Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Morning all, a while since I've been here....I contacted my bank regarding the matter and they took the decision to take "charge back" action against QVC, I initially got the money back and then letters from QVC basically stating I had defaulted on my payments and owed them the money Nationwide had claimed back, just as BF speculated they would. In short I repaid QVC to avoid having debt collectors after me, and having contacted CAB am now in the process of writing to Evri outlining my claim. CAB provided me with a basic template for the letter so I'll see how that goes. Regards.
    • Well you could say that you have pictures where the signs were not on the wall where you parked so would require strict proof of when they were erected . But in any case it was dark so even if a sign was there you didn't see as it was not illuminated. Little point in not having signs that can be seen at night though it obviously makes it easier to issue PCNs and pursue motorists claiming they have breached non contractual contracts whilst breaching those same motorist's GDPR.
    • It fizzled out, they kept delaying the complaints process. In the end I believe they stopped charging me for a bunch of services, unsure if it was deliberate or a mistake so I stopped bringing it up. Ultimately we bought a house and moved out.
    • There are so many factors, and local elections are often far more about local issues and people, but the one previously general rule in a general election are that the hard core Tories vote Tory and hard core Labour voters vote labour   Gaza seems to have dulled both the muslim and Jewish labour votes more than the Tories - and I can see why - but do the muslim voters really think that the Tories will do ANYTHING other than talk and then do whatever the Americans say - and thats support Israel whatever they do first and foremost in real terms? Reform has unquestionably affected the Tory local vote - so should affect the GE vote a bit more, but has largely been factored in - reform isnt new in any way - its all Brexitish although there seem to be far more ex 'conservative' core reform/ukip/brexitish voters than ex 'labour' core voters - about 6-8% of the national vote in a GE seems to me. A little up on prior brexitish/faragits scores But the large swathes of center ground voters who decide who wins the election seem to have utterly deserted the Tories in their millions - although they have gone to labour, libdems and greens - and many real conservatives are in limbo despite Sunak being naturally more a thatcherite than most - his party currently seems far less so. Johnson promised much, and many were taken in, just as people (inc me) made that mistake with Farage in the early days - but we now know that they are self serving liars who can't be trusted with anything - although I still think it likely The Liar will be back - but most likely after the GE (60/40) Starmer is lacking in charisma and presence, but others in his cabinet should shine. But Corbynistas could still cause trouble - another group that seem happy to drag everything down if they think it suites   Johnson perhaps could reunite some of the Tory party - but he seems to have numerous criminal and political convistions sitting in the background should he try Lying about giving preference to dogs in the Afghan evacuations - and lying about it Unlawfully proroguing parliament embezzlement re funds and spending (eg flat referb) .. repeatedly Taking jobs before he should after being booted - should lose his PM pension and rights over that IMO the list goes on ad nauseam
    • Hi I am negotiating with my ex (commercial) landlord's solicitor for a debt I owe for rent. This has been going on for a little while and I expect they may go ahead with the court action they threaten. I wanted to ask however, In the event this action goes ahead, I think will have a response pack sent to me from the court, along with the claim. Google tells me that a section of this response pack is a 'Admit the claim and ask for time to pay'. Would this time to pay, if accepted also mean a CCJ registered against me? Thanks
  • 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

McDonalds Parking Fine - MET Parking Services


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5066 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 guys

 

I was recently sent a parking fine by MET Parking Services for staying in McDonalds car park for longer than 75 Minutes.

 

I've just turned 18 and i was 17 on the date of the fine.

 

I have recieved all the usual letters - 'IMPORTANT LEGAL NOTICE', 'FINAL WARNING' etc etc but i've now recieved letters from Graham White Solicitors threatening me with court action.

 

The only thing im worried about is having my Credit Rating tarnished, is this likely to affect it? I don't know what to make of it.

 

Any advice appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

it wont and cant effect you credit

 

unless they actually took you to court , 00000000000001% chance of that

 

then they actually won the case even less chance

 

and then you did not pay what the court awarded within 28 days

 

its a mail [problem] IT IS NOT A FINE

 

IGNORE

..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember that this is not a fine!

 

It is an unenforcible [problem] invoice.

 

IGNORE IT!

 

That "solicitor's" letter was almost certainly sent to you by either the teaboy or the office cleaner.

 

Don't write.

Don't email.

Don't phone.

Don't respond to them in any way.

 

Those letters are just a load of B.S.

They cannot affect your credit rating.

The letters that you have received are not worth the paper they're written on.

 

Ignore.

IGNORE.

IGNORE!

 

If that doesn't work, Then ignore them, some more.

If you've received letters from Graham White "solicitors" then they are almost at the end of the process.

The final stage is that they leave you alone and chase an easier target.

 

If you are uncomfortable about ignoring them, then send all the correspondence to us and we'll ignore them for you! :lol:

 

IGNORE THEM!

  • Haha 1

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

-------------------------------------------------------

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

------------------------------------------------------

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore.

IGNORE.

IGNORE!

 

If that doesn't work, Then ignore them, some more.

