Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • OP stated they had been arrested, but not charged (let alone convicted). They DON'T have a criminal record, but do have an entry on the PNC. That information stays on the PNC (Police National Computer) for life, but doesn't get released in a standard DBS. It only MIGHT get released for an Enhanced DBS (eDBS) check  ... but it would be incredibly unlikely. (The rational behind this is that eDBS's allow for 'information at Chief Officer of Police's discretion' ..... this covers the 2 'barring lists' and is also intended for the scenario where someone has multiple arrests or investigations, where safeguarding is a concern .... it was brought in after the Soham murders / Ian Huntley case, where the information known about the now-convicted child murderer may have prevented his employment in a school, had it been made available). So, for the sake of accuracy and completeness, arrests stay on the PNC for life, wont appear in a standard DBS, MIGHT appear in an eDBS, but in reality, would be the exception rather than the norm, and I can't see them being released  to a defense barrister. What then if the defence found out a different way, and brought it up in court?. Again, unlikely, but the important feature is that the judge would make sure they trod very carefully!. They MIGHT consider using it if there were other factors that allowed them to try to cast doubts as to the truthfulness of your evidence, but on its own : No way. Anyone MIGHT be arrested (if a seemingly plausible complaint been made against them)! The approach to take if it did come up is to be truthful. "Yes, I was arrested. It arose from a vexatious complaint. I wasn't charged, let alone convicted. That could happen to any one of us, if a vexatious complaint gets made" Far better that than lying, saying you'd never been arrested, and getting caught in a lie : that would ruin your credibility. I'm incredibly doubtful it will even come up, though.
    • we dont get N157 because its new OCMC but no court dont have evidence either.   Just seems a bit of a pointless wait but oh well
    • Post #9 suggested some options to avoid or put off having a smart meter. Post #12 a simple solution to your complaint about the ay they handle fixed monthly DD. It's not really clear why you posted if you're going get irate when members "jump in" with suggestions. You can see what I'm referring to on "gasracker.uk" to allay your suspicion that I was lying in Post #16 which was made to correct ther misinformation shown in your Post #15
    • Back to octopus from the smart meter/tariff salesperson. Octopus have now said just ignore the letter - I dont have to have one despite there letter implying (at least) it was required, but that i will HAVE to have a smart meter if current meters stop working as 'their suppliers dont supply non smart meters any more'. They also say they do not/will not disable any smart functionality when they fit a smart meter I am of course going to challenge that. Thats their choice of meter fitter/supplier problem not mine
  • 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

More DLR problems


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5201 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,

 

This weekend I travelled with a friend from the north of London to Greenwich, only to be hit with a pair of penalty notices.

 

At every point I touched in and out, it wasn't busy, so I wasn't pushed through the barriers, no 'seek assistance' notices were shown and everything went smoothly until I was pulled aside by a ticket inspector after trying to read my card.

 

I have no idea why, but having looked at my travel history on the oyster topup points all the times of travel are correct, all the destinations are correct but the origin station is always the place I started travelling in the morning. So far as I understand if I hadn't touched in and out then the times wouldn't be right and I wouldn't have been physically able to pass the gates.

 

Furthermore to this I have only lived in London for a short time and recently started renting here. The inspector was threatening, agressive, reduced my friend to tears and threatened to detain me for not carrying photographic ID (something which I'm not legally obliged to do and as a non-driver I don't have a licence) and whoever they contact over the phone didn't have my details at that address. He also shouted at me 'You are obviously trying to decieve me and aren't telling the truth' and when I asked why he was accusing me of lying he threatened me with 'serious consequences' if I accused him of calling me a liar. The phrase 'or else' was used quite often too.

 

I know for a fact I complied with their rules, I have a photo of the screen on the oyster topup terminal with their incorrect travel history on it. If I touch in and out and no warnings are given that there is a problem I don't think that realistically a fine is deserved for what looks like a technical glitch.

 

What is the best way to tackle this? It's not fair to have to pay a fine under these circumstances and equally I don't think for a minute that the inspector should be allowed to get away with being abusive and threatening.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

This weekend I travelled with a friend from the north of London to Greenwich, only to be hit with a pair of penalty notices.

 

At every point I touched in and out, it wasn't busy, so I wasn't pushed through the barriers, no 'seek assistance' notices were shown and everything went smoothly until I was pulled aside by a ticket inspector after trying to read my card.

 

I have no idea why, but having looked at my travel history on the oyster topup points all the times of travel are correct, all the destinations are correct but the origin station is always the place I started travelling in the morning. So far as I understand if I hadn't touched in and out then the times wouldn't be right and I wouldn't have been physically able to pass the gates.

 

Furthermore to this I have only lived in London for a short time and recently started renting here. The inspector was threatening, agressive, reduced my friend to tears and threatened to detain me for not carrying photographic ID (something which I'm not legally obliged to do and as a non-driver I don't have a licence) and whoever they contact over the phone didn't have my details at that address. He also shouted at me 'You are obviously trying to decieve me and aren't telling the truth' and when I asked why he was accusing me of lying he threatened me with 'serious consequences' if I accused him of calling me a liar. The phrase 'or else' was used quite often too.

