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
  • Our picks

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

Chris v Natwest***WON***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6392 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

Hi All,

 

I have been reading this thread with interest in attempt to predict Cobbetts next move and head them off to stop them time waisting.

I have not been able to find any detail as to the content of the Questioner the courts send out. Could somebody please post some details so I can clearly understand what i should expect next.

I submitted my MCOL and then sent the below letter to Cobbetts recorded delivery before they have had any time to defend. Hopefully it will do the trick and stop them delaying any outcome but as yet i have heard nothing. I also included a schedule of all charges and interest.

 

Cobbetts LLP

Ship Canal House

King Street

Manchester

M2 4WB

 

19th September 2006

 

To whom it may concern,

 

I have attached the below for your information and to assist your understanding as to my claim against your client. I have received the update from the court that you have acknowledged my claim and will be defending on behalf of Natwest; therefore I look forward to receiving a cheque from you soon.

 

A copy of this letter and attached documents will be supplied to the court also.

 

Claim Number

 

IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT

 

BETWEEN

 

NAME- CLAIMANT

ADDRESS

 

And

 

NATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK DEFENDANT

135 BISHOPSGATE

LONDON

EC2M 3UR

 

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

 

1. The Claimant has two accounts (SORT CODE) ACC NUM and (SORT CODE) ACC NUM with the Defendant, which were opened around 3 years ago.

 

2. During the period in which the Accounts have been operating the Defendant debited numerous charges to the Account in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant and also charged interest on the charges once applied. The Claimant understands that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant.

 

3. A list of the charges applied is attached to these particulars of claim.

 

4. The Claimant contends that:

 

a) The charges debited to the Accounts are punitive in nature; are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant; exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and are

not intended to represent or related to any alleged actual loss, but instead unduly enrich the Defendant which exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges

with a view to profit.

 

b) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is

unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts

Regulations (1999), the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the common law.

 

5. Accordingly the Claimant claims:

 

a) The return of the amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £CHARGES

and interest charged thereon of £INTEREST.

 

b) Court costs of £250 thus far.

 

c) Interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act as set out on the attached list of

charges or at such rate and for such periods as the court deems just.

 

The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from DATE and DATE of £INTEREST and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of 80 pence.

 

6. In relation to each and every breach by the Claimant which resulted in a charge being levied as confirmed by the Defendant in its Defence please provide full details (with all relevant supporting documentation) of:

 

a) Any letters, telephone calls, or incidents of manual intervention into the account in respect of each and every charge claimed by the Claimant in the Particulars of Claim;

 

b) How charges are applied to the account (whether automatically or by some other means) and when;

 

c) The Defendant’s assessment of the cost to it of sending any letter making any telephone call or otherwise administering the account, with details of how the cost to the Defendant is calculated and what items of expense are included, or such other costs as are foreseeable in the context of contractual damages and the remoteness thereof and which can be specifically identified and defined and which can be reasonably attributed to each and every breach on the part of the Claimant;

 

d) The justifiably objective principles upon which all such costs are calculated and result in the specific level of each charge levied by the bank in respect of each of the breaches which resulted in the charges now claimed by the Claimant.

 

 

7. Where the Defendant avers that the charges are applied in return for the provision of a banking service to the Claimant:

 

a) Please identify each and every such service referred to in the defendant’s terms and conditions and identify the charges, by reference to those terms and conditions, that the Claimant is required to pay for each service identified.

 

b) Please confirm what steps are taken by the defendant in providing the alleged services referred to in the defence. Please provide copies of all notes, memoranda, or other information retained by the defendant to demonstrate the provision of the alleged services to the Claimant.

 

c) Please confirm whether charges are applied automatically.

 

Please note however, I consider that upon allocation this case will be referred to the Small Claims Track, accordingly I would consider any CPR Part 18 request to be intimidatory as Part 18 would not apply. Having been in touch with other Nat West claimants I am aware of your recently devised tactics and attempts to cause claimants in person to give up. I shall not be responding to your requests designed to intimidate. I shall of course respond to the order of the Court leaving the matters to be settled by the court.

 

I believe that the contents of these particulars of claim are true.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

Signed:

Peep x

Bite me and i'll bite back....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 163
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi Chris,

How goes it?

Your case is very similar to mine... Natwest waited to the last day to fill in their AQ's, have you seen a copy of theirs? I received a copy on Monday that Corbetts had filled it, and on Tuesday another letter from Corbetts saying they'll offer me a goodwill payment of £1300.00 but im gonna hold out for the ful £2600 they owe me.

Yours will be just round the corner!

Ragingbull

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry about it Chris ... this bit is the most frustrating part, where its not you in control of the time frame ... the finishing post is in sight, just be patient!

NatWest:

Sent LBA on 12 May.

Submitted MoneyClaim on 30 May.

