Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • finaldj
      Santuary Housing

      By finaldj · Posted

      Thanks DX,   I wasn't aware we could do that for that length of time. I'll ask my wife to check with the bank this week
    • finaldj
      Santuary Housing

      By finaldj · Posted

      Yeah That's correct. We left rent payment coming out of his bank account from January 2023 - August 2023 until we could find somewhere to sort out his belongings which was fine. I tried to give notice a few times from August 2023 asking for advice from Sanctuary housing how we went about this explaining his condition and that he was in a Nursing home from December 2022. I explained we don't have any legal powers to his account like POT but were in the process of going for Deputyship and that I was the named person to act on his behalf to speak with Santuary housing. I said we could provide details of his condition and proof he was now in a nursing home with date he moved in. This went ignored despite repeated attempts to contact them until a housing manager contacted us end of February 2024 and notice was finally accepted with his tenancy coming to an end March 22 2024. Although they have continued to take rental payments for the flat despite someone else living in it from the 1st April. I wasn't aware payments were still being taken till I checked his May banks statements. I had asked them to back date rental payments to August 2023 when I gave notice rather than just giving notice in March 2024 but they've ignored that bit. I don't see why they shouldn't give it back they've taken money they shouldn't have.
    • dx100uk
      Santuary Housing

      By dx100uk · Posted

      go do a Direct Debit Guarantee Clawback to your bank if you've now got control of his bank account finny.
    • jk2054
      Santuary Housing

      By jk2054 · Posted

      Hello, Just to check I understand things right, he moved to a nursing home, you then kept paying the rent for a period of time whilst you sorted his belongings. You have asked to give notice and asked for backdated payments of rent from when you first asked which went ignored? They are still taking rent payments.   Have I understood correct?   If I've got anything wrong please correct me.
    • finaldj
      Santuary Housing

      By finaldj · Posted

      I contacted Sanctury housing in August 2023 after informing them my father in law who had Dementia had moved into a Nursing home December 2022. We kept the flat for 8 months until such a time we could accomodate some of his furniture that my wife wanted to keep. I contacted them in August 2023 to let them know the situation by email as I was the named person that could speak on his behalf. I informed them that we had left it to late for POT and were seeing a solicitor for Deputyship of his financies. I asked them what information would they need in order to give notice on the flat and we could provide details of his condition and nursing home. This went ignored I left it a month and then called them October 2023. I was promised a call back from a manager over the next few days. This never happened and it was end of November when I contacted them again and they had no record of me calling them. I explained the email and again I was told the local manager to the area would call me. This never happened and I ended up emailing them in January 2024 with a copy of the email from August. Again this went ignored and I had explained to them that we couldn't just go to the bank and stop the DD as we had tried. This email again went ignored. I then had a letter written to our home address in February asking us to get in contact with them (local manager) as they were concerend nobody was living in the flat. He had an email address so I copied in the last 2 emails to say I had been trying to give notice since August 2023. I also stated that I would like the rent that was paid from August 2023 refunded back to his account as I had officially tried to give notice then and it went ignored. He replied to us about wanting to look at the flat then notice could be given once he had contacted the nursing home to confirm he was actually living there now. Notice was giving for the 22 March 2024 and this would be when rent would stop and no further payment would be taken by this point. The fact I asked to be back dated went ignored. I have since noticed on 2 banks statement for April and May that they are still taking Rent payments of £501 from his bank. Further to this which seems very strange. He was with Eon Next for his utility bill again we were having problems getting this stopped as they needed a named person on his account which there wasn't one despite me managing his online account for him. I didn't check the email address that often that I used to set it up and went to check as noticed the credit he had built up with not living there was all getting refunded in February. The email said £600 would be refunded to his account with a (sorry you are leaving us message) but how can he leave as nobody but himself had access to speak with them. I also noticed the lady in the flat above him had a letter from her bank sent to his address with his address details but his name which was dated 4th March well before we had given notice and it said (thank you for giving us your new address details) we have set all this up for your account.   So Sanctuary housing must have been aware he wasn't living there from the ignored emails for the lady above to start changing address details to move into his flat before the housing manager had even got in contact to ask if anyone was living there. What I basically want to know his do we have any legal standing to claim the rent back from when I first contacted them in August 2023? There is roughly £3000 to come back  

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Your advice please

Theodore T
 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5251 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

Theodore T

Theodore T

Posted
Posted

Good evening and a Happy New Year to you all.

A couple of days ago I received through the post a PCN with two nice photos of my car under the heading "Case Evidence Report"

The offence too place on the 17th December in a local nearby road.

I can remember the incident. When I'm not working I will occasionally drive my wife to work at the local school where she is a teacher - this avoids her havering to use her own car with difficult parking at the school. Usually I would drive straight into the school and drop her off there but on this morning, there was a Refuse lorry in the gateway so i judged it best to avoid it. Instead, I turned right intending to drop her off just a little way down the road in a safe place but found myself facing several cars trying to get down the road and heading towards me. I was fortunate that I could move over to my left to allow them to pass and whilst there suggested to the missus that she should get out here. She did - I moved off. All completed in the blink of an eye.

