Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I received a Claim Form issued on 19 Jul 2021. The claimant is ParkingEye Limited.    The alleged offence took place on 22/10/2019. The particulars of claim read as follows:   "Claim for monies outstanding from the Defendant in relation to a Parking Charge (reference xxxxxx/xxxxxx) issued on 25/10/2019. The signage clearly displayed throughput University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff - Staff 4, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4XW states that this is private land, managed by ParkingEye Ltd, and that it is subject to terms and consitions, including auhotisation being required for parking, by which those who park agree to be bound (the contract). ParkingEye's ANPR system captured vehicle xxxxx entering and leaving the site on 22/10/2019, and parking without authorisation. Pursuant to Sch 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, notice has been given to the registered keeper, making them liable for the Parking Charge payable upon breach."   As they claim the PCN was issued in October 2019, I do not recall receiving anything in the post. I did receive a Final notice of Debt Recovery from dcbl, demanding £140. However, it had no reference on the letter so I just ignored it. I logged on to ParkingEye's portal to access photographic evidence and did not manage to find the complete PCN, however, there were just two pictures of the car with a time stamp (please see the attached files). I have copied the parking charge details from ParkingEye's website:   Parking charge details Parking Charge Reference: xxxxxx Vehicle Registration Number: xxxxxx Contravention date/time: 22/10/2019 19:41:52 Contravention location: University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff - Staff 4 Location address: Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4XW Stay duration: 0 hours 30 minutes Allowed duration: 0 hours 10 minutes Status: Open Outstanding balance: £155.00 (Please allow 24 hours after payment for it to be reflected on the balance)   I do not recall parking there, however I may have entered the car on multiple occasions on the day to turn the car around.   I visited the car park yesterday to take some pictures (please see the second attached file)   I have completed the AOS on moneyclaim.gov.uk   I am looking to file my defence based on the following points: The photographic evidence supplied by the claimant does not prove the car parked in the above mentioned car park. It just shows the front and the back of the car with two different time stamps. The notice which states that it is a staff car park is located right at the end of the car park, which is not noticeable as you approach the car park and the board seems fairly new to me, the claimant has not provided any proof to suggest that it was there when the alleged alleged offence took place? As they have allowed a 10 minute grace period, a £70 charge for 20 minutes is unreasonable.   Any advice would be much appreciated!! Thanks a lot. Parking Eye 2-converted.pdf 20210725_232345-converted_compressed.pdf
    • Technology firms are scrambling to add new features but will video calls improve.View the full article
    • Strong demand for houses will last into 2022 as buyers react to the pandemic, says property website Zoopla.View the full article
    • Just need a bit of clarification on this. I run my own online business so I think I've got it right, but just good to have some clarification. I bought some items via ibidder auction site. Typically trade and liquidated items for sale there.  The items were men's fragrances and as I gather, auctioneers skip out of a load of the legal consumer right act jargon (from what I recall). Anyway. Several of these fragrances arrived smashed to bits. I logged it with the auction house with all photo's and evidence, and the staff responding even agreed with me that it was clearly damaged in transit.  Anyway, rather than refund me right away or ask me to return said damaged items to get a refund (as should happen right? After all, they pay insurance for their own benefit, to protect themselves as the sender), they put a claim in without refunding me. It's like they have been waiting for compensation to pay me, and if that didn't happen, it's no money for me.  To stop this getting long, the courier refused the claim because the items they sent were prohibited. Terms state anything made partly of wholly of glass won't be compensated and even so, fragrance rules is no more than 4 per parcel (they sent me around 10). Of course that's not my fault, they are responsible for shipment of goods and if they choose to cut corners, then regardless of it being trade lots, that's on them, not me. They've breached compensation terms of the courier and yet because of them not getting compensation, they wont give me my money back, even though they agreed from the evidence that items were clearly damaged in transit.  My thoughts on this (please tell me if I'm wrong): First port of call as they aren't forthcoming via emails is to put the pressure on them. Truthful bad reviews on sites like trustpilot will surely make them want to do the right thing? (That step is already done, by all means I'm happy to hear that I was wrong or it was stupid).   If that fails then it's down to an LBA, not just for the amount lost out on but also for loss of value of other items in the package (glass, liquid damage to those items reducing the value) and reasonable hours lost where instead of putting into my own business, I've been dealing with them.    The sum is low, some £50 or so. Yet it's the principal. I have to deal with customers day in, day out and if I cut corners by not fully insuring shipments, then it's me who takes the brunt and has to refund the customer anyway, so why should another businesses risk mean I've lost out? Thanks
    • both pages are in the earlier upload LFI   dx  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Amex Platinum Charge Card


