Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • BankFodder
      EVRI have lost parcel £300 model kit

      By BankFodder · Posted

      Have we seen your court bundle?   If we haven't then it's probably an idea to post it up here especially the index page and the witness statement so we can see if there is anything which might need adding or changing 
    • T911
      G24 anpr PCN - Double Dipping - Wigan Robin Retail Park

      By T911 · Posted

      "Care to briefly tell someone who isn't tech savvy - i.e. me! - how you did this?" Its pretty simple although not obvious. You open the google maps app > click your profile picture > Click Timeline from the list > click today > choose the date you want to see the timeline from. Then you'll see your timeline for that day. Often, places you have visited will have a question mark beside them where google wants you confirm you have actually visited. You either click 'yes' if you have, or you click 'edit' to enter the actual place you visited. Sometimes, you'll see 'Missing visit' This probably happens if your internet connection has dropped out at that time. You simply click 'Add visit' and enter the place. The internet on my crappy phone often loses connection so I have to do that alot.   OK dx, understood mate. 
    • Strider713
      EVRI have lost parcel £300 model kit

      By Strider713 · Posted

      I have now been given a court date vs Evri, 4th Sept 2024. I have completed my court bundle, when am I expected to send copies to the court and Evri and should it be in hard copy or electronic? The Notice of Allocation states that no later than 7 days before the directions hearing both parties must send to the other party their final offers to settle. Does this mean I will have to tell Evri what I'm willing to settle? Rgds, J
    • LilMissM
      Can I get a Cifas marker removed?

      By LilMissM · Posted

      Ok how about this to the CEO? I know it sounds super desperate but lets call a spade a spade here, I am super desperate: Dear Sir, On 29th November 2023 I took out a loan of £5000 with you. Unfortunately very early into 2024 I found myself in financial difficulty (unexpected bills and two episodes of sickness and the tax office getting my tax code wrong resulting in less pay for two months) and I contacted you (MCB) on 13th February 2024 asking if there was any way I could extend the length of my loan to 36 months. I fully explained why I was requesting this and asked for your help. I did not receive a reply to that email so I again contacted you on 7th March 2024 to advise you of a change in my circumstances which resulted in me having to take out a DMP and asking you to confirm that the direct debit had been cancelled. You would have also received confirmation of this DMP from StepChange but you did not acknowledge receipt of my email. I have only managed to make one payment from my loan but did try and contact MCB to discuss extending my loan, help etc.  I have now therefore fallen behind on several of my debts, yours included, and as a result you have lodged a Cifas marker against my name for "evasion of payment", which has resulted in me having to change banks, which has been an extremely difficult process because of the Cifas marker. I do not feel you have been fair or given me the opportunity to fully explain my situation to you before you lodged the marker against my name. I appreciate it is a business and you have acted accordingly, but I did try to make contact to arrange alternative arrangements and at no point, not even to this day, did I ever intend to not repay my loan. I cannot stress to you enough how much this has affected my mental health. I am having trouble sleeping and my existing health condition has been exacerbated by all of this. What I would like you to do is to please, please remove the Cifas marker and let me make arrangements to pay the loan back through a DMP.  Please sir, I am begging for your help here. I am not a dishonest person and I have never been in a situation like this before. I am desperately trying to make things right but this marker is killing me. Please can you help me? I look forward to hearing from you. Yours faithfully,
    • LilMissM
      Can I get a Cifas marker removed?

      By LilMissM · Posted

      Sorry  Noted x

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

PPC 2nd letter from them HELP!!

thisisafakename
 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5549 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

thisisafakename

thisisafakename

Posted
Posted

hello all 1st post

 

got a charge by PPC parking on a private road, got charge notice on car, got letter through to RK which i returned with template letter from here advising take it up with driver im RK, PPC have returned advising that shouldnt use template letters from here as not strictly accurate and doesnt constitute legal advice!! also references a case upmann vs elkan(1871) which should read 1971 i might add. which references a counterfeit goods case?!!!basically trying bully me into telling who was driving, by saying i have a "duty"

 

where would people go from here, i've told them i am RK and they need to take it up with driver, as far as im concerned thats my part done!

