Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No, do the section 75 chargeback to your credit card provider.
    • See what dx thinks but it seems to me that sending a photo of your own pass isn't relevant to what happened. Let's wait and see what he says. HB
    • 1st letter image.pdf1st letter 2nd page.pdf
    • Many thanks for the replies and advice!   I what to send this email to the Starbucks CEO and the area manager. Your thoughts would be appreciated.   [email protected] [email protected]   Re: MET Parking PNC at your Starbucks Southgate site   Dear Ms Rayner, / Dear Heather Christie,   I have received a Notice to Keeper regarding a Parking Charge Notice of £100 for the driver parking in the Southgate Park Car Park, otherwise infamously known as the Stanstead Starbucks/McDonalds car park(s).   Issued by: MET Parking Services Ltd Parking Charge Notice Number: XXXXXXXXX Vehicle Registration Number: XXXX XXX Date of Contravention: XX.XX.XXXX Time: XX:XX - XX:XX   After a little research it apears that the driver is not alone in being caught in what is commonly described as a scam, and has featured in the national press and on the mainstream television.   It is a shame that the reputation of Starbucks is being tarnished by this, with your customers leaving the lowest possible reviews on Trustpilot and Trip Advisor at this location, and to be associated with what on the face of it appears to be a doubious and predatory car park management company.   In this instance, during the early hours of the morning the driver required a coffee and parked up outside Starbucks with the intention of purchasing one from yourselves. Unfortunately, you were closed so the driver walked to McDonalds next door and ordered a coffee, and for this I have received the Notice to Keeper.   It is claimed that the car park is two separate car parks (Starbucks/McDonalds). However, there is no barrier or road markings to identity a boundary, and the signage in the car park(s) and outside your property is ambiguous, as such the terms would most likely be deemed unfair and unenforcable under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   I understand that Starbucks-Euro Garages neither operate or benefit from the charges imposed by MET Parking. However, MET Parking is your client.   Additionally, I understand that the charge amount of £100 had previously been upheld in court due to a ‘legitimate interest in making sure that a car park was run as efficiently as possible to benefit other drivers as well as the local stores, keeping cars from overstaying’.   However, this is not applicable when the shop or store is closed (as was the case here), as there is no legitimate interest. Therefore, the amount demanded is a penalty and is punitive, again contravening the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   As the driver’s intention of the visit was genuine, I would be grateful if you could please instruct your client to cancel this Notice to Keeper/Parking Charge Notice.   Kind regards
    • I received the promised call back from the Saga man today who informed me that the undertakers have decreed it IS a modification and they will need to recalculate a quote individually for me. However it all sounds very arbitrary. The more I think about it, and with help from forum replies, the more I am sure that it is not a modification. If for example the original seatback had become damaged by a spillage or a tear, I would be entitled to replace it with the nearest available part. The problem is when it comes to a payout after an accident, there is no telling what an individual insurer will decide when he notices the change. I am still undecided which of the two best routes to go with, either don't mention the replacement at all, or fill in the quote form without mentioning, and when it comes to buying the insurance over the phone, mention it at the time.
  • 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

Eek, a Vodaphone!!!!!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5375 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

Hi everybody

 

Received a lovely letter today from a DCA regarding an account with vodaphone in the sum of around 300 of your english pounds. (if you're wondering the DCA is Wescot)

 

I read somewhere that the CCA doesnt apply to mobile contracts, so I just wondered what the next course of action would be for me, and if the CCA doesnt apply, does this mean they can basically send me anything and I just have to pay?

 

I'm also not really sure if it is actually mine. I only remember having 1 mobile contract and that was with Orange, but it is possible that I've forgotten having one with them. I also don't see how I could have used £300 of call credit in a month. I say a month because I asked a friend who works for vodaphone and he said they cut you off from making calls if you don't pay your bill.

 

So anyway, hope that all makes sense, and any suggestions as to the next course of action would be very much appreciated :D

 

Thanks everybody!

Edited by Youslaa
errr, typos
Link to post
Share on other sites

you could send them a 'prove it' letter

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Account no:

 

You have contacted me/us regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself/ourselves.

 

I/we would point out that I/we have no knowledge of any such debt being owed to (insert company name).

 

I am/we are familiar with the Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidance which states that it unfair to send demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question.

 

I/we would also point out that the OFT say under the Guidance that it is unfair to pursue third parties for payment when they are not liable. In not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt you are using deceptive/and or unfair methods.

