Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • OK thanks for that. I have no prior correspondence with EXCEL and therefore have not admitted being the driver. As it happens, I wasn't. The have not responded to my initial request for documents and therefore I have no details on planning permission. I guess I'll assume and assert that they haven't in the absence of them providing proof to the contrary.   Meanwhile, I've had a letter from EXCEL offering a reduced payment. I will attach this. I'm wondering whether I should ignore the letter or respond. I will not accept the offer.  offer.pdf
    • Thanks for all responses I’ve been looking at other threads and now feel totally confused as I’m scared of actually having to go to court as I have no idea how to defend this! Torn between just setting up a payment plan and not wanting them to win! 
    • Thanks so much!    1. on planning permission my WS says: The signs did not have planning permission under the Town and County planning.  I have an email stating there was no planning permission from the council. The signs do not fall under deemed consent.  * Their WS says they do not need planning permission by being an approved operator of the trade association, and it is not for the  county court to determine planning permission.   2. Excel are trying to say I’m dishonest.  Their WS states my defence appears to be cut and pasted from websites relating to parking whose aim is to assist motorists on contesting PCN's. Large portions are non sensical and irrelevant to the claim   This is Unacceptable as the defendant has signed a statement of truth whilst clearly not being the defendants knowledge    Q Any comments?      Their WS states that I alleged I received no correspondence, and the onus is on the driver to update DVLA. I did update DVLA, but I moved numerous times due to domestic abuse. This was in my set aside and part of why it was granted. Evidence was provided at that time. Q Is this going to come up again?    *Also they question how I would be able to comment on the signs if I’m not the driver of the vehicle, as she would not have first hand knowledge, therefore it is the claimants position that she is being disingenuous.    I state that photos will be provided in my bundle. I actually haven’t submitted any but I do also know somebody who had PCN from the same carpark,   He gave me all his evidence etc, Mr Booth and he won his case. I linked to the parking pranksters article on it.  Q So is it ok to use such websites and to use photos from someone else?    Thanks    I put Excel to strict proof that any contract can exist  *Their WS states it falls foul of the unfair terms in consumer contracts regulations 1999(UTCCR 1999). Claims the regulations don't apply   This is the link to Mr Booth case who won on the signage  Also the PCN is completely blurred and illegible in their WS evidence  Is this another point?    I have his his email regarding planning consent, Mr Booth had an email from the town planning officer stating that in his opinion the signage would require planning consent     http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017/01/excel-parking-v-booth.html?m=1   He had a number of lines of defence, but focussed on the poor signage in the car park. Excel Parking used BW Legal who hired a local solicitor to turn up. She wasn't that well prepared and had not bothered to bring printed copies of the case. When the Judge asked her to refer to defence photographs provided of poor signage she used her phone. Mr Booth admitted that he never bought a ticket - but this was because he never saw the signage signage in the first place and so no contract was entered into. Excel provided pictures of the signage, date stamped for August 2015, but the event was in March 2015. They also provided at the last minute a witness statement from the landowner stating he gave authority, date stamped September 2015. The PCN they sent in their Witness statement was a photocopy and completely blurred and illegible. Mr Booth's arguments were that; 1. Poor signage - there were "staff only" parking signs on the building wall next to where he parked - he questioned the claimant's right to sue someone parked against these bays 2. He questioned their authority to act on behalf of the landlord 3. He questioned whether the signage had planning consent. The Judge followed this through with Excel's representative: "Did they have a contract which said these bays were exempt or not exempt from Excel issuing tickets on the vehicles parked? As Excel had not bothered to supply a copy of the actual contract, the solicitor could not confirm either way. Regarding. planning consent, Mr Booth had an email from the town planning officer stating that in his opinion the signage would require planning consent, and that there was no planning application on file. The judge said if Mr Booth had only brought this point up he may have found differently. The judge clearly had doubts about the signs where any reasonable person would think the same and that the "staff only" signs would not lead them to think there was a requirement to buy a ticket. He took a recess for 10 mins then made his judgment. Claim refused - the parking signs cause confusion , and there was prof there was a contract which allowed the charges claimed. He went on to state that he was staggered that serial claims companies like Excel do not take a photo of the signs at the time of erection. Why do they wait until litigation to take photos. There was no evidence that the signs were there at all on the date.    
    • Not anymore now that the right have manipulated voters into voting for a conservative dictatorship.   All of what you've said is just another worrying aspect of what the future holds 
    • Just like all the rubbish spouted over the past 4 years, would, would, would.  What you really mean is COULD.    
  • Our picks

indebtstudent

Is this new? CCA related

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3662 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

As part of my preparation for a debt management plan I took advice on here to request copies of the agreements just on the off chance.

 

HSBC sent one which looks to be all in otder, no reply from one other but Halifax were the first to respond. I just requested a copy and enclosed the fee. That is all

 

They have replied with a letter saying they have enclosed a reconstituted agreement. Is this code for we don't have the agreement? There is a strong possibility I opened the account online, what does this mean in terms of a CCA request?

 

The letter also goes onto say they have satisfied the requeset and the agreement is enforcible and they will continue to act as such. They also have a warning about these dodgy firms who claim they can write debts off.

 

The letter is really quite confrontational, why does it have all this still in?

 

I could mock up any agreement I liked and say it is a reconstituted agreement. It does not really prove anything.

 

I would post an exact quote but someone has been tidying the computer room and it has mysteriously disappeared...

 

Will post it when/if I find it.

 

Oh it also states no further correspondance will be entered into with regard to the agreement. Surely as a customer if I complain they HAVE TO respond...

 

Is it just Halifax that send these sort of letters? Is it new? And what does it mean?


The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

see today release about cca issues from the oft

 

it has sev threads or is on the bbc news website

 

dx


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've found the copy now and this is the bit I thought may be new

 

"The copy of the agreement enclosed with this letter complies with the requirements of the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documants) Regulations 1983 (the "Regulations"). Regulation 3 (2) b provides that a copy can omit any signiture box, signature of date of signature. In summary we are not required to produce a copy with your clients signature on it. By providing a copy of the agreement complying with the requirements of the Regulations the agreement remains enforceable."

 

Now I'm not very well up on these issues but this sounds to me very much like they are trying to pull a fast one. If HSBC were able to produce an agreement with my signature why are Halifax making such a fuss?


The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still none the wiser having read all that. Just to be clear in this case I probably did the application online, in which case there would not be a signed agreement.

 

The letter makes reference to my client but I am not a company. Perhaps this is a response to a deluge of activity from those dubious claims management companies...

 

To me reconstituted means recreating something that already existed, but WHY don't they have the original?


The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

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...