Jump to content

You can now change your notification sounds by going to this link https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/index.php?/&app=soundboard&module=soundboard&controller=managesounds

 

You can find a library of free notification sounds in several places on the Internet. Here's one which has a very large selection https://notificationsounds.com/notification-sounds

 

 

BankFodder BankFodder

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I thank the Consumer Action Group Members for getting me this far in my case which is still in progress.   Situation: The Court has reversed earlier permission for me to rely on witness summaries.    The question upon which I am seeking help, please,  is - do I need to bother myself as to why the Court has reversed permission to rely on witness summaries?  If so, what line of logic or law can might I follow because clearly, the Court has said one thing and then another a few weeks later, of its own motion, the Court has reversed the earlier decision. I find this development quite extraordinary in the sense that as a result of being granted permission earlier, I served the three Witness Summons which had the Court stamp.   Background Having given me permission to serve 'Witness Summons' which I served on 3 hostile witnesses several weeks ago, the Court has now reversed it's earlier decision, and refused me permission to rely on 'witness summaries' pursuant to paragraph 32.9(2), citing that I have not shown steps taken to obtain witness statements from the 3 hostile witnesses.  I however, made two attempts to talk to the hostile witnesses who have been non responsive and I can evidence this.   I would be immensely grateful for some steer from Forum Members, please.
    • Pubs all seem to be doing a roaring trade around here. It does make me feel uncomfortable but At least they are finally making some money. Our area, the South West never really got hit badly by the pandemic. Wiltshire has regularly seeing zero confirmed cases and deaths. So we will have to see how opening pubs really pans out!     
    • Thanks for filling in the forum sticky and well done on reading up.  The more info. we all take in, the more we know what the real legal position is and how to fight sharks like CEL.   As you'll have seen, CEL are one of the most dishonest and greediest of the PPCs.  If you had indisputable proof that your car was on Mars at the time, they'd find a way to reject your appeal!  Sadly POPLA has become more & more useless, as your experience shows.  Instead of managing the car park in a professional manner, it's highly likely that CEL don't illuminate the signs at night deliberately in order to catch out motorists like yourself.   The good news is that the only person who can make you pay this "debt" is a judge, after a court case.  So from now on ignore any begging letters from CEL and/or their rent-a-threat DCAs, but do not ignore a Letter Before Action/Claim which is a formal notice of intention to start court proceedings.  However, don't waste your time while ignoring them, build a case.  Like dx says, look up the planning permission.  If the KFC is local to you, go back in the evening and get pix of their pathetic signage.  Please post up what you wrote in your appeal too.   As a belt & braces approach, get on to KFC and demand they cancel the ticket.  Show all the proof you were a genuine customer and point out that you stayed an extra 19 minutes because you were consuming more food & drink!  However, what we often find is that the bod who runs the local branch often doesn't have much power, so don't faff around.  If the local branch don't cancel within 48 hours get on to to the area manager, and if you get no joy there in 48 hours go to CEO level.   It's highly likely that if you had complained to KFC straight away and ignored CEL's kangaroo court procedure that the matter would have been resolved there & then, but hey, what is done is done and you still have a great chance of seeing off these fleecers.
    • if you are twisting sideways to takaway pubs? rather than opening pubs as you initially referred   ... thats always been cheaper at off licences and supermarkets isn't it, and rather defeats the point of pubs, and restaurants?   WHAT are you actually saying/claiming/suggestion if anything?
    • They have got a plan https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-coronavirus-covid-19/restaurants-offering-takeaway-or-delivery   It seems pretty clear to me.
  • Our picks

    • Currys Refuse Refund F/Freezer 5day old. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422656-currys-refuse-refund-ffreezer-5day-old/
      • 5 replies
    • Hi,  
      I was in Sainsbury’s today and did scan and shop.
      I arrived in after a busy day at work and immediately got distracted by the clothes.
       
      I put a few things in my trolley and then did a shop.
      I paid and was about to get into my car when the security guard stopped me and asked me to come back in.
       
