Quite what that actually means is anyone's guess, since it's nothing to do with CSS.

 

'Legal documents' means absolutely nothing either! Hilarious.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that's a lie for a start. WJ can only commence legal proceeding, not the debt collectors. And why would they even bother with debt collectors in the first place if they were going to take it to court?

 

Of course, the literal way of reading it is that they will 'prepare legal documents'. Quite what that actually means is anyone's guess, since it's nothing to do with CSS.

 

'Legal documents' means absolutely nothing either! Hilarious.

 

 

However, for anyone who found themselves really annoyed by these letters, that letter almost certainly falls fould of the Fraud Act 2006. It's clearly intended to convince you to pay up (thereby causeing you "loss") and S2 of the Act says this:

 

Fraud by false representation

 

(1) A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and

(b) intends, by making the representation—

(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

 

 

(2) A representation is false if—

(a) it is untrue or misleading, and

(b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.

 

 

(3) “Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of—

(a) the person making the representation, or

(b) any other person.

(4) A representation may be express or implied.

 

 

(5) For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).

Now, if they were to say outright that they could take you to court - or even issue a summons against you, considering you're only confirmed as the keeper - that would be a clear case of misrepresentation.

 

 

They get round this by not actually saying that, but I'd suggest it's clearly what they're implying in that letter. And that's still an offence. Would be an interesting one to see them in court over. If they were found guilty it would really screw their game cos all they could effectively do from then on would be to send letters saying "Please pay us if it's not too much trouble for you" :D

 

 

 

Unfortunately, that would mean convincing the CPS to prosecute as it's a criminal matter. Nothing to stop a complaint being registered with the police though... maybe if enough people made complaints about the same company.....

:!:Nothing I post should be taken as legal advice. It is offered as an opinion only.:!:

 

This warning is in my signature because I'm not organised enough to remember to type

it in every post.

 

And you're considering trusting me????:eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Now, if they were to say outright that they could take you to court - or even issue a summons against you, considering you're only confirmed as the keeper - that would be a clear case of misrepresentation.

 

 

 

Well G4 are coming close to this, as seen on one of the documents they sent me.

 

As the registered keeper/owner/hirer/driver of the vehicle at the time of the above contravention you are responsible for the payment of the Parking Charge Notice

 

 

1346798qwe.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

Clearly Fraud by false representation ??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it is. And you're free to make a complaint.

 

I suspect, though, that to get any action taken against them it would need a concerted camapign of complaints - preferably targetted at the same company to "help" the CPS decide to act. It's almost tempting to go out trying to pick up tickets deliberately :p

:!:Nothing I post should be taken as legal advice. It is offered as an opinion only.:!:

 

This warning is in my signature because I'm not organised enough to remember to type

it in every post.

 

And you're considering trusting me????:eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

"As the registered keeper/owner/hirer/driver of the vehicle" this wording is used by a LOT of PPCs. If it was me I would send it back to them telling them they have not chosen which of those different entities they are basing their claim on. To make the alleged responsibility claim they have to choose the driver of course - and they don't know who that is. If they choose RK they are stuffed. Contacting them would only be done to allow them to bury themselves deeper into trouble and I would pick the PPC carefully based on circumstances, signs and the extent of unlawfulness of their paperwork. WJ would seem to fit the bill. For the average victim I would recommend ignoring the PPC and using stamps to send complaints. Don't contact a PPC unless you know what you are doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you receive a parking notice from WJ parking Ltd then the issuing officer has committed a criminal offence.

 

A search at companies house reveals WJ parking Ltd" is in receivership.

 

Companies Act S 222. —(1) Where a receiver or manager of the property of a corporation has been appointed, every invoice order for goods or business letter issued by or on behalf of the corporation or the receiver or manager or the liquidator of the corporation, being a document on or in which the name of the corporation appears, shall contain a statement immediately following the name of the corporation that a receiver or manager has been appointed.

(2) If default is made in complying with this section, the corporation and every officer and every liquidator of the corporation and every receiver or manager who knowingly and wilfully authorises or permits the default shall be guilty of an offence.

 

The issue of a notice by them in their current format makes THEM GUILTY OF A CRIMINAL OFFENCE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Just a quick update, This morning I have received another letter this time from Charles Howard and Partners giving me 72 hours notice of a home visit.

 

The letter reads ' We are now making arrangements for one of our collectors to visit you at home.

 

The purpose of this visit is to:

 

Secure payment from you

Investigate your home situation prior to Court Action.'

 

 

Then the usual, you can avoid our collector visiting by sending payment in full blah blah.

 

Do I simply ignore this one, will they actually send someone over?

 

In relation to the post above regarding WJ Parking being in administration, is what they are doing illegal? Can I call the police or better yet just phone Charles Howard and tell them to get ****ed?

Link to post
Share on other sites

they won't visit. Its a mail [problem]. why would they waste time and fuel when they know they have no powers at all. Also they also know its a mail based [problem]. See Companies House about trading when in administration and not declaring it on their paperwork (thai already covered on the forum). ignore them. its a mail based [problem].

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...