Link to post
Share on other sites
DDWales

DDWales

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hi! Do not worry. Its more nonsense and intimidation from a PPC. You have no obligation by law to tell them who the driver is. By them trying to use case law on you shows how desperate they are for your money!! Ignore from now on. Who is the PPC by the way?

Edited by DDWales
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites
DDWales

DDWales

Posted
Posted

I havent had any dealings with this PPC personally but perhaps a few of the other Caggers have. They may be able to tell you which DCA (s) they work with etc. However, as above,- ignore as if you continue to write they will think you are wavering into paying and hassle you even more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
sameagle

sameagle

Posted
Posted

"Summary.

Upmann were Cuban cigar manufacturers who found several counterfeit boxes of cigars marked with their brand. The cigars were found at St Catherine's Docks and consigned in the name of Elkan who were German forwarding agents and warehousemen. Elkan maintained that they did not realise that the goods were counterfeit. It was argued by Elkan that it was not possible to obtain an injunction against them as they had no knowledge of the counterfeit nature of the goods.

 

 

Decision

 

Lord Hatherley LC noted that this was effectively an appeal about costs and held that a duty was upon Elkan to give all the information they possibly could from the first moment possible to assist Upmann"

 

Did VCS issue you with a ticket for smoking whilst driving ?

 

Sam the Eagle

All of these are on behalf of a friend.. Cabot - [There's no CCA!]

CapQuest - [There's no CCA!]

Barclays - Zinc, [There's no CCA!]

Robinson Way - Written off!

NatWest - Written off!

Link to post
Share on other sites
DDWales

DDWales

Posted
Posted
"Summary.

Upmann were Cuban cigar manufacturers who found several counterfeit boxes of cigars marked with their brand. The cigars were found at St Catherine's Docks and consigned in the name of Elkan who were German forwarding agents and warehousemen. Elkan maintained that they did not realise that the goods were counterfeit. It was argued by Elkan that it was not possible to obtain an injunction against them as they had no knowledge of the counterfeit nature of the goods.

 

 

Decision

 

Lord Hatherley LC noted that this was effectively an appeal about costs and held that a duty was upon Elkan to give all the information they possibly could from the first moment possible to assist Upmann"

 

Did VCS issue you with a ticket for smoking whilst driving ?

 

Sam the Eagle

 

I think that says it all-really laughable and signs of pure desperation for your money by quoting case law that has absolutely no association with whats going on! Has anyone had anything similar or worse?:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wayne's Enforcement

Wayne's Enforcement

Posted
Posted

The significance of the case cited is that a defendant must take reasonable steps to help the claimant in a civil case.

 

So, if you were the registered keeper of a vehicle which received a PCN from a CIEO on private land, and were not the driver - what reasons could a reasonable person have for refusing to name the driver and to allow justice to take its course?

PPC TROLL!

Link to post
Share on other sites
My Real Name

My Real Name

Posted
Posted
The significance of the case cited is that a defendant must take reasonable steps to help the claimant in a civil case.

 

So, if you were the registered keeper of a vehicle which received a PCN from a CIEO on private land, and were not the driver - what reasons could a reasonable person have for refusing to name the driver and to allow justice to take its course?

The right not to incriminate oneself or others.

 

That, and the lack of any statutory requirement to keep a record of the driver, let alone inform some random with a tin foil badge and photocopied law diploma.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve__M

Steve__M

Posted
Posted
The significance of the case cited is that a defendant must take reasonable steps to help the claimant in a civil case.

 

So, if you were the registered keeper of a vehicle which received a PCN from a CIEO on private land, and were not the driver - what reasons could a reasonable person have for refusing to name the driver and to allow justice to take its course?

 

The parking company is entitled to seek a court order requiring the RK to provide the information, but the parking company will need to pay the RK's defence costs, and would have, at the very least, to show that the RK had some level of responsibility for the driver's action.

 

In short it's an insurmountable hurdle for a small invoice, and therefore PPC bluster to suggest it is a requirement.