      I did and they took me upstairs.
      I was mortified and said I forgot to scan the clothes and a conditioner, 5 items.
      I know its unacceptable but I was distracted and Initially hadn’t really planned to use scan and shop.
       
      No excuse.
      I offered to pay for the goods but the manager said it was too late.
      He looked at the CCTV and because I didn’t try to scan the items he was phoning the police.
       
      The cost of the items was about £40.
      I was crying at this point and told them I was a nurse, just coming from work and I could get struck off.
       
      They rang the police anyway and they came and issued me with a community resolution notice, which goes off my record in a year.
      I feel terrible. I have to declare this to my employer and NMC.
       
      They kept me in a room on my own with 4 staff and have banned me from all stores.
      The police said if I didn’t do the community order I would go to court and they would refer me to the PPS.
       
      I’m so stressed,
      can u appeal this or should I just accept it?
       
      Thanks for reading 
      • 6 replies
    • The courier industry – some basic points for customers. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421913-the-courier-industry-%E2%80%93-some-basic-points-for-customers/
      • 1 reply
    • The controversial sub-prime lender says the City watchdog is investigating its practices.
      View the full article
      • 0 replies
style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3977 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I have enclosed links of communication with marstons, and my recent request. I would like to check if marstons claims are unfair and exorbitant, if so i would like to claim for some refund if possible were errors can be identified. thanks in advance.

http://i561.photobucket.com/albums/ss53/deepmind/mars1a.jpg

http://i561.photobucket.com/albums/ss53/deepmind/mars2a.jpg

http://i561.photobucket.com/albums/ss53/deepmind/mars3.jpg

http://s561.photobucket.com/albums/ss53/deepmind/mars4.jpg

http://i561.photobucket.com/albums/ss53/deepmind/mars5a.jpg

http://i561.photobucket.com/albums/ss53/deepmind/mars6a.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You were lucky they have a complaints proceedure...Phoenix didn't even reply to me..more fool them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there are no dates next to your charges

need more info did the bailiffs leave a walking possession agreement what charges are on this

when did they clamp your car

when did the remove your car

H P I charge i take it that this is to check if the car is on H P there is no legislation saying they can charge this

i would say your levy fee is wrong levy fee £177.43

The Enforcement of Road Traffic Debts (Certificated Bailiffs) (Amendment) Regulations 2003

For preparing and sending a letter advising the debtor that a warrant is with the bailiff and requesting the total sum due, the fee is £11.20.

 

For levying distress, where the sum demanded and due does not exceed £100, the fee is £28.00; and where the sum demanded and due exceeds £100, the fee 28% on the first £200 and on any additional sum over £200, the fee is 5.5%.

Edited by hallowitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this may also help you

 

In the Central London County Court - Case No 8CL51015 - Anthony Culligan (Claimant) v 1. Jason Simkin & 2. Marstons (Defendants). Before District Judge Advent 9th & 24th September 2008

 

Mr Culligan challenged the bailiffs fees & charges imposed by Mr Simkin and Marstons when levying distress and seeking to remove Mr Culigans car for non-payment of a Penalty Charge Notice issued by the London Borough of Camden.

 

The Judgment goes a long way to clarify exactly what a Bailiff can charge for levying distress. Bailiffs have always sought to charge for fixing an immobilisation device by clamping a vehicle, and an attendance to remove. These charges in Anthony Culligan's case were £200 (£100 for the clamp and £100 for attendance to remove). The Bailiffs have argued that the Fee Regulations permit them to make a charge for levying distress (that is 28% on the first £200 demanded, and for removing goods, or attending to remove goods where no goods are removed, reasonable costs and charges). Bailiffs have claimed that the costs of putting on a clamp, etc. are costs to be included in attending to remove where no goods are removed, if payment is made before the vehicle concerned is removed.