alangee
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4261 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

Can monies be transferred from a regulated agreement (Amex Flex Account attached to the charge card) to the unregulated agreement (Charge Card) each month? My thinking is that they are two separate accounts and should be treated so. Otherwise what is to stop Amex transferring all the regulated credit facility into the unregulated credit facility?

 

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Letter from Amex informing me they have sold the account. Surprised that they would sell a charge card account, but not overly bothered. I wonder if they got a good price for it, as they offered me 60% off.

 

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Alan!

 

Mmmm...that's interesting!

 

Must be something wrong with the alleged Agreement in that case, because Amex don't tend to sell their alleged Debts!

 

I'd have a good slow and long look through all of your paperwork, and also get a SAR off to Amex soon. Not just yet, wait a little while for the Sale to appear in their documents, so that you get to see anything useful.

 

Be on standby to CCA/S.A.R. any DCA pond life that appears, and have the no harassment strategy ready as well.

 

The hassle will start all over again when the DCA tries to collect, so let them start, then get ready to prod them in both eyes once they have made a few calls and you have a sequence of harassment established.

 

Also, hunt out the Default Notices and Cancellation letters, because they could well add some real meat to your counter-attack against the DCA when they come collecting.

 

Cheers,

BRW

Link to post
Share on other sites

BRW do you think section 173 could be appropriate in this case?

 

Alan

 

Contracting-out forbidden

 

173

 

(1) A term contained in a regulated agreement or linked transaction, or in any other agreement relating to an actual or prospective regulated agreement or linked transaction, is void if, and to the extent that, it is inconsistent with a provision for the protection of the debtor or hirer or his relative or any surety contained in this Act or in any regulation made under this Act.

 

(2) Where a provision specifies the duty or liability of the debtor or hirer or his relative or any surety in certain circumstances, a term is inconsistent with that provision if it purports to impose, directly or indirectly, an additional duty or liability on him in those circumstances.

 

(3) Notwithstanding subsection (1), a provision of this Act under which a thing may be done in relation to any person on an order of the court or the [F1 OFT] only shall not be taken to prevent its being done at any time with that person’s consent given at that time, but the refusal of such consent shall not give rise to any liability.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They issued their normal invalid Default Notice for the Flex account, and then terminated about three weeks later.

 

At the time it was terminated, they had transferred three payments from the Flex account to the charge card. It is this part where they appear to be overcoming CCA1974.

 

Alan

Edited by alangee
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Alan!

 

They issued their normal invalid Default Notice for the Flex account, and then terminated about three weeks later.

 

That's good as far as that one goes.

 

At the time it was terminated, they had transferred three payments from the Flex account to the charge card. It is this part where they appear to be overcoming CCA1974.

 

Yes, it does indeed.

 

I would think this must go against the OFT Debt Collection Guidelines, i.e. they are using Debt to pay off other Debt, so that could be a breach on those grounds perhaps.

 

Cheers,

BRW

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Hi Hestia

 

I am still corresponding with CapQuest - the DCA they sold it to. I am still trying to confirm if it was an absolute or equitable sale. Neither Amex or CapQuest seem to want to answer my question, which is interesting.

 

The DN is faulty - I have never seen a good one from Amex yet. They do not have an agreement for the Flex account, and the application for the charge card was for another card that was fully paid up about 8 years ago, so, I just answer their threat letters with 'Account in Dispute'.

 

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...