 

Norwich Pharmacal Co. and others -v- Customs and Excise Commissioners, House of Lords, 1973

 

Since 100% of requests to PPCs to provide evidence relevant to their claims

are ignored, it's a bit like the pot calling the kettle black (as my mum would say).

Link to post
Share on other sites
petej2811

petej2811

Posted
Posted
The significance of the case cited is that a defendant must take reasonable steps to help the claimant in a civil case.

 

So, if you were the registered keeper of a vehicle which received a PCN from a CIEO on private land, and were not the driver - what reasons could a reasonable person have for refusing to name the driver and to allow justice to take its course?

 

A defendant must take reasonable steps.

 

Nobody else is under any such duty. So if the keeper knows himself not to be the defendant he is not a party to the contract, to the case and indeed is nothing to do with the matter at hand then it cannot rightly be said that he has any obligations to assist any purported claimant.

 

Particularly so when the keeper knows that the claimant's case is flawed in law.

 

The purported claimant must identify the defendant himself. He can ask all he likes for the assistance of any party but that party is absolutely not under any obligation whatsoever in law to assist.

 

You're misquoting the point of the case and doing so to the detriment of users here. Given that you are a PPC associate of some description your presence here mis-quoting law could easily be construed as a mis-representation per S2 Fraud Act 2006. Particularly if you were to give the said advice to someone who had been sent a invoice from a firm which you are associated with.

 

I suggest you tread lightly having been given suitable advice.

 

P

Link to post
Share on other sites
crem

crem

Posted
Posted

So, if you were the registered keeper of a vehicle which received a PCN from a CIEO on private land, and were not the driver - what reasons could a reasonable person have for refusing to name the driver and to allow justice to take its course?

 

 

I don't understand this made up term of CIEO.

 

What on earth is one of those supposed to be and does Wayne think that by giving his invoice clerk's a made up title that sounds like the legally appointed CEOs we will be duped into believing they are official people like we think his PCNs pretending to be real council PCNs are? (or not)

Link to post
Share on other sites
the_freedom_trail

the_freedom_trail

Posted
Posted
The significance of the case cited is that a defendant must take reasonable steps to help the claimant in a civil case.

 

So, if you were the registered keeper of a vehicle which received a PCN from a CIEO on private land, and were not the driver - what reasons could a reasonable person have for refusing to name the driver and to allow justice to take its course?

 

Oooopppps, I forgot who was driving the car at the time - what you going to do about that one Wayne? lol BTW, what the hell is a CIEO. I woke up this morning and declared myself a super mega pretend parking ticket enforcement mega man. Dude, seriously you have about as much legal power as a paper bag. Would you kindly stop misleading people on this site over the legality and legitimacy of private parking tickets.

 

TFT

09/07/09 :)Business Studies BA(Hons) 2:1:)

 

eCar Insurance overpayment - £325

Settled in full - 15/09/08

NatWest Student A/C bank charges - £260

Settled under hardship scheme - 08/06/09

Natwest Business A/C bank charges - £60

Settled in full as GOGW - 20/04/09

Santander Consumer Finance late payment fees - £60

Part settled for £48 - 01/03/08

Peugeot Finance late payment fees - £50

Settled in full before county court hearing - 01/09/09

Peugeot Finance overpayment of £247

Settled in full - 01/12/08

Valley Leisure - complaint about collections agent

£160 part refund of gym membership in compensation - 01/02/09

HFC Bank - complaint about payment deducted from my account on wrong date

GOGW £10 - 01/05/09

Link to post
Share on other sites
letshelp

letshelp

Posted
Posted
The significance of the case cited is that a defendant must take reasonable steps to help the claimant in a civil case.

 

So, if you were the registered keeper of a vehicle which received a PCN from a CIEO on private land, and were not the driver - what reasons could a reasonable person have for refusing to name the driver and to allow justice to take its course?

 

Well you will have to issue a court summons to find out, rather than the mindless nonsense that usually arrives in the post from the PPC.

Please remember our troops, fighting and dying in our name. God protect them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...