Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well we can't predict what the judge will believe. PE will say that they responded in the deadline and you will say they don't. Nobody can tell what a random DJ will decide. However if you go for an OOC settlement you should still be able to get some money
    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
  • 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

UK debt being Chased in Australia


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3756 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

Skippy

 

You must take option 2.

 

Punishment by the Regulatory bodies is all scummy DCAs understand. Be thankful that you are in Oz where the authorities have balls and not here in the UK where thay talk the talk but have yet to walk the walk.

 

Go for the jugular.

 

Pie on Ear know they are stuffed hence their keeness to get you to settle quietly. Unless they offer you a huge sum of dosh or several tinnies of ice cold golden nectar then hang them out to Dry/Die

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 538
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Skippy

 

You must take option 2.

 

 

 

I agree. If you take option 1, they win. They push people as far as they can and when they know they can't win they just pull out and no harm comes to them. They rely on the fact that a large number of people would simply give in and pay. That's why they don't mind making all these false claims.

 

I won't be happy until they have been punished for they actions. I would really like to see their license revoked and I will push as hard as I can for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Option 2 would be benificial to all, but you need to take your own situation into consideration first. Make sure everything is water tight though if you do take option 1.

 

My complaints are still standing though, even though they have no recourse on me now. I'm gunning for the idiots one way or the other.

 

About time these people where taught a lesson as long as ASIC et al will have the decency to take action. Which under the glaring obvious way these people have breached various laws and regulations they should do pretty soon.

 

I believe we may have a spate of similar calls to other members of the PFF very shortly.

 

Bodgit

Link to post
Share on other sites

Option 2 would be benificial to all, but you need to take your own situation into consideration first. Make sure everything is water tight though if you do take option 1.

 

My complaints are still standing though, even though they have no recourse on me now. I'm gunning for the idiots one way or the other.

 

About time these people where taught a lesson as long as ASIC et al will have the decency to take action. Which under the glaring obvious way these people have breached various laws and regulations they should do pretty soon.

 

I believe we may have a spate of similar calls to other members of the PFF very shortly.

 

Bodgit

the fat lady is on stage. i have just spoken to my lawyer. he has spoken at length to the lawyer at fos today. i have great news i can't post here.....

 

2010 is a great year already. happy to take anyones calls if you want to know more....

 

Pie and beer are seemingly on the ropes. it appears they want to reduce the number of fos complaints at all costs....

 

im feeling like a dog with 2 d*cks tonight... sing fat lady sing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Skippy

 

You must take option 2.

 

Punishment by the Regulatory bodies is all scummy DCAs understand. Be thankful that you are in Oz where the authorities have balls and not here in the UK where thay talk the talk but have yet to walk the walk.

 

Go for the jugular.

 

Pie on Ear know they are stuffed hence their keeness to get you to settle quietly. Unless they offer you a huge sum of dosh or several tinnies of ice cold golden nectar then hang them out to Dry/Die

not sure about balls, but everything including a barbers is licensed here. so when it comes to renewal time.........

 

santas watching.... be good pls children!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Greeno. From my experience - I lodged a FOS complaint and received an auto-generated email reply straight away (11/01/10). I then received a reply from P&B which although dated 11/01/10, I didn't receive until around the 19/01/10. Then received a letter from FOS dated 20/01/10.

The best bit is P&B included detail in their letter dated the 11th which didn't happen until the 13th - gotta love their attention to detail!

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi greeno

 

I didnt receive an automatic response either but I do know they are well and truly on the case, just wading through all of our cases I suspect. Some others have had contact made so now its just a waiting game till they get to us too. Rest assured though, they are aware and answering all complaints in due course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, my application is well advanced at FOS and I think it's going our way. Can't say anymore at this stage.

 

Guys, quite simply the best advice you can get on this forum is to put an application into FOS. Firstly, it costs Pie&Beer $2K for every single application and secondly, if (when) you win on grounds of jurisdiction (and anything else you can think of), FOS have the power to wipe the alleged debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great advice Goldcoast. I'd normally would wish you luck with your FOS complaint but from what I have seen they are really good and you don't need luck.

 

To anyone who hasn't filed a complaint with FOS, do it now. The process is simple and free. At least it is free to you, it costs Pie & Beer at least $2,000 for each complaint.

 

In addition to finding that the debt is unenforceable, FOS can also award costs to you and even compensation in the worst cases. If you have suffered any financial loss because of Pie & Beer this may be recovered.

 

If anyone doesn't want to submit to a public forum they can send me a personal message. We now have two teams of lawyers working on this and someone on the inside.

 

If anyone has paid money to Pie & Beer for a UK credit card debt after being threatened by them, please contact me to be part of a class action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, my application is well advanced at FOS and I think it's going our way. Can't say anymore at this stage.

 

Guys, quite simply the best advice you can get on this forum is to put an application into FOS. Firstly, it costs Pie&Beer $2K for every single application and secondly, if (when) you win on grounds of jurisdiction (and anything else you can think of), FOS have the power to wipe the alleged debt.

i agree. i also have reason to believe the tide has turned against pioneer. fos is the way to go, then followed by asic one fos ruling is out...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Spoke to FOS and they said my issue has been received, accepted and escalated already. She wasn't able to tell me too much but I got the impression that this was unusual and had gone to someone high up. Then again I might have just been trying to read too much into it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Newman - it's good to be back.

 

Bodgit's been keeping me in the loop but it's really good to be able to watch all this unfolding...and P & B's defence unravelling :D

 

Bugger Foxtel, I'm staying tuned to this channel! Or at least until the footy starts again...mind you, if the Sharkies start this season the way they played last year I may need to reconsider that too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been following this thread with interest for a little while now.

 

Glad to hear (see/read?) that you guys have taken the bull by the horns with regards to this P&B mob.

 

One thing that has me concerned, - and please correct me if I have misunderstood.

 

1. The FOS in Australia is a voluntary scheme/code, and P&B have given notice that they wish to withdraw. (this takes 1 year ?)

 

2. Several Aussie CAGGERs have complained to the FOS about the behaviour of P&B and gained a resolution largely due to pressure from the FOS ?

 

3. What has been the outcome of queries raised about the defaults/negative info the P&B have made to Credit Reference Agencies ? (Veda?)

 

I suspect that P&B will get worse with their badly behaved ways once they are free of the binding rulings that can be made by the FOS.

 

4. For those that dont have the luxury of complaining to the FOS in future, what are the best option(s) they can use to repel the attacks on themselves (and their credit files) against P&B ?

 

Discuss....

Just trying to be proactive.

Edited by toto003
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...