Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • 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.
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Advice needed... no CCA available


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5462 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

Right... this is a big debt... roughly £10k but written off by HSBC... ben sold to Robinson Way and they sent me this letter after a 3 month wait...

 

 

scan0001-2.jpg

 

 

What is the best course of action to take? I have never had this experience before... I've always challenged lenders based upon the prescribed terms... but no documentation at all?

 

I am thinking of the ICO at the moment as there is no data protection compliance without express permission... but someone with experience of this scenario might obviously be able to advise on the best course of action.

 

Thanks in advance :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok... sending this letter to them...

 

Dear Rebecca,

 

I am writing in response to the letter you sent dated 07/05/09 in relation to being unable to provide documentation to prove a debt with your business exists which would be in the form of a consumer credit agreement.

 

You have written;

 

“we will report the current status of the account to the credit reference agencies where appropriate”

 

The principles upon with you are recording information with the credit reference agencies comes under the Data Protection Act 1998; this is the law governing the processing of personal data. Under the law there are a number of conditions under which data can be processed and under schedule 2 of the Act it states:

 

3.1.1 Conditions for Processing

At least one of the following conditions must be met in the case of all processing of personal data (except where a relevant exemption applies):-

The data subject has given his consent to the processing (see paragraph 3.1.5 below).

The processing is necessary –

 

(a) for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is a party; or

(b) for the taking of steps at the request of the data subject with a view to entering into a contract.

§The processing is necessary to comply with any legal obligation to which the data controller is subject, other than an obligation imposed by contract.

 

Under section 3.1.1 (a) it states the data you share must be in accordance with a contract. You have stated in your correspondence that you do not have a copy of a credit agreement upon which you are relying on to record information with the credit reference agencies. Therefore I believe you are in breach of the Data Protection Act for recording such data which is vexatious and unfounded. This is unless you can provide the legislation upon which you are processing my data at which time I shall seek further clarification from the Information Commissioners Office.

 

Please consider this a formal complaint under the Data Protection Act 1998; under legal guidance it states you have 28 days to respond before an official investigation by the Information Commissioner takes place. Upon the expiry of this deadline I shall also make a report to the Office of Fair Trading who will assess you suitability to hold a credit licence which will cost your business both time and money to comply with. The other option I have is to make a formal representation to the civil courts to make a declaration based upon the non-existence of a contract between ourselves under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 1999. This again will cost considerable time and financial resources for your company to defend litigation.

 

I want you to stop processing my data with the credit reference agencies and remove my records from your database within the next 28 days before a complaint is made. It is in everyone’s interest to do this as the courts prefer for parties to settle their disputes out of the litigation cycle.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

###############

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok... have amended the letter after doing some more reading...

 

 

YOUR REF: ################

 

 

FORMAL COMPLAINT UNDER THE FOLLOWING STATUTES:

 

Dear #########

 

I am writing in response to the letter you sent dated 07/05/09 in relation to being unable to provide documentation to prove a debt with your business exists which would be in the form of a consumer credit agreement.

 

You have written;

 

“we will report the current status of the account to the credit reference agencies where appropriate”

 

The principles upon with you are recording information with the credit reference agencies comes under the Data Protection Act 1998; this is the law governing the processing of personal data. Under the law there are a number of conditions under which data can be processed and, specifically under schedule 2 of the Act it states:

 

3.1.1 Conditions for Processing

At least one of the following conditions must be met in the case of all processing of personal data (except where a relevant exemption applies):-

The data subject has given his consent to the processing (see paragraph 3.1.5 below).

The processing is necessary –

 

(a) for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is a party; or

(b) for the taking of steps at the request of the data subject with a view to entering into a contract.

  • The processing is necessary to comply with any legal obligation to which the data controller is subject, other than an obligation imposed by contract.

Under section 3.1.1 (a) it states the data you share must be in accordance with a contract. You have stated in your correspondence that you do not have a copy of any credit agreement upon which you are relying on to record information with the credit reference agencies. Therefore it is clear there is no permission or legal right for you to register information with any third party. On that basis I believe you are in breach of the Data Protection Act for recording such data which is both vexatious and unfounded. This is unless you can provide the legislation upon which you are processing my data and justify this to the Information Commissioner. This is not an informal request for you to justify your decision making process; under s.10.3 (a) of the Data Protection Act 1998 you have 21 days in which to do this but in order to seek a final resolution to this and so that no time is wasted I shall extend this to 28 days in order to meet the time limit upon which I need to make a complaint to the Information Commissioner. What this means is that I have a right to receive a full and final response by the end of the period before making a formal complaint as outlined above.

