Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • You can counter a Judges's question on why you didn't respond by pointing out that any company that charges you with stopping at a zebra crossing is likely to be of a criminal mentality and so unlikely to cancel the PCN plus you didn't want to give away any knowledge you had at that time that could allow them to counteract your claim if it went to Court. There are many ways in which you can see off their stupid claim-you will see them in other threads  where our members have been caught by Met at other airports as well as Bristol.  Time and again they take motorists to Court for "NO Stopping" apparently completely forgetting that the have lost doing that because no stopping is prohibitory and cannot form a contract. Yet they keep on issuing PCNs because so many people just pay up . Crazy . You can see what chuckleheads they are when you read their Claim form which is pursuing you as the driver or the keeper. they don't seem to understand that on airport land because of the Bye laws, the keeper is never liable.   
    • The video-sharing app told the BBC that a "very limited" number of accounts had been compromised.View the full article
    • luckily like this thread VCS/DCB(L) PCN spycar capture - PAPLOC Now claimform - no Stopping in Restricted Zone - Bristol Airport ***Claim Dismissed*** - Page 4 - Private Land Parking Enforcement - Consumer Action Group although no on the crossing, same applies to you so WS time. there are numerous threads here on pedestrian crossing claimforms by VCS at Bristol and at other airports so use our enhanced google searchbox and find them. really a bad idea to vanish for SIX months and not been have reading up here.....................  
    • Not at all.  The onus is on them to ensure that their invoice respects the provisions of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to establish keeper liability.  Which it can't as the area is covered by bye-laws. Spot on. Irrelevant as to whether you entered into a contract with VCS to pay them £100 if you didn't obey what was written on their silly signs. Who cares?  What about their ridiculous generic Particulars of Claim where they deliberately mix up driver and keeper. And where do they mention this?  You haven't shown us anything. Of course you have to prepare a Witness Statement and you'd better get on with it. This is the problem here - you've disappeared for months & months, haven't kept us updated and presumably haven't read other VCS threads.  That needs to change - now. Otherwise you will lose - simple as that. For a start - please upload the court order which fixes the hearing date plus plus where "VCS mentioned my initial defence was generic and clearly copied from the internet".  We're not mind readers.
  • 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

Im sitting here panicking!!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5513 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

Yep - I know how that feels. I used to be a customer until recently and after finding CAG in October I became stronger and after learning my rights, they stopped bothering me - the same WILL happen with you. Like all bullies, they back down when challenged :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trespassing is a complicated matter.

 

I know this from my hobby. It requires trespassing :oops:. Basically in England and Wales trespassing is a civil matter. If someone is found trespassing its up to the owner of the property to press charges.

 

If the trespasser is found on site and asked to leave the trespasser must be allowed to leave. You cant hold him/her. If they refuse to leave it then becomes a criminal matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its classed as burglary.

 

Hope this helps

 

Burglary

9 1 (a) Any person who enters a building or part of a building as a trespasser with intent to

steal anything in the building or part of the building

OR

inflict grievous bodily harm on any person therein

OR

do unlawful damage to the building or anything therein Shall be guilty of an offence.

 

9 1 (b) Any person who having entered a building or part of a building as a trespasser

steals or attempts to steal anything therein

OR

inflict or attempts to inflict grievous bodily harm on any person therein Shall be guilty of an offence.

 

 

 

 

 

Part A covers the crime if it was with intent to steal or cause gbh etc, part b however is if they enter the property with no intention of stealing or hurting anybody but end up doing so (they see something nice they want, are confronted by the owner). Also covers the offence being commited.

 

Part B is common for burglaries where the owner has been seriously injured confronting the thief. He had no intention of entering to cause gbh but ended up doing so, while he would be guilty of part a as he entered with intent to steal.

 

PS Part B does not need to show intent, the action will suffice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send them one of Diskmandaves brilliant letters (I know it says you are recording calls - let them think you are :)) - and nice to see you back posting again Mark :D

 

harass1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...