 

 

 

 

DJ Avent, after considering Case Law and Statute, has found that the purpose of putting on a clamp is to "impound" the vehicle and is not part of the costs of removal. This is because:-

 

1. The Bailiff's obligation is to secure the vehicle, and the simplest and easiest way to do this is to "immobilise" it so it cannot be driven away. This is effectively the equal of impounding the goods.

 

2. The Fee Regulations provide for a distinction between the levying of distress and removal of goods. There is a gap between the two stages. The purpose of this "gap" is to allow the debtor to make payment of what is due after the first stage.

 

DJ Avent says at paragraph 50 of his Judgment:-

 

"Accordingly, in my judgment the bailiff should not and, as a matter of law cannot take any steps to remove goods until he has given the debtor a reasonable opportunity to pay what is due at the time of seizure. This being so I cannot see that Form 7 can or should include any costs of removal. Mr. Simkin included on the Form 7 he produced for Mr. Culligan the sum of £100 in respect of the immobilisation device. If, as the Defendants now argue, that was part of the removal expenses, it should never have been included in Form 7".

 

The District Judge went on to find that the application of the clamp falls within the act of levying distress and does not form part of the removal process, whatever the Bailiff's Contract with Camden says.

 

The Bailiff also charged Anthony Culligan £100 for the " reasonable costs " of removing the vehicle (although the vehicle was never actually removed) in that a tow truck was called and actually arrived at Anthony Culligan's home. Because the Bailiff produced no evidence as to how the charge had been arrived at he was unable to show that it was reasonable.

 

The District Judge in his conclusion says:

 

"I am also conscious that my findings in this case ... may have wider consequences and may cause problems for bailiffs because they will not be able to charge for immobilising a vehicle as a separate charge but must include it within the cost of levying distress. To do otherwise would, in my judgment, be unlawful... I would also add that if the Defendant or either of them in the light of this judgment now continued to apply such charges in the manner in which they have done up to now and, specifically, charge fees of £100 for applying an immobilisation device then that would amount to conduct which may well then found a legitimate complaint because in my judgment it would be unlawful....".

 

What this means in effect is that Bailiffs who continue to make unlawful charges may be guilty of misconduct and have their Certificates removed.

 

You should know however that Marstons obtained permission to appeal from the District Judge. His reasons for granting the permission were :

 

"The bailiff was following the practice in force for 15 years. No one has challenged the right to charge for wheelclamping before.

My decision that they cannot do so (at least to the extent that they have charged until now) not only affects the London Borough of Camden but also every Borough with de-criminalised parking.

 

Accordingly, it has significant local and possible National implications and that is a compelling reason why an appeal should be heard"

 

 

Bailiffs chose not to pursue appeal of detailed assesment decision topics The baillif company having been granted leave to appeal the decsion have decided not to pursue the application

 

The Judge had specified in granting permission to appeal "The bailiff was following the practice in force for 15 years. No one has challenged the right to charge for wheelclamping before.

 

My decision that they cannot do so (at least to the extent that they have charged until now) not only affects the London Borough of Camden but also every Borough with de-criminalised parking.

 

Accordingly, it has significant local and possible National implications and that is a compelling reason why an appeal should be heard"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks a lot for the info. my car was not clamped but was towed on 11/05/09 at 6.30am according to POLICE since TRACE could not get any info on thier system. My car is registered at eastbourne and towed from some london address. I made two different payments to marstons (1)580.20 on there website with receipt and requested for the car and was told i need another 152.56 which they could not explain reasons for extra cost. I obliged to realese the car to avoid more cost. I work in london and stay eastborne over weekends. have only received three letters from marstons noting more. Apart from the two above the third was sent a day after the removal.

http://i561.photobucket.com/albums/ss53/deepmind/mars7a.jpg. I would write using the dowloaded template from this site requesting more info, as my initial letter to marstons might have been vague.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have enclosed links of communication with marstons, and my recent request. I would like to check if marstons claims are unfair and exorbitant, if so i would like to claim for some refund if possible were errors can be identified. thanks in advance.

http://i561.photobucket.com/albums/ss53/deepmind/mars1a.jpg

http://i561.photobucket.com/albums/ss53/deepmind/mars2a.jpg

http://i561.photobucket.com/albums/ss53/deepmind/mars3.jpg

http://s561.photobucket.com/albums/ss53/deepmind/mars4.jpg

http://i561.photobucket.com/albums/ss53/deepmind/mars5a.jpg

http://i561.photobucket.com/albums/ss53/deepmind/mars6a.jpg

 

 

Thank you so much for posting this.