The first photo shows my car with the passenger door open and a foot emerging from the passenger seat. The second photo shows my wife alighted from the car and the passenger door shut. In both pics, the brake light is on (one was out of action - oh dear!) the time span between the two photos is 4 SECONDS.

The "offence or contravention quoted is 62J "Parked with one or more wheels on or over a footpath or any part of a road other than a carriageway (Camera enforcement).

The photos do not show any markings, or footpath. In fact nothing on the roadway is discernible at all.

I've been back to the location and I reckon that for a camera car to have taken this photo, it must have been parked on the school crossing markings - is that allowed?

I wish to contest this ticket on the grounds that

1) 4 seconds does not constitute parking - it is certainly not in keeping with the Oxford Dictionary meaning of "Parked" and 2)

The photos give absolutely no indication of the location of the car in respect of the roadway or the footpath or any markings.

3). I had no alternative but to pull over to my left to allow other vehicles to pass.

What advice can you give me?

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites
lamma

lamma

Posted
Posted

get pictures of the road with a clear view (no obstructions) and post them up. plus of the sign and lines (if any). Would help to see the pics you have of the alleged contravention - suitably washed of your personal details ! pics of the PCN as ell - also suitably washed but leave in the dates.

Link to post
Share on other sites
sailor sam

sailor sam

Posted
Posted
I'll see what I can do about the size. I believe I was on School markings but had no choice as I had to let other traffic pass!

 

Unfortunately if your wife got out while you were stationary on the markings, you are considered to be 'parked' not matter what the duration of you being stationary was. This is a comon problem outside schools nation wide and as such certain local authorities are using cameras. (It may have not been a camera car by the way).

 

See if you can post the pics/PCN up so we can take a good look but I doubt if you will have a case for appeal.

 

__________________

Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my scales at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice usefull.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
sailor sam

sailor sam

Posted
Posted
But regardless of my wife being in the car - I would have been stationary in that position in any event to allow the oncoming traffic to pass!

 

It matters not my friend, the zig-zag markings have the same meaning as 'no stopping' (definition; to allow dropping off/picking up) so the moment a door is opened and someone gets out, you have 'parked' and therefore the offence has been commited. Had your wife not got out and waited until you were clear of the markings then all would of been fine.

 

It may still be worth looking at the markings/signage ect to see if they are compliant.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
sailor sam

sailor sam

Posted
Posted

Ok its not for a school markings offence, its for parking partially on a footpath. The pics do not show this very clearly at all so I reckon we should see what others have to say. The pics could have been taken anywhere in my opinion.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Theodore T

Theodore T

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The wording on the PCN differs slightly from the wording on the list of contraventions I downloaded from newparkinglaws.co.uk where it says "parked with one or more wheels on any part of an urban road other than a carriageway (footway parking). Whereas on the PCN it reads "Parked with one or more wheels on or over a footpath or any part of a road other than a carriageway (camera enforcement).

Is that significant?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Theodore T

Theodore T

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The rear of the PCN under the heading Camera Evidence invites me to to be provided with, free of charge, such still images from that record as, in the authority's opinion, establish the contravention.

Does that mean they are holding other photos and if so could they use them in an appeal. Or would they have to rely on the two that they have sent to me and called "case evidence report" ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
sailor sam

sailor sam

Posted
Posted
The rear of the PCN under the heading Camera Evidence invites me to to be provided with, free of charge, such still images from that record as, in the authority's opinion, establish the contravention.

Does that mean they are holding other photos and if so could they use them in an appeal. Or would they have to rely on the two that they have sent to me and called "case evidence report" ?

 

Well the ones you have posted dont seem sufficeint to me. They do not show that your wheels are on the 'footway'. I reckon we should wait for other caggers to take a look.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
TheBogsDollocks

TheBogsDollocks

Posted
Posted

The PCN is invalid. The council has failed to comply with Paragraph 2(a) of Statutory Instrument 2007/3483

 

The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007 (No. 3483) - Statute Law Database

 

The PCN must be posted on the date of the notice (23/12/2009) yet the council claim the date of posting is 24/12/2009. Therefore a procedural impropriety has occurred.

Link to post
Share on other sites
green_and_mean

green_and_mean

Posted
Posted
The wording on the PCN differs slightly from the wording on the list of contraventions I downloaded from newparkinglaws.co.uk where it says "parked with one or more wheels on any part of an urban road other than a carriageway (footway parking). Whereas on the PCN it reads "Parked with one or more wheels on or over a footpath or any part of a road other than a carriageway (camera enforcement).

Is that significant?

 

The wording in London was changed by the LLA act 2008 which made all roads enforceable not just urban ones and footpaths as well as footways.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Theodore T

Theodore T

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thank you Green & Mean. I will certainly contest this PCN on the strength of the info given above by Blog Dollocks and as mentioned earlier by Sailor Sam - the photos do not show any supporting evidence as to the position of the car in relation to any road markings etc.

As a matter of interest I will re-visit the site tomorrow and stand at the spot where the photo was taken from (as determined by Google Earth using the coordinates printed on the Photos). I do not believe it possible to see road markings at that distance and I think there is a slight rise in the road making it impossible from that height and position to see markings on the far side of the junction. I'll report my findings.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...