 

 

In addition to Roosters valuable post I have some very important information you must follow.

 

1. Ignore.

2. Ignore

3. Goto 1

 

There we are - I think between us that should do it.

 

..and just for confirmation you have received some junk from a chap going by the name Micheal Sobell using the trading name of Graham White Solicitors.

 

Not to be confused with the "real" Grahaam White Solictiors.

 

Blagton

Edited by Rooster-UK
Corrected endless GOTO loop.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just turned 18 and i was 17 on the date of the fine.

 

The standard advice here is to completely ignore all communication

and not attempt to enter into a dialogue with these people which I

absolutely advocate.. But I'ld also be absolutely chomping the bit

wanting to know what their response to a challenge would be on the

grounds of age and being unable to enter into a contract because of it..

Link to post
Share on other sites

buzby, This is a PPC invoice, so age, and the fact he was not of a legal age to enter into a "contract" is a key feature and would prove to be an absolute defence.

 

The OP DIDN'T know this - and referred to a 'parking fine'. Perhaps your comments would be better directed at him? *I* was pointing out for something like that, age is of no relevance (and if truth be told, for a PPC is academic anyway) as court action is invariably academic. Ging on about age of contract admisability through age is kinda pointless, because in Scotland - 16 is the 'age' for entering into a contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites

buzby, This is a PPC invoice, so age, and the fact he was not of a legal age to enter into a "contract" is a key feature and would prove to be an absolute defence.

 

Actually a minor can enter into a contract for necessities, food is classed as a necessity, if he was parking there to get food then regardless of his age the contract would stand.

 

However, the rest of the case is junk.

 

Mossy

Link to post
Share on other sites

And remedy for breach of contract is what...

 

Yeah I know the remedies for breach of contract, which is why I said the rest of the case was junk.

 

I wasn't siding with the PPC, I was simply pointing out that in some cases contracts with minors are legal and enforceable (it's one of those weird anomalies that allows a person under the age of 18 to legally buy alcohol)

 

Mossy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

I've also just been pinged by Met acting on behalf of McDs. Having spent a little time looking at the Web and thinking about this, I'm certainly not going to be paying. Given the lack of statutory authority (unlike the police and local authorities), PPCs can only be claiming for some sort of breach of contract (a contract for parking). Point 1 here - there can only be a contract if the terms of the contract are sufficiently known to both parties (i.e. if there are very few signs or they're confusing/not in the right location, there's no contract). Point 2 - For a contract claim, a party needs to suffer a loss, or "damage", which can either be "liquidated" (fixed) in the contract or "unliquidated" (that is, to be quantified when a claim arises). These "PCNs" purport to be "fines" but are more likely to be liquidated damages, but to be enforceable in law, they need to represent "a reasonable pre-estimate of the loss suffered". If they're more than that, they're a penalty for breach of contact and, under English contract law, penalties are NOT enforceable. In other words, these "PCNs" would be legitimate if they were for a few pounds if the car park has similar lost charges. For free car parks, what loss has the PPC suffered? I should say that this is only my personal and intuitive view of this situation. You draw your own conclusions, but I'm confident enough not to pay these cowboys and, as someone with many years' experience as a lawyer, I probably have some idea what I'm doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

soz for the PUN :D you have put it AsItis :rolleyes:

 

confirming what many of us advise new posters when the come to CAG for help

 

anyways welcome to the family CAG, and I am sure you may be able to help others in many topics that CAG covers

regards

 

Kip

..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Am just starting another round of MET scamvoices courtesy of McD's and can re-assure anyone who is uncertain about the ignore route in case it leads to a court appearance.

 

They are an ineffectual bunch who even when asked to proceed to court with all possible haste because I will not pay them a penny still refuse to do so

 

The only consequences that you face are that the recycle bin has more in it:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Hi guys

 

I was recently sent a parking fine by MET Parking Services for staying in McDonalds car park for longer than 75 Minutes.

 

I've just turned 18 and i was 17 on the date of the fine.

 

I have recieved all the usual letters - 'IMPORTANT LEGAL NOTICE', 'FINAL WARNING' etc etc but i've now recieved letters from Graham White Solicitors threatening me with court action.

 

The only thing im worried about is having my Credit Rating tarnished, is this likely to affect it? I don't know what to make of it.

 

Any advice appreciated!

Hi, im new in this forum and i wish for an answer to my question about the MET (parking charge notice)the letter has a photo when i drive in and drive out of McDonalds. i have been given it today by post, similar to Eskiboy, 75 minutes limited free estate period and then said i was there for 240 minutes 13/06/10 at 16:30-20:30 pm. im shocked because it was fake, i was working during that time also i arrive home early! so i read the forum thats says to ignore it, i don't know what to do, because to me its a prank (fake) thankfuly i would like a reply as to how i would fight against that kind of things that hit many people, Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

The advice is just the same, just ignore. If you saw the recent Watchdog programme you would have seen a legal expert fold the "parking-charge" paperwork into a paper aeroplane and fly it across the studio. That's how worthless these "threats" are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...