Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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
        • I agree
      • 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

urgent help needed with AQ N149


moh786
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5490 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

I nned some help filling in a AQ N149, I have attached the POC and the defence I used and the agreement below. please will some help be out

 

thanks in advance

 

cca : http://i44.tinypic.com/5554xv.jpg

poc page 1 : http://i39.tinypic.com/245znnp.jpg

poc page 2 : http://i44.tinypic.com/2uzb1iw.jpg

default letter : http://i44.tinypic.com/2qa5wds.jpg

termination letter : http://i43.tinypic.com/ok3ih2.jpg

 

defence used : http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/184802-discussion-enforceability-agreements-11.html#post1985182

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, just printed off a copy of N149 form, usually do n150s,

 

A Settlement tick no

Section B tick yes (if it has already been transferred to your local court) if it has write that in the box, if not write that you are unable to travel etc.

C Track tick yes

D none

E tick no leave the rest blank

F self explanatory

G in the box write " please see attachment section G"

H leave blank

 

 

I will post up an attachment for section G shortly

Please note i have no legal training any advice i give comes from my own experience and from what i have learned on this site

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you write to the solicitor requesting information under CPR 18 or 31.14?

If so did they reply, and have they sent you the app form copy and DN wich you posted up above?

Please note i have no legal training any advice i give comes from my own experience and from what i have learned on this site

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, ive put together something, have read let me know what you think

 

Other Information

 

Section G

 

The claimant has to date supplied only a application form which does not contain the Prescribed terms under regulations made by the Secretary of State under section 60(1) CCA 1974, the regulations referred to are the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) on which to base its case, it will be necessary for the claimant to produce a copy of the actual signed agreement itself conforming to Act and its regulations, The original document must be brought to the hearing

 

The defendant also requires a full and complete statement of account including all payments made and charges applied covering the period beginning with the day of the making of the agreement and ending on the date of the commencement of this case.

Without production of the requested documents, I am at a disadvantage and am unable to serve a proper defence. Failure of the claimant to supply the requested documentation will make the case much harder for the court to deal with as without production of the requested documentation will inhibit the courts ability to deal with the case.

 

The House of Lords in the case of Wilson v First County Trust Ltd - [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) made it clear in paragraph 29 of LORD NICHOLLS OF BIRKENHEAD judgment

 

29. The court's powers under section 127(1) are subject to significant qualification in two types of cases. The first type is where section 61(1)(a), regarding signing of agreements, is not complied with. In such cases the court 'shall not make' an enforcement order unless a document, whether or not in the prescribed form, containing all the prescribed terms, was signed by the debtor: section 127(3). Thus, signature of a document containing all the prescribed terms is an essential prerequisite to the court's power to make an enforcement order. The second type of case concerns failure to comply with the duty to supply a copy of an executed or unexecuted agreement pursuant to sections 62 and 63, or failure to comply with the duty to give

notice of cancellation rights in accordance with section 64(1). Here again, subject to one exception regarding sections 62 and63, section 127(4) precludes the court from making an enforcement order.

 

Its is respectfully requested this case be allocated to the small claims track, it is a straight forward case and is easily resolved on production of the required documentation by the claimant, should the claimant not have the documentation required to progress this case I suggest that there will be no case to answer

 

Therefore it stands to reason that these documents must be disclosed before this case can progress any further

Please note i have no legal training any advice i give comes from my own experience and from what i have learned on this site

Link to post
Share on other sites

No i dont think you do with the N149, as its small claims track, and standard directions will apply.

 

If you hand deliver it to the court, they will give you a receipt if you ask, also ask whether the other side have filed their AQ, if so ask for a photocopy.

 

Dont bother sending a copy of yours to the other side

Please note i have no legal training any advice i give comes from my own experience and from what i have learned on this site

Link to post
Share on other sites

I need some advice on CPR requests. I made a CPR 31 request to the solicitors and gave them 7 days to reply by but have had no response what is the next step that i need to take. I have filled in an AQ N149 and sent it to the court yesterday.

 

Can some please advise.

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Just had a letter from the solictors firm dealing with the other party and they want to settle out of court. They have said they are will to accept a full and final settlement of a third of what was on cc.

 

i was thinking of accepting this and now and it will be over then. what would you do, just need advice or suggestion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you feel happy with the offer, then take it, but you need to make sure its full and final, and that you wont be paying any court costs, and that any negative markers on your credit file are removed, and that no further claim will be made in the future.

 

Have a read around the forums to find out how to do this correctly, i haven't done it myself so id rather not advise, keep bumping the thread for more comments

Please note i have no legal training any advice i give comes from my own experience and from what i have learned on this site

Link to post
Share on other sites

They rarely reply to them, i suggest you wait now for the courts directions[/quote

 

I'm not sure that I would agree with that...

 

What I suggest is that you do a chasing letter - attach the original 31.14 request - tell them they have 7 days to reply or you will apply to the court for an Order requiring compliance AND also your costs.

 

If you don't get a reply within 7 days you make an application to the court on an N244 for an Order that they comply within 7 days and pay your costs.

 

The reason that creditors don't reply to CPR 31.14 requests is the fact that defendants don't make them

If I've helped feel free to add to my reputation.

 

I am not a Practising Lawyer. My comments are my opinion only. You should not rely upon those comments and should always take your own professional advice from a practising Solicitor or Barrister

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...