Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I am trying to follow your advice in post 21 which suggests the kennels T&Cs are over ruled by the CRA As I understood it , even if the kennel felt they good reason to refuse the dog boarding, which would be a difficult point to argue , as I am unable to get the vet to confirm they said the dog “should “ be ok ,the most the kennel  would be entitled to would be reasonable admin expenses due to refusing to accept the dog . Then I read in you last post , which  to me seems a contradiction . Paragraph 3 suggests a Judge would favour the kennel and its stance ,then paragraph 4 says to deny a refund in unenforceable . Surely if to deny me a refund is unenforceable at common law , then a Judge would have to rule in my favour . So if I continue I need to be sure I am citing the correct sections of the CRA
    • To clear this up !This new ccj claim from cabot/Mortimer is  for  a bank i have no account with.And is obviously trying to make out my older debt is not statute barred.They think i will respond and start the six years all over again for a totally diferent debt. I have no debt with the bank they are claiming against me with. Do people not understand this?
    • The site has a drop down for different postal services, implying the exclusions are based on the service you use, yet when you select different services the exclusions appear to remain the same, and certainly in the case of Parcelforce do not tally with the cover included by Parcelforce.   My P2G account still shows the declaration I made.
    • Finally go  a little time to myself, so knocked the defence from your given examples. How does it look?   1.The claim is for the sum of £882.53 due by the Defendant under the CCA 1974 for a Shop Direct account with the account ref of ********************    2.The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default notice was served under s.87(1) of the CCA 1974 which has not been complied with.   3.The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 08/01/18, notice of which has been given to the defendant.   4.The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £70.60 - The claimant claims the sum of £953.13   #####Defence######   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. Paragraph 1 is denied. Whilst it is admitted I have held various catalogue agreements in the past, I have no recollection of ever entering into an agreement with Shop Direct and do not recognise the specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request pursuant to The Consumer Credit Act 1974.   2. Paragraph 2 is denied I have not been served with a Default Notice pursuant to sec87(1) the Consumer Credit Act 1974. They have sent an alleged copy dated 28th Jan 2018 from my cpr31.14 request. this is the first time I have seen this letter.   3. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of a legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1)   4. On receipt of this claim form I, the Defendant, sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of the said request.   5. A further request made via CPR 31.14 to the claimant’s solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The claimant has not complied.   6. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim   7. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed   8. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.   If you think it's okay, I'll get it put in today.    Thank you for all your help on this. 
  • Our picks

alexRs

PCN number not recognised when I go to pay online...

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3653 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

I recently received a PCN at a NCP car park for not displaying a ticket. Monday just gone, I arrived at the station car park where I tried two of the pay and display machines to find out that they were out of order. I wasn't prepared to go running from machine to machine in the torrential rain that we've had and to then miss my train. The car park is the biggest one on the TFL network too, so needless to say the machines are far apart. It was probably stubborn of me to not bother to get a ticket but I park there nigh on every day and for two machines to be out I assumed that the others were too also out of order...

 

Anyway, I get my lovely white PCN but was really annoyed that the fine was £50 if paid within 28 days, there wasn't even an option for settling in 14 days for £25. I logged on to NCP's fee paying website, put it the PCN number along with my registration number and it said that the PCN number could not be found. I have tried every day since I received this fine but it still says that it can not be found. Do you reckon I could get away with not paying this fine given that the ticket can not be found?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I recently received a PCN at a NCP car park for not displaying a ticket. Monday just gone, I arrived at the station car park where I tried two of the pay and display machines to find out that they were out of order. I wasn't prepared to go running from machine to machine in the torrential rain that we've had and to then miss my train. The car park is the biggest one on the TFL network too, so needless to say the machines are far apart. It was probably stubborn of me to not bother to get a ticket but I park there nigh on every day and for two machines to be out I assumed that the others were too also out of order...

 

Anyway, I get my lovely white PCN but was really annoyed that the fine was £50 if paid within 28 days, there wasn't even an option for settling in 14 days for £25. I logged on to NCP's fee paying website, put it the PCN number along with my registration number and it said that the PCN number could not be found. I have tried every day since I received this fine but it still says that it can not be found. Do you reckon I could get away with not paying this fine given that the ticket can not be found?

 

Is this a 'proper' PCN or a parking charge? Who is it issued on behalf of a local council/ Tfl or NCP themselves?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NCP, does this make a difference then?

 

website they tell me to pay via:

 

www.ncp.co.uk/pcn

 

I was going to ring them up and give a false car reg just to see if it's the car reg which they might've got wrong or whether ticket has just simply not been put on their system?

Edited by alexRs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If its not an official PCN issued under the Traffic Management Act 2004 its just an invoice which is unenforceable as NCP does not know who parked the car. You need to read the threads at the top of the board regarding 'private parking tickets'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, thanks, I will have a look... My ticket states that the site is operated in accordance with the Railway Byelaws, more specifically byelaw 14 thus I assume it's not an invoice and IS enforceable?

 

Regardless of the aforementioned though, the fact that my ticket can not be found and I wonder, if through error of theirs, that they have mistyped my reg and/or PCN number meaning that I can not pay it online.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, thanks, I will have a look... My ticket states that the site is operated in accordance with the Railway Byelaws, more specifically byelaw 14 thus I assume it's not an invoice and IS enforceable?

 

Regardless of the aforementioned though, the fact that my ticket can not be found and I wonder, if through error of theirs, that they have mistyped my reg and/or PCN number meaning that I can not pay it online.

 

If its a byelaw penalty charge then it may be enforceable but I have never heard of anyone being made to pay one if they ignore the letters sent. There are several threads on here from other people with NCP railway tickets if you use search you should find them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, thanks, I will have a look... My ticket states that the site is operated in accordance with the Railway Byelaws, more specifically byelaw 14 thus I assume it's not an invoice and IS enforceable?

 

 

The vast majority of parking tickets issued "claiming" to be under railways byelaw 14 are nothing more than standard PPC scamvoices.

 

If you can post a copy of it on here after removing your personal details then it can be checked as to whether it is the genuine article or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every NCP 'Byelaw' ticket we have seen has in fact been a PPC ticket falsely claiming statutory powers. real Byelaw tickets go to magistrate's court but the NCP ones talk about a civil claim - thats the big giveaway. their website is immaterial, .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Every NCP 'Byelaw' ticket we have seen has in fact been a PPC ticket falsely claiming statutory powers. real Byelaw tickets go to magistrate's court but the NCP ones talk about a civil claim - thats the big giveaway. their website is immaterial, .

 

The bylelaw gives the rail company the authority to issue civil penalties only criminal offences go to Court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

real Railway Byelaw tickets go through magistrate's court for enforcement. See Schedule 20 of the 200 Transport Act. "2. Bye-laws may provide that any person contravening them is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine of an amount not exceeding— (a) level 3 on the standard scale, or (b) such lower amount as is specified in the bye-laws, for each offence."

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...