 

I am staggered that Marston Group are charging fees such as this. In particular in light of the ruling by District Judge Avent in the case of Anthony Culligan v Marston Group.

 

In addition, questions need to be asked as to how this company have calculated "levy charges" of £177.43!! What is this for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks a lot for the info. my car was not clamped but was towed on 11/05/09 at 6.30am according to POLICE since TRACE could not get any info on thier system. My car is registered at eastbourne and towed from some london address. I made two different payments to marstons (1)580.20 on there website with receipt and requested for the car and was told i need another 152.56 which they could not explain reasons for extra cost. I obliged to realese the car to avoid more cost. I work in london and stay eastborne over weekends. have only received three letters from marstons noting more. Apart from the two above the third was sent a day after the removal.

http://i561.photobucket.com/albums/ss53/deepmind/mars7a.jpg. I would write using the dowloaded template from this site requesting more info, as my initial letter to marstons might have been vague.

.

 

 

I have just read the documents again and can you confirm that you wrote to Marston Group on 20th May AND 3rd June but that they failed to respond to both letters until 27th July.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes! and that's why the apologised on the last letter with the charges. Thanks! will add to my complains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to jump in on your thread, but my son received a letter from them in June for alleged "multiple offences" in 2005, to the tune of £285.00. I wrote back on his behalf, requesting an explanation of these offences.

They wrote back "Vehicle fail to comply with double white lines and using a mobile whilst driving". They refuse to enter further correspondence and say that are instructed to enforce entry. I have written again asking for make,model and registration no. of vehicle. My son has not had received any other notification of this fine. I have also taking the precaution of sending a letter from his girlfriend, who owns the house and contents as recommended on CAG, to protect her and her child

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry to jump in on your thread, but my son received a letter from them in June for alleged "multiple offences" in 2005, to the tune of £285.00. I wrote back on his behalf, requesting an explanation of these offences.

They wrote back "Vehicle fail to comply with double white lines and using a mobile whilst driving". They refuse to enter further correspondence and say that are instructed to enforce entry. I have written again asking for make,model and registration no. of vehicle. My son has not had received any other notification of this fine. I have also taking the precaution of sending a letter from his girlfriend, who owns the house and contents as recommended on CAG, to protect her and her child

 

Taking the side of Marston Group for one minute they DO NOT have any obligation to write to you UNLESS your son had provided a Letter of Authority.

 

if your son has not received any notification of these fines then he simply needs to file a STATUTORY DECLARATION with the Magistrates Court that issued the original fines.

 

HOWEVER...

 

There is a STRICT TIME LIMIT in which this can be done. He MUST send this within 21 days of becoming aware of the fact !!!

Edited by tomtubby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that. I only typed the letter. He signed it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for that. I only typed the letter. He signed it!

 

Is he able to file a Statutory Declaration?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume he will have to go to the court nin person. Is that so?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He will not need to go to court to do this . A valid Statutory Declaration will cancel the fine and cancel the Distress warrant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I've just printed down a form "statutory declaration under s.73(2) Road TRaffic ofenders Act 1988" Is this the one? It looks like a declaration has to be done in the presence of a Justice of the Peace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mummybird,

 

The offences you mention sound like fixed penalties issued by a police officer. Is this is the case, a statutory declaration by your son suggesting he knew nothing of the offences will be useless as details of where to pay and by when are printed on the back!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He says the nasty letters from Marstons are the first he's heard of this alleged offence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the Magistrates in question will be able to jog his memory if he phones them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...