 

Furthermore ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment amounts to physical/psychological harassment.

 

I/we would ask that no further contact be made concerning the above account unless you can provide evidence as to my/our liability for the debt in question.

 

I/we await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed. Otherwise I will have no option but to make a complaint to the trading standards department and consider informing the OFT of your actions.

 

I/we look forward to your reply.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

(Your Name) Print do not sign

 

see what they come back with :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical, you try to get them to go away and they ignore you......

 

Thanks Saintly, I'll get that off to them in the morning, and wait to be promptly ignored. Oh the joys of dealing with these muppets.

 

Just had another read of my letter and it seems they're acting on behalf of Vodaphone rather than having actually bought the debt.

 

Is there a letter I can send them to say I only want to deal with Vodaphone. I'm sure I saw one like that once but can't seem to find it now. Does anyone know if this exists or have I just eaten too many picnic eggs and gone slightly crazy? (picnic eggs past midnight ftw!!)

 

Thanks for the swift replies. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, so here's what I'm sending off to them tomorrow, with a bit added by myself :D It's cheeky time

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Account no:

 

You have contacted me/us regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself/ourselves.

 

I/we would point out that I/we have no knowledge of any such debt being owed to (insert company name).

 

I am/we are familiar with the Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidance which states that it unfair to send demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question.

 

I/we would also point out that the OFT say under the Guidance that it is unfair to pursue third parties for payment when they are not liable. In not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt you are using deceptive/and or unfair methods.

 

Furthermore ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment amounts to physical/psychological harassment.

 

I/we would ask that no further contact be made concerning the above account unless you can provide evidence as to my/our liability for the debt in question. Any further demands for payment without evidence of my liability will be met with a further copy of this letter and a charge of £10 per letter levied against you. Should I receive any more of these demands without the requested evidence, it will be deemed that you are in agreement to pay the £10 sum per letter.

 

I/we await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed. Otherwise I will have no option but to make a complaint to the trading standards department and consider informing the OFT of your actions.

 

I/we look forward to your reply.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

(Your Name) Print do not sign

 

 

Just wish I could see the looks on their face when they get that. Even if it legally doesnt mean anything, just turning the tables and being cheeky is good enough. Plus I think it would be a fair basis for compansation if I ever took them to court. (ah thats why I love this site, 6 months ago I wouldve been a wreck thinking they might take me to court.......now I'm talking about taking them to court and I don't even know if it's my debt) :D

 

Oh happy days

Edited by Youslaa
can't type today
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Youslaa,

 

Have you had a reply to your letter yet?

 

If not and you'd us to take a look at this just email your details using the 'Contact us' form on the Vodafone website which you can access here.

 

When sending your email could you include within the body of it a link to this thread and the code WRT135?

 

Thanks,

 

Lee

 

Web Relations Team

 

Vodafone UK

Edited by Lee_Vodafone
Link to post
Share on other sites

I will repeat here whats been said elsewhere.

Over the last 3 years we have seen more than our share of trolls,and those who have come onto CAG with a purported impression that they were here to give help and assistance.

It is therefore understandable that some members will not be so welcoming of those who come here giving the same undertakings as we have heard so many times before.

The Vodafone Webteam initiative is something that should be embraced,and they should be given the chance to demonstrate their intent.

I think it is only fair that they are given opportunity to show this,and should be given credit for their willingness to try.

Vodafone is the only mobile operator/provider to have shown willingness to assist customers with problems-for me this shows concern over contempt.

 

CAG exists first and foremost for consumers and will always be so,the Vodafone Webteam does not claim that they will be be able to resolve everyones problems,and we all know that no one is perfect they wont always get things right first time.

But a focus on resolving customer care issues and keeping customers,is something the rest should be doing.

As it stands at this moment theres no sign of that-which has to tell you something dont you think ?

 

There is now stickied info in this forum which can get the ball rolling.If Vodafone Webteam are true to their word,then those with issues here will not have spent some time reading this in vain.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This reminds me of the time Vodafone breached their own contract with me to the point of fraudulently obtaining money from my bank account and then when I stopped my dd to them they passed my account to a dca, who then turned up on my doorstep looking money. I showed them the correspondence with Vodafone and they rescinded assignment of the "debt" on the spot. I haven't seen or heard from Vodafone or the dca since - that must be 4 years now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...