 

I know for a fact I complied with their rules, I have a photo of the screen on the oyster topup terminal with their incorrect travel history on it. If I touch in and out and no warnings are given that there is a problem I don't think that realistically a fine is deserved for what looks like a technical glitch.

 

What is the best way to tackle this? It's not fair to have to pay a fine under these circumstances and equally I don't think for a minute that the inspector should be allowed to get away with being abusive and threatening.

 

Firstly, I would say that the place to make any complaint or accusation of aggressive & threatening behaviour by the inspector is in writing to the Customer Relations Department at DLR and not on this public forum.

 

If you were issued a Penalty Fare Notice then you should write to

 

The Penalty Fares Administrator

(K. Thienel)

Serco-Docklands

Poplar Depot

Castor Lane

London

E1 0DS

 

Telephone: 0207 363 9500

 

You can obtain a full print-out of your Oyster transactions over the last 8 weeks free of charge by applying to the Oyster Records Help-line and should do so as soon as possible. You can then send a copy with your letter to the PF Administrator, but remember, you only have 21 days to lodge your appeal.

 

I would forget about all the third party opinion ( that you are bound to get ) of an incident that none of us were present at for the time being and get your appeal made as soon as possible

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

Thanks - that is exactly the information I was after. The ticket doesn't give any phone contact details and the ticket inspector wouldn't say anything more than 'if you don't like it talk to Boris Johnson'.

 

I sent the letter yesterday (to dispute the fine, I'll tackle the issue with the ticket inspector afterwards) and have a proof of postage slip detailing when the letter was sent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I finally got an answer - it looks like they realise a mistake has been made but aren't actually willing to admit it. The letter says that the penalty fare has been dropped from £25 each to just £4, raising to £50 with my details being passed to an enforement company and a summons if I don't pay in 10 days (not easy with christmas post, and it'd cost me more as much as the fine to go an pay it in person and I'd have to use their service to do it). It also says that 'no correspondence will be entered into'.

 

This gives me a little problem - I'm sure the £4 they want is a standard penalty fare, but this was paid from the oyster card due to the ticket inspector not allowing us to touch out so I don't think it's fair to be made to pay twice for a (really terrible) service.

 

But principles aside it's not enough to take time off work to fight about because I'd end up losing more than that.

 

Is there any way that I can just this and then take it up with someone further down the line? I'd also like to know who to talk to with respect to the ticket inspectors behaviour.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the £4 charge is NOT a penalty fare

 

The £4 is the single fare due for travelling within Zone 1 without having previously paid the fare.

 

You can pay the fares due within the time period allowed by their letter, thereby making it impossible for them to issue a Summons alleging non-payment and then write outlining your complaint to:

 

Mr Peter Hendy,

Commissioner, (Surface Transport)

Transport for London,

Empress State Building

Empress Approach

London

SW6 1TR

 

I suppose it goes without saying, you should stick to the facts of what occurred when writing, but it may be helpful to recognise that all too often complaints are received wherein the 'facts' are embellished with accusations that are either, irrelevant or, a distortion of what actually happened.

 

DLR is one of the most highly monitored transport systems in the country.

 

Stick to commenting on the apparent error that you believe is evident in relation to your Oyster and what was actually said by the Inspector, otherwise, as is so often the case when travellers claim to have been abused or mistreated when no such activity occurred, the whole complaint is likely to be doubted.

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

thanks,

 

It's just hard to make a good judgement from the letter they send out because it contains no facts whatsoever regarding the decision they made. Had they given me that information I'd have been a lot happier about just putting a cheque in the post without even thinking about it. This information should come from them and not a volunteer on a forum.

 

Maybe a little communication is all that's needed here...

 

I'll just pay the thing if it balances everything out fairly

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I posted them a cheque as per their letter on the 23rd December and got a proof of postage certificate at the time.

 

Thing is looking at my bank account I've not seen the cheque cashed and the 10 days has obviously long gone.

 

How likely are they to press for the £100 full penalty (50 per person)? What is the best thing to do to cover myself at this point?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe you should be ok.

 

My knowledge isn't too great on the matter, but I'm fairly certain that as long as the cheque was posted within reasonable time then you're covered by the "postal rule" where you've done what is reasonably expected of you but it's genuinely held up in the post.

 

Unless of course they couldn't be bothered to cash it

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
I posted them a cheque as per their letter on the 23rd December and got a proof of postage certificate at the time.

 

Thing is looking at my bank account I've not seen the cheque cashed and the 10 days has obviously long gone.

 

How likely are they to press for the £100 full penalty (50 per person)? What is the best thing to do to cover myself at this point?

 

 

How did you get on? Has the original cheque now been cashed?

 

The only problem that you have is in that you only got proof of posting. That doesn't record that they received any letter and neither can it confirm what was in any envelope.

 

It's easy to be wise after the event I know, but 'recorded delivery' or 'signed for' post is always the best bet in these cases.

 

If it hasn't been paid and the time allowed has lapsed, they could press for the orginal penalty, which is as you rightly say £50 per person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...