Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Caught with Freedom Pass - Old CodJA/ UNDERGROUND help! What to do?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4610 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

You're right SPRO, I should be heavily fined and I completely accept responsibility for these actions.

 

However I disagree that it should be as 'serious' as to be prosecuted, possibly leading to a mark on a CRB which seems rediculously excessive. After all no one or no property has been harmed and with a heavy fine LU would be getting back more than they lost and I have definitely learned my lesson.

 

My main question was whether anyone else has had CCTV evidence used against them..

 

You may believe this is not a 'serious' matter, but it is worth taking note of the CPS view on the subject. In their own words:

 

'Fare Evasion is the principal form of dishonesty to affect public transport. The fact that it is widespread is a relevant public interest factor and we must also take account of the general principles covering prosecution for all offences of dishonesty'

 

Your post suggets that you admitted using the Freedom Pass during the previous two weeks, but unless you mentioned specific dates & times and were questioned under caution for those additional offences, you should only be charged with the one offence for which you were detected and reported.

 

There are no guarantees, but your best option is to write to the rail company, offering to pay the fares due and any reasonable costs incurred by them in recovering the fare as an alternative to being prosecuted.

 

Make sure that you apologise for your uncharacteristic use of someone else's Oyster

 

Be sure to give an undertaking to always ensure that you hold a valid ticket before travelling in future.

 

Have a look at the 'MissyLow' thread for further detail.

Edited by Old-CodJA
Link to post
Share on other sites

With Oyster cards ALL journeys are kept on file, if the officers can pin down dates and times as to when they think that you have travelled using such pass, then yes they can request a copy of the CCTV for the gateline area, to see if they can spot you tapping in or out, but they would ahve to be specific as to a day and time span. we recently done it for someone to prove that they didnt come into work, we ask for the cctv footage between the time that they say they came in and left, to see if we cld prove or disprove what the employee has said.

 

Absolutely right, I do the checks too where justified, but the 'suspect' still has to be made aware of the specific charges alleged and must be given an opportunity to respond.

 

Yes, all Oyster journeys are kept on file. However, only the most recent 8 weeks are immediately accessible and any CCTV footage that may exist is not available indefinitely unless a serious incident has been captured and preserved during the given time-span that you are asking to be examined.

 

Where staff travel Oysters (and nominee) are concerned, as suggested in your example, it is of course quite a bit easier too.

 

I am a firm believer in making everyone aware of the penalty that they might face, but I also like to see it done in a fair manner and try not to increase any fears unnecessarily.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In honesty CCTV footage is rarely of any value in such cases because the imagery is not high quality and whilst it may show a hand passing over a reader, it cannot conclusively show what the hand held.

 

Now I understand that confirmation of that action may be all you are seeking, but this might easily be discredited for that reason if someone has been charged with fare evasion. Equally, it might give the Magistrates sufficient doubt to acquit, but I would expect the prosecutor would also have evidence that the validation point was working normally and that the traveller's card history showed no valid ticket.

 

Dumbelling is the name given to the practice of avoiding a fare by using two tickets that do not cover a whole journey. Adopting this pracyice guarantees that a traveller will be prosecuted when detected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for hijack, just to confirm really, but:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-2361300.html

 

Am I right in assuming that son is going to lose his Oyster card altogether? Is there any way to avoid this? I know he's an idiot (even HE knows he's an idiot... now), but without the card, guess who's going to get lumped with the cost of travel when he goes back to college. :-(

 

This is taken from the DLR/TfL Conditions of Carriage:

 

10.2. If we believe that you have used or tried to use any ticket or Oyster card to defraud us we may cancel and not re-issue it. If this happens, we will not give you a refund of the remaining value of the ticket, or refund any credit or deposit paid for the Oyster card

Your son might try writing to the office with a full explanation and appealling to their better nature.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

Mr Dell, it seems that you have posted the same query on 3 or 4 different threads, which may well lead to a lot of confusion.

 

Perhaps the site team can resolve that so that we can give any suggestions all in one place

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4610 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...