Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • ACPOA PCN 190424.pdf   1 Date of the infringement 30/3/24 2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 19/4/24 [scan up BOTH SIDES as ONE PDF- follow the upload guide] please LEAVE IN LOCATION AND ALL DATES/TIMES/£'s 3 Date received 23/4/24 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] No 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? No 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] N Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up Give answer here 7 Who is the parking company? APCOA 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Ludlow Tesco 2856 For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. No  
    • So not entirely down to the ticket office, then. In fact you have been quite fortunate. The "Section 172" response provides the evidence the police need to prove that you were driving if they wish to prosecute you in court. In England and Wales there is a legal precedent which has determined that an unsigned s172 response does not meet the requirements of that part of the RTA. In effect, an unsigned response is equivalent to no response at all. (This precedent is not recognised in Scotland and there is a strategy to "go unsigned" to avoid conviction). When they receive an unsigned response the police are perfectly entitled to prosecute you for "Failing to provide drivers details" and they more often than not do. This offence carries six points, a hefty fine and insurance grief for up to five years. So you got lucky. The situation now is that the deadline for accepting a course is passed. Four months is the absolute maximum, with some forces cutting it back to as little as three months from the date of the offence. The police will not extend this because if you fail to complete the course before six months has elapsed, they can no longer prosecute you. They can only begin proceedings up to the corresponding date in June (i.e. if the offence was December 10th, they have until June 10th to begin proceedings). You will gain nothing by taking this to court. On the contrary you have a lot to lose. Courses are offered entirely at the discretion of the police, you have no right to one and the court has no powers to order one. Presumably you have been offered a fixed penalty of £100 and 3 points. If you are sentenced in court it will cost you at least three times that, possibly more (depending on your speed and your income). My advice: accept the fixed penalty and do it soon as there is a deadline for that as well and if you allow it to pass your matter will be taken to court anyway. Do not forget to submit your driving licence details as instructed when accepting the offer. If you fail to do so the police will have no time left to remind you (and they don't usually send reminders for this anyway) and, again, your case will end up in court.
    • put them all in one mass pdf please  read upload use the websites listed. dx
    • Hi all, I have an update: I have received the documents from the SAR, including photos. It appears that I was parked in a bay with a sign that requires a permit, however the pole that it is on does appear to be behind the barrier - see photo. Also, they documented that they DID NOT apply the PCN to my car because of safety concerns and I DID NOT receive the initial £60 PCN by post- see attached.CamScanner 05-10-2024 15.06.pdf appreciate nay feedback/ advice, current PCN fee stands at £100. CamScanner 05-10-2024 15.03.pdf CamScanner 05-10-2024 15.08.pdf CamScanner 05-10-2024 15.06.pdf
    • They said hi is this (name) I said no and they asked if he’s there tell him to contact us in regards to Sainsbury’s  I said ok bye
  • 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

Phoenix/Carter Claimform - old GUS Shop Direct Cat Debt - returned faulty TV .**CLAIM DISMISSED**


emtdickson
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5062 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

Cover your back...Short letter thanking them for the cheque and insisting, before you cash it and confirm their suggestion, the blance of the alleged account be returned to zero and a statement confirming same to be supplied, all trace of default be removed from your CRFs, all three. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 193
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Thank you babybear.

It makes sense.

t present there is no mention of that in my credit score, but since they threatened to earlier this year I have to make sure that is so.

They must know there is no debt, otherwise why wait five years?

I will keep you posted.

The whole thing has made me very tired indeed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can still go to court with this, and I'm sure they would either discontinue or you would win. If you made a further representation to Carter - ie. your version of a consent order, asking for £1,000 and a statement that the account will not be sold on, and that they acknowledge no debt ever existed - and it was refused, then they would be in trouble.

 

The choice is yours. You have a strong case. Personally I would ask them for £1,500, which is half of your counterclaim, plus the other conditions. They do not have a leg to stand on.

 

The issue for you, EMT, is the stress factor. If you want us to draft your version of the consent order, let us know.

 

Do not trust Carter one little bit. He is backpedalling at top speed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear DonkeyB

I would very much like you to draft a letter for me along those lines. Yes, I am stressed, but at the same time I have come this far. I told them when I received the summons that there was no debt, yet they have persisted.

I remember reading somewhere, long ago, that if you contest a bill, write to the firm, enclosing a cheque for final settlement of on account and they accept the cheque and pay it in, that is final. Is this still correct?

I am not sure whether I should say here, but I was told on good authority last December, that BC saying they will withdraw does not mean they will not bring an action again! The writer of that email was well qualified to know.

That was why I joined your site, and very glad I was to do so.

I have always kept records of things for much longer than the recommended five years.

This has stood me in good stead over the years.

I wrote to Mary Kelly of BC explaining that I had made a final payment in 2006 which was accepted, and that I will no acknowledge that there is a debt.

Her reply is very untrue.

None of it is correct, and I cannot understand it.

I believe it is a deliberate attempt to cause more harassment.

It is by email attachment in the form of a pdf.

I would like to forward it to someone, if it is possible for you to allow me access to an email address.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sent you a private message (PM) with an email address.

Well, well, a real, genuine, completely useless witness statement from Bryan Carter & Co!

And what a lot of tripe it is!

Will liaise with EMT and get the info here asap.

Edit: EMT,

I've emailed the WS to another trusted source who hopefully can pop in and give some input.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear DonkeyB,

What I don't understand is what happens to this latest from them?

I have until 9 June.

They have increased the amount, despite the Court extension of time.

Can they do that?

I am not refusing to pay because I cannot, but because I returned the faulty item.

They have never asked me for paperwork copies or details of the accounts.

All the paperwork in connection with this is listed on the Allocation Questionnaire.

The instructions from the court are not to enclose them with the form, so I did not, and this woman has never asked for them, as she says in the Witness, nor have I ever denied having ordered the item.

Can she make me send copies of my bank accounts and credit card statements?

Those things are private.

I have never requested a breakdown of items.

Why would I?

The sum was for one item ,£1,999.99 and if I have to pay it I should have a new TV.

There is only one purchase involved, and as I told her, I settled the account to nil in 2006 after deducting the item which they did not take off the account.

I have never denied that I have statements, as I said above.

I cannot understand why they should say these things.

Anyone would think I had not listed them, back to Nov/Dec when they sent the claim and it was moved to my local court.

Are they acting lawfully?

Should they not have raised this before now?

If I had kept the cheque and cancelled my counterclaim, could they have started the whole thing over again bringing up my recognition of the contested debt?

If it is possible, then they are making fools of the law.

I have no knowledge of this woman apart from that posted earlier in the year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

EMT is a redoubtable old bean and is an LiP. I was wondering about seeing if we had a litigation/court friend in the Oxford area.

 

I'm just topping off EMT's statements. Carter has tried to discontinue with a consent order which is unsatisfactory, and their late WS is laughable. Will post it all up afterwards. You will need a handkerchief to stem the tears of laughter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm tight on time - it will be a taxi! Still not heard from EMT...

 

You may need to be quite persuasive with the taxi driver as they can be reluctant to go from the station to St Aldates. There's a large pedestriansied area in the way. Not sure about busses but I know what nos 1 and 5 stop near there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...