Acknowledged 7 Jun, 3 Jul deadline for response

Defence filed 4 Jul

Received their copy of AQ 21 July, awaiting court date

*********** SETTLED IN FULL - 17 August *************

Egg Card:

Requested Payment Protection Refund on 20 May,

Sent Data Protection Act request, egg acknowledged,

8 Jul deadline for response.

26 Jul: Sent Prelim Letter

01 Sep: Sent LBA

Citibank:

Not Started

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just phoned the court to find out if cobbetts had sent their A/Q back yet, they had until today to get it in, and guess what :| , they havent sent it in yet, so they were 8 days late putting in their defence and got away with it, now they are going to be late with their A/Q and I bet it will be allowed :-x , it is not fair, we wouldnt be allowed to do this

CHRIS WATKINS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chris,

 

Really gutted for you. When I saw ur name come up i thought u were gonna be telling us youd won! Really sorry its being dragged out like this for you.

 

Keep this in mind though, the end is near, youll get ur money and all that extra interest as well.

 

Good Luck Chris

 

Clark xx:p

:p If you like the advice I give or I have helped you in any way, click the scales and let me know about it x :p

 

 

NatWest: £1148.00 (defence filed 3/10/06)

 

Halifax: £2600.00 Letter received 28/09/06 SETTLED IN FULL!!!:lol:

 

Co-op: £1140.00 Cheque received 5/10/06 SETTLED IN FULL

 

Barclays Bank: £510.00 (LBA time up 19/9/06) Offer received of £250.00 thanks but no thanks

 

Barclaycard: £840.00 Half refunded mcol being done for the other half!

 

Capital One: £100 Settled in full after preliminary letter

 

RBS: £38.00 SETTLED IN FULL 14th September 2006

 

STILL TO GO.......

 

Hubbys Halifax visa :p

 

Hubbys Yorkshire bank visa :)

 

Hubbys old Yorkshire bank (closed) account :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Know what you mean, a little disheartening but you know what helps??? Go into the **WON** section and read around a bit youll feel miles better. I way behind u, Natwest have til 3/10 to submit a defence so i have all the naff stuff to come yet!

 

Ill keep watching Chris, chin up

 

Clark xx:p

:p If you like the advice I give or I have helped you in any way, click the scales and let me know about it x :p

 

 

NatWest: £1148.00 (defence filed 3/10/06)

 

Halifax: £2600.00 Letter received 28/09/06 SETTLED IN FULL!!!:lol:

 

Co-op: £1140.00 Cheque received 5/10/06 SETTLED IN FULL

 

Barclays Bank: £510.00 (LBA time up 19/9/06) Offer received of £250.00 thanks but no thanks

 

Barclaycard: £840.00 Half refunded mcol being done for the other half!

 

Capital One: £100 Settled in full after preliminary letter

 

RBS: £38.00 SETTLED IN FULL 14th September 2006

 

STILL TO GO.......

 

Hubbys Halifax visa :p

 

Hubbys Yorkshire bank visa :)

 

Hubbys old Yorkshire bank (closed) account :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry about it Chris, just one of those things. You have right on your side, and ultimatly they know that. Just be determined not to give in....

 

PLUTOS

 

 

thanks for that message of support, all this sometimes leaves me feeling a bit down and any encouragement helps

SNATCHWEST and NOBBETS no scare me!

Link to post
Share on other sites

000200BA.gif Why on earth are the courts allowing them to play games? it is blatently obvious that they leave everything until the last minute and that they are totally abusing the court system to hold out aslong as they can. the courts can tell that they pay up eventually so why on earth are they being allowed to waste the courts time aswell as ours? I'm baffled honestly, seeing as the courts are inundated with these claims I would have thought they wanted to get them cleared up asap and this would be done by not allowing the banks to take the p**s.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree lisa, anyway, I am a bit short of cash at the moment, so thought I would ask natwest to increase my overdraft a bit, so went to see them today,thought they would tell me where to go, but surprise :o , they gave me it, probably because they know that they can take it all back as soon as I win my money back

CHRIS WATKINS

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree lisa, anyway, I am a bit short of cash at the moment, so thought I would ask NatWest to increase my overdraft a bit, so went to see them today,thought they would tell me where to go, but surprise :o , they gave me it, probably because they know that they can take it all back as soon as I win my money back

 

they will make even more money now so they are happy. They are unbelievable!

I'm new, what the hell do I know? My comments and opinions are my own. Please seek advice of a qualified professional if in doubt.

Halifax

SAR sent 12/08/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chris,

 

Ur one step closer now though....what was ur full amount??

 

Clark xx:p

:p If you like the advice I give or I have helped you in any way, click the scales and let me know about it x :p

 

 

NatWest: £1148.00 (defence filed 3/10/06)

 

Halifax: £2600.00 Letter received 28/09/06 SETTLED IN FULL!!!:lol:

 

Co-op: £1140.00 Cheque received 5/10/06 SETTLED IN FULL

 

Barclays Bank: £510.00 (LBA time up 19/9/06) Offer received of £250.00 thanks but no thanks

 

Barclaycard: £840.00 Half refunded mcol being done for the other half!

 

Capital One: £100 Settled in full after preliminary letter

 

RBS: £38.00 SETTLED IN FULL 14th September 2006

 

STILL TO GO.......

 

Hubbys Halifax visa :p

 

Hubbys Yorkshire bank visa :)

 

Hubbys old Yorkshire bank (closed) account :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...