Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

manual intervention - clarification please


moozie
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6546 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

Hello there, new here and I am really hoping I am not asking something that has been answered previously. I looked but I am still confused.

 

I have all the bank statements relating to my Barclays account. The charges they have applied to the account over the last 6 years come to £630 (and £655 for the previous 6 years but I know I can't claim on that)

 

Should I still write to them about any manual interventions to the account or should I now sent them the preliminary approach for payment letter?

 

Thank you very much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do both - separate letters

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 5 weeks later...

Second recorded delivery to Barclays got there. This was only about 'manual interventions' as I already have all the relevant statements.

 

I received a letter from them today which says (direct copy):

 

==========================================================

In regard your mention of 'manual intervention', the DPA does not oblige the Bank to comment about internal policies and procedures. Furthermore, in the context of managing out of order account (if indeed this is the nature of your query), the Bank does not hold the information you have requested in a form that would be covered by the DPA. Whilst aggregated information is retained for statistical purposes, this would not constitute 'personal data' under the DPA and therefore would not be covered by a s.7 DPA subject access request.

 

Notwithstanding the above, the Bank is of course entirely willing to supply the general information that should be disclosed due to the DPA. To initiate the process Barclays will require payment of a £10 fee per individual which should be provided by cheque, payable to Barclays plc, directly to this department. Upon payment of the fee(s) the relevant information will be supplied as promptly as possible.

======================================================

 

The author did not attend the plain english school, did he?

 

Should I send the £10 fee and another request?

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had this letter yesterday, I sent it back with the cheque, asking to give me all disclosable personal information.

 

In reply to his statement about manual intervention I aksed him to clarify whether

 

The bank had no personal information about manual intervention

 

or

 

They do have information but it is in a format that is non disclosable.

 

I agree about the letter it certainly is not easy to understand

 

Good luck

  • Confused 1

7 actions in progress

 

amount refunded so far £6500

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I agree about the letter it certainly is not easy to understand

 

Good luck

 

I am glad it was not just me - thank you.

 

I am just drafting a letter back and enclosing a £10 chq. See where we go from here.

 

Thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I have now had a huge parceldelivered from Barclays which includes all the statements (do now have them twice) as well as all sorts of other pieces of information like complaints I have made and where they made agreements with me to reduce my overdraft as I was outseidfe the limit etc etc.

 

Do I have to go through all of this paper before I send them the approach for payment letter?

 

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you know what your charges total is, just proceed.

  • Confused 1

..

.

 

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was wondering if anyone has any advice in terms of the 6 years period. In the FAQs, under Can I claim back beyond 6 years? it says:

 

If you would like to try and claim your charges as far back as you have ever paid them, you should try to do so.

 

But in the step by step instructions it says:

 

under the Limitation Act 1980, you can only claim for the last 6 years

 

I am not sure what to do. Please could you advise.

 

Also, to clarify (I'm sorry,I am not good at all with all this), the preliminary approach letter includes the total of charges plus interest. Is this the 8% interest worked out with the helpful spreadsheet in the library or is this the interest that is stated on the statements following those charges?

 

Many many thanks for any advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got the answer on the interest - sorry! A bit more trawling through the library and Inow know the 8% is only used for going to court.

 

I am still unclear about cvlaiming back longer than 6 years. Any suggestions please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The general rule (Limitations) is that you can only go back 6 years. However, there is an arguement that because you were not aware that the charges might have been illegal, and that this only came to light when (for instance) you read the OFT statement, so in that case you could not be expected to limit your claim to 6 years.

..

.

 

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 03/06/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6546 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...