 

If you cannot provide a legal and justified reason for processing my data without an enforceable and legal contract then I shall also be seeking compensation for the vexatious and damaging information that you are recording with the credit reference agencies. Upon the expiry of the deadline I shall also make a report to the Office of Fair Trading who will assess you suitability to hold a credit licence which will cost your business both time and money to comply with

 

I would also point out that any compensation claim registered with the ICO will also encompass s.174 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which states:

 

174.—(l) No information obtained under or by virtue of this Act about any individual

shall be disclosed without his consent.

 

This enables me to make a representation to the civil courts to make a declaration based upon the non-existence of a contract between ourselves under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 1999 under the direct contravention of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 s.174 (5) which states:

 

(5) Any person who discloses information in contravention of this section commits an offence.

 

This again will cost considerable time and financial resources for your company to defend litigation. I want you to immediately cease processing my data with the credit reference agencies and remove my records from your databases within the next 28 days before a complaint is made. I am taking this action as I believe you have committed an offence as described under s.174 (5) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and contravened the Data Protection principles as governed under the Act.

 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

###########

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also subscribed with great interest - should be an interesting one, this :)

 

 

Indeed... letter should have been received today too so no doubt I should have something in writing soon enough :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a similar issue with Lowell, they couldn't come up with as much as an empty envelope that MIGHT have had my application form in. Sent them a snotty email and they said they would remove the default immediately. I haven't checked to see if they were true to their word as yet (this was about 6 months ago)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right...

 

Basically had virtually the same letter sent by them. Essentially they acknowledge my letter but cannot find the CCA. On that basis they believe the debt stil exists... but is unenforceable in court.

 

I am sending this back...

 

 

Dear ##########

I am writing in response to the letter you sent dated 14/05/09.

 

Unfortunately you did not respond in a satisfactory manner by not making reference to the section 10 Data Protection Act notice I sent. I must point out that this is a legal requirement on your part (on behalf of Robinson, Way and Company Ltd) to respond to this.

 

I shall reiterate what the notice states:

10. (3) The data controller must within twenty-one days of receiving a notice under subsection (1) (“the data subject notice”) give the individual who gave it a written notice—

(a) stating that he has complied or intends to comply with the data subject notice, or

(b) stating his reasons for regarding the data subject notice as to any extent unjustified and the extent (if any) to which he has complied or intends to comply with it.

 

 

Under section 10.4 I can make an application to the court to force you to comply with the order which will also involve me seeking redress for court costs and litigation time. Therefore it is the best interest for you to comply with the notice and write to me by June 3rd 16:00 which satisfies the 21 day notice period as defined in s.10 (3) of the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

If you do not intend to comply with this notice then please state this in your correspondence and please indicate that it is indeed a “final response” in line with your complaints procedure.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

#############

 

I am going to stick with the Data Protection Act 1998 s.10 complaint because they will be in default of that soon enough.

 

I am under the impression that without a CCA there is no debt?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No the debt still exists but it cannot be enforced in court.

 

Complain to the ICO re lack of CCA and non response to your S.10 notice.

 

babybear...

 

From my understanding an improperly executed agreement cannot be enforced in court but the debt still exists as a technicality. However, how can a debt exist if there is no credit agreement at all?

 

Similarly, there would be no contractual provision for them to be able to record my data based upon what I know about the Data Protection Act.

 

Therefore do you know on what legal basis they can report to the CRA's?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why I'm advising you to complain to the ICO as no agreement means they have no authority to process your data ;)

 

Ok... should I wait until I receive a final response from Robinson and Way or should I just send in a complaint regardless?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As they have admitted there is no agreement I'd personally complain straight away sending a copy of the letter you received from RW.

 

I just want to keep on the good side of the ICO... I sent the original s.10 notice on the 11th May... they have not yet complied but also have not ensured it is a final response. I only have to wait a few more days and then I will make a formal complaint to the ICO. I'm basically giving them time to comply with my original request.

 

Thanks for the advice so far... I will keep you updated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I thought they were out of time * blush*

 

No not yet lol... I have given them until 03/06/09 to come up with a resolution... if they haven't by then I will take them to court :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...