Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • nothing you can do can product against the very rare judge lottery syndrome.
    • not sure why you added the blue line I've highlighted? that's no in the we gave you.   as for your question... PRAC's roboclaim computer knows when the account was taken out, after all it raised the claim and checked everything carefully first before issuing the request via northants bulk courts equally inept roboclaim computer... 
    • I've been researching in preparation of compiling my particularised defence/WS.    I'm none too happy that some judges still seem to be siding with DCAs and seemingly brushing aside anything that we have assumed to be "necessary" for DCAs to have a winning case.    Reading a recent "summary" from another poster (another thread with case similar to mine - very old, illegible application form, no default notice, reliance on their own software to prove it was ever sent) and the judgment made in favour of the DCA and even suggesting that there was no "agreement with the DCA, they simply owned the debt, not the agreement"  Makes me very nervous.    Especially if cases like this will be judged on "probability" - the probability that if I signed the original application form, then I must have taken out the credit card and racked up the alleged debt as shown in statements enclosed in their WS (and dated some ten years later).   Is it ok to post some "evidence" I've found from elsewhere?    This is in line with my fears that regardless of how hard one tries to rebut the "lack of evidence" produced by DCAs for chasing these very old "alleged" debts, it does appear to come down to the luck of what judge you get on the day and how much they can be swayed by the DCA solicitor.    A quick Google search produced the following - from one case - this related to a credit agreement - which resulted in someone being made bankrupt - that person appealed the bankruptcy order on the grounds of defective credit agreement and default notice and this was the appeal judge's decision:   The necessary formalities for the entry into the regulated consumer credit agreement (which related to the debt in issue) were not complied with; The default notice served in respect of that credit agreement was defective.   The First Ground The Appellant argued that she did not receive the terms and conditions when she entered into the credit agreement and, accordingly, section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (“CCA”) had not been complied with and the agreement could not be enforced. The agreement had been entered in 1995 and, whilst it had provided a microfiche copy of the front page of the application, the Respondent had been unable to provide a copy of the terms.   Despite the terms not being produced, the District Judge had found that, in the circumstances, it was very likely that such terms existed and would have been provided to the Appellant when she entered into the Agreement. Mr Justice Mann held that this was a finding that the District Judge was entitled to make.   Further, Mr Justice Mann found that it was implicit from the District Judge’s findings that she considered that the terms and conditions not only existed but had been subscribed to by the Appellant’s signature and, consequently, the requirements of section 61 CCA were fulfilled. Mr Justice Mann held that this was also a justifiable finding which should not be interfered with on appeal.   The Second Ground The Appellant also argued that the default notice upon which the Respondent relied did not comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notice) Regulations 1989 because it stated the full balance of the account rather than the total of the missed payments. The Respondent argued that, as a result of the missed payments, it was contractually entitled to the entire balance subject to the service of the appropriate notice, a requirement which was fulfilled by the default notice itself and, consequently, the sum required to remedy the breach was the entire amount.   Mr Justice Mann agreed with the Respondent and the District Judge, holding that: “If by the time the default notice is served circumstances have arisen which entitle the lender to recover not merely sums which might be regarded as arrears, by which I assume is meant accumulated minimum payments, but also the whole of the sum, then they are entitled to claim that sum, and the sum to require to remedy the breach for non-payment of that sum is the payment of the whole sum due. The bank is not confined, at that stage, to claiming merely the amount of arrears if it has an accrued contractual right to have the whole of the sum.”   Do judgments like these not mean that a lot of what you guys do on here (and for which I and many others are VERY grateful) somewhat redundant. What is happening to judges just accepting "well, the terms must have been there if you signed it" -    Feeling quite nervous now.
    • we know it wasn't done to avoid enforcement we understand completely. but that doesn't take from away the fact that it happened   you can't appeal the pcn's on the basis that 'it was not his vehicle to levy upon'. the law clearly states otherwise.          
    • here is a question for you, is yu house divided up into a retail/business area  and domestic area for business rates purposes? If not why on earth are you paying business water rates? ceertainly not for tax purposes as you can claim any legit expense without having to reclassify your home as a business premises. i would be stopping this nonsense and goping back to whatever water supplier is the domestic one for your area. there is stuff all they can do to get the £40 from you whan you do that.
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3599 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

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.

Share this post


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

Share this post


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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


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

Share this post


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

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...