Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • One other point to note, the more I read, the more I study, the more proficient I feel I am becoming in this area. Make no mistake DBCL if you are reading this, when I win in court, if I have the grounds to make any claims against you, such as breach of GDPR, I shall be doing so.
    • Yep, I read that and thought about trying to find out what the consideration and grace period is at Riverside but not sure I can. I know they say "You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is"  but I doubt they would disclose it to the public, maybe I should have asked in my CPR 31.14 letter? Yes, I think I can get rid of 5 minutes. I am also going to include a point about BPA CoP: 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place. I think that is Deception .... They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other!
    • Six months of conflict have also taken a heavy economic toll.View the full article
    • the Town and Country [advertisments ] Regulations 2007 are not easy to understand. Most Council planing officials don't so it's good that you found one who knows. Although he may not have been right if the rogues have not been "controlling" in the car park for that long. The time only starts when the ANPR signs go up, not how long the area has been used as a car park.   Sadly I have checked Highview out and they have been there since at least 2014 . I have looked at the BPA Code of Practice version 8 which covers 2023 and that states Re Consideration and Grace Periods 13.3 Where a parking location is one where a limited period of parking is permitted, or where drivers contract to park for a defined period and pay for that service in advance (Pay & Display), this would be considered as a parking event and a Grace Period of at least 10 minutes must be added to the end of a parking event before you issue a PCN. It then goes on to explain a bit more further down 13.5 You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is. 13.6 Neither a consideration period or a grace period are periods of free parking and there is no requirement for you to offer an additional allowance on top of a consideration or grace period. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________So you have  now only overstayed 5 minutes maximum since BPA quote a minimum of 10 minutes. And it may be that the Riverside does have a longer period perhaps because of the size of the car park? So it becomes even more incumbent on you to remember where the extra 5 minutes could be.  Were you travelling as a family with children or a disabled person where getting them in and out of the car would take longer. Was there difficulty finding a space, or having to queue to get out of the car park . Or anything else that could account for another 5 minutes  without having to claim the difference between the ANPR times and the actual times.
  • 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

Welcome - illegal repo in contravention of section 92 and unfair relationship ** WON **


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4283 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

