Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It sounds as if they need better algorithms or another way to check. DWP algorithm wrongly flags 200,000 people for possible fraud and error | Housing benefit | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Exclusive: Two-thirds of housing benefit claims marked as high risk in last three years were legitimate, figures show  
    • I'm afraid that both yourself and we will need to see the claim form as a basic minimum. As this person has issued proceedings, we can't go any further at all without understanding the detail of what they are claiming on the basis of the claim. When you receive a claim form then you might normally respond within 14 days either with a defence or an acknowledgement of service. If you don't respond with either of these then the claimant can go ahead and obtain a judgement against you in default and that then becomes a bit tricky and also a bit expensive to overturn – called "a set-aside" If you don't file a defence but you supply an acknowledgement, then you get a further 14 days so up to 28 days to file a defence. I understand that you have had difficulties accessing the claim form. I'm afraid I don't know why that is not sure how much help we can give you on that. You're going to have to do this is a matter of urgency whatever the runs are rights of your position are. Once we understand the claim form, then we can advise you as to the next step and also we can put the claim in the context of your own story and decide how best to defend. I'm at a bit of the lost to give any more constructive advice at this point. Access to the claim form is essential. You could telephone the County Court business centre which I think is in Northampton. They have a helpline and maybe they can give you some solutions – but in the meantime, why can't you access the password reset? Have you checked your spam folder?
    • Thanks very much BankFodder, your help is invaluable and I will read through it more carefully this evening.  At this time I am not aware of any information I have left out. And thanks to jk2054, I realised after sending it about the third party rights, you are absolutely correct and I will proceed as standard BOC claim. I'll come back with any questions once I've had a thorough re-read and so I hope to get the letter emailed and posted early this week so I can start the 14 day clock. Thanks again, M
    • The original LOC is wrong. You are nothing to do with third party rights.   you placed the order on EVRi's website so there is no third party rights in it, its a standard BOC claim
    • nike pre provide the labels arguably here the easiest target is nike because they will give in very easily.  
  • 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

PCN - Failing to comply with a no entry sign in Rye Lane SE15


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5262 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

Hello.

 

:confused: Newbie to this particular forum but hope you can help/advise.

 

On my first trip to Peckham armed with my Google directions it seems I went through a no entry sign. To my recollection I did not why would I, yet if I did, it was definately unintentional. The picture they sent with the PCN shows my car and the date that I was in Peckham but not much else. The PCN does state that the contravention has been recorded on video tape, so am going to ask for a copy to be sent to me as I don't fancy risking a trip to Walworth Road, which again is unfamiliar territory to me.

 

I have uploaded the PCN so those with the knowledge/experience of these can advise me as to whether or not it is worth challenging. Having said that, I guess without the video evidence there may not be much you can advise at this stage? (Pic is quite dark and grainy, hope you can make it out)

 

Thanks in the meantime.

PCN Peckham 1.pdf

PCN Peckham.pdf

PCN Peckham 3.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mam62,

Sorry to advise you, whether it was intentional or not, the wrongful act has been done. Although your driving offence is classed as a crime, you dont have to have a guilty mind; as in other crimes. Your only hope really is that the video does not show the sign that you allegedly went through. Write to them and ask if you can have a copy of the video evidence. Just one other thought, have you reveived a Notice of Intended Prosecution. Sctn 172 statement of driver at the time of the offence declaration. If you havent thenm in my humble opinion the ticket is unlawful. If you fail to comply with a regulatory traffic sign , you have ti be NIP'd. If they havent done that the offence is out of the window. I live up north and someone else may advise me of some special local law which states they don't have to NIP you, but until then my advice stands.

 

Hope this helps - Cheers - Scousegeezer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mam62,

Sorry to advise you, whether it was intentional or not, the wrongful act has been done. Although your driving offence is classed as a crime, you dont have to have a guilty mind; as in other crimes. Your only hope really is that the video does not show the sign that you allegedly went through. Write to them and ask if you can have a copy of the video evidence. Just one other thought, have you reveived a Notice of Intended Prosecution. Sctn 172 statement of driver at the time of the offence declaration. If you havent thenm in my humble opinion the ticket is unlawful. If you fail to comply with a regulatory traffic sign , you have ti be NIP'd. If they havent done that the offence is out of the window. I live up north and someone else may advise me of some special local law which states they don't have to NIP you, but until then my advice stands.

 

Hope this helps - Cheers - Scousegeezer.

 

 

Ignore all the above in most London moving traffic offences are decriminalised and dealt with outside the Court system.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:confused: Sorry for the delay, internet connection is hit and miss today.

 

Many thanks for your reply's.

 

No I came from Barry road, then on to Peckham Rye. Is Rye lane off there somewhere? I am totally unfamiliar with the area (I guess that's obvious).

Link to post
Share on other sites

:confused: Sorry for the delay, internet connection is hit and miss today.

 

Many thanks for your reply's.

 

No I came from Barry road, then on to Peckham Rye. Is Rye lane off there somewhere? I am totally unfamiliar with the area (I guess that's obvious).

 

barry road peckham - Google Maps

 

How about here...look familiar? There are so many no entry in the area you need to see the cctv I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi green_and_mean.

 

:confused: It does look somewhat familiar but I remember I had to do a right into Copeland road because of the 'buses only' signs to the left.

 

I turned right down Consort road, then onto Clayton road.

 

I think things started getting more confusing after that. I remember doing a left into Peckham High street. Could that have been where I went wrong? I did not see any signs to say I couldn't turn left but admittedly, there were buses stopped on the left just before the traffic lights. Maybe there was a sign where the buses were?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Just received one of these - I can't spot a no-entry on rye lane except for the one at the top of the 'high street'

 

Of course, the PCN is no help as to where this was supposed to have occured.

 

I'll be appealing - if only to find out where they are talking about!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just received one of these - I can't spot a no-entry on rye lane except for the one at the top of the 'high street'

 

Of course, the PCN is no help as to where this was supposed to have occured.

 

I'll be appealing - if only to find out where they are talking about!

 

You are entitled to view video before making an appeal and should do so or you will be appealing blind with no idea of what took place,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there,

 

I've just spent the last 30 mins examining the area in question on Google and there seems to be at least one 'no entry' (except buses) where the signage seems a little iffy to me. For eaxmple here;

 

Barry Road Southwark, London SE15, United Kingdom - Google Maps

 

the signs should be in a line on both sides of the road, but here the one on the right is further back than the one on the left. Plus the blue 'turn left ahead' sign appears to be too high up so in my opinion, they are unenforcable. Waht do the rest of you guys think?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

OK - I appealed on this basis:

 

The PCN does not state the precise location of the alleged contravention. There are a number of no entry signs listed in the document attached to this letter (from http://www.southwark.gov.uk/Uploads/FILE_26911.pdf) it is unclear from the PCN which of these have been contravened.

The PCN states "A penalty charge of £120 is payable and must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of this notice" I contend that the wording of this PCN is invalid, as it gives 28 days from the date of service of the notice. This is incorrect. This wording mis-states my legal position and does not comply with the relevant statues (The London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003, Section 4 (8) iii and iv), which clearly states the 14 and 28 day periods begin with the date of notice, not the date of service of the notice. I refer you again to a recent PATAS case 2070445427: Pulp Faction Recycling v Islington which found that the relevant wording on a PCN to be mandatory. I attach this for your convenience.

Got this in the post:

ZxdLvl.jpg

 

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice result, Well done!

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...