Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Actually one thing I forgot to mention was that our friends who got to the car park before us got an NTK too. What I didn't realise was that they paid their £60. Arrgghh! I think AP made a huge amount of money on that day!!!!! Can't comment on that. Let's say I'm legal counsel to the keeper! Unfortunately the appeal was made direct on the alliance-parking.co.uk/appeals page not IAS, we know know that this was only to get driver details and was only after we submitted did we realise that should just ignored it. As it was a web online form we have a screenshot. But we basically stated that we had paid for parking and only really submitted our justpark receipt ref image BUT DID NOT confirm any driver details. Only thinking they had somehow not got the justpark payment info. The back of the PCN is on page2 of the NTK+LOC. The LOC is page3+4 Just a quick question on this. Where does the £70 come from? In our NTK&LOC it states £170?  PCN-Appeal-HarlynBay-jun23redact.pdf
    • I've been on this forum for eight years and I've never once seen a parking attendant refuse to leave a ticket through fear of an altercation with the driver.  It's a very poor and obvious excuse to first not inform you you've got a ticket and second to lie about sending the £60 demand by post, so they can go for the whole £100.
    • We have 10 cases, including yours, for this company. There are no guarantees of course, but so far not once have they had the bottle to do court.  They seem to be a small company operating only in Cornwall and out of their depth when it comes to court. BTW, thanks for filling in the sticky and uploading the PDF so quickly - we wish everyone who comes here would do that! As dx asked, please post what you wrote in your appeal.    
    • Had a previous car loan with this lot. Included in the amount (prior to added interest) on this agreement, is the outstanding balance from the previous loan. This outstanding balance had already been subject to hefty interest on the 1st loan, yet on this agreement they added interest to it again! Also, where it states that the particular Ts and Cs (ref # removed) form part of the agreement, the Ts and Cs they've sent, which they say are part of the agreement, but they are not- they have a different reference number to the Ts and Cs which form part of the (original) agreement. agreeandterm.pdf
  • 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
×
×
  • Create New...