Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Please answer the following questions.   1 Date of the infringement 03rd March 2024   2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] I did not received a NTK    [scan up BOTH SIDES as ONE PDF- follow the upload guide] please LEAVE IN LOCATION AND ALL DATES/TIMES/£'s   3 Date received Give answer here   4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] Give answer here   5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Give answer here   6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] Give answer here   Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up Give answer here   7 Who is the parking company? MET Parking Services   8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] (346) Southgate Park, Stansted CM24 1PY   For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. IAS - POPLA   There are two official bodies, the BPA and the IAS. If you are unsure, please check HERE   If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here I received a parking charge Final Reminder today 15th April 2024  Copy the windscreen or ANPR section to your thread and answer the questions... …….... In either case scan up bothsides of any letters/tickets in or appeals made out to ONE MULTIPAGE PDF ONLY MET Parking Services Scanned Doc.pdf
    • I am getting conflicting advice from friends about this issue. I am hoping somebody can end my confusion. A couple of weeks ago I took my Mum out for her birthday. Another driver scratched the front passenger side near the bumper of my car as it was parked up. There are no dents just quite severe paint work damage. He scraped his car against mine. The other driver drove off. Luckily there was 2 witnesses who got the other drivers reg number. Cut a log story short the other driver said he didn’t realise he damaged the paintwork on my car. He has however admitted liability. His insurance is paying out. Last Thursday my car was taken away to have the paintwork done. Today I been told my car has been put down as a total loss (not a write off).  As it is only paintwork damage and not body work or mechanical damage, I don't understand why it has been put down as a total loss. I have been told by the insurers I can either write the car off and receive payment to the value of the car or I can take a lower payment and get the car repaired myself.   I am getting conflicting advice from friends. Some are saying if I keep my car and get the repairs done myself the car will then be classed as a category S or category M and I will no longer be able get insurance on the car as it will be classed as written off. As it is only paintwork damage and not body work or mechanical damage, I don't understand that. My questions are  If I take the payment to get the paintwork repair done myself will I still be able to insure my car when the insurance is up for renewal? If I take the payment to get the paintwork repair done myself will my current insurance policy be voided? If my car does get classed as category M or S will the stop me from selling it on the future? Thanks
    • Yes, it is just for Tesco. But as that manager explained, those two spaces on that ground are now rented by the electric company. "What appeal?  Private parking companies never, ever, ever accept appeals - ever." What is my next move then, please? Just wait for them to issue me with whatever it is they issue, and then what? 
    • so how are you doing OP?  Letter of claim ready?
    • @fusionrox please create your own thread by clicking the button at the top of the website
  • 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

Something Fishy Halifax CCA Expert advise appreciated


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5454 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 have just received a response to my CCA request from Halifax

 

Apart from the usual covering letter, where they think that they have discharged their responsibilities, there was an up to date 8 page CCA which everyone seems to receive, with current T&C’s, using my current address and not my address in 2002, so I assume that this is irrelevant.

 

In place of a signed CCA, was a signed application form. Something fishy about this as the header and footer refer to platinum card application with a gold card logo and indeed it should be a gold card. The reverse is skewed and contains a competition and a small box ‘Financial and related conditions’.

 

This document is not signed by the creditor, not marked as approved, there is no credit limit, no mention of charges, no example of charges for credit, no reference to T&C’s and no T&C’s relating to 2002. The only possible prescribed terms are under ‘Financial and related conditions’ on the alleged reverse of the application.

 

An experienced opinion would be very welcome.

 

Links to application below

 

Many thanks

 

Vint

Edited by vint1954
Link to post
Share on other sites

At first look it seems everything where it should be, but when you look at the bottom of each document you see the document ref number (for re-ordering stationary) and the dates are different ie 07/02 & 04/02. How can they be diff on the same doc? Looks like its a cut and paste job, but proving it would prob mean court or trying civil procedures to get a really true copy.

 

The front is deffo an application form that is not executed (no prescribed terms), 2nd sheet looks to conform even though it refers to the rest of the terms & conditions in another doc. If you look at the general copy of the first sheet it is of a poorer quality than the second sheet, scanned in and microfiched? The 2nd sheet is clearer and much better quality, scanned from a recent doc? The % interest matches up, would be interested to see if anyone has a copy of the terms &conditions available from when this was signed. If it was just the first sheet no problem its not a cca and i think the second has been reproduced to suit, but difficult to prove.

 

Hopefully someone with more experience can help on how to find out if it is an original.

Advice & opinions given by spartathisis are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your replies.

 

When I look loser at this document, the actual form appears to have been reduced and pasted onto a blank Platinum form. The form is slightly out of line with the header and footer.

 

I am faily sure that this was a stick down edge mailshot, so the reverse would have been an address.

 

Vint

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way to challenge this would be in court. There should be a reference and a signature, but these in itself do not make the strongest argument.

 

It's just my opinion, but because your signature appears within 4 corners of the prescribed terms, I would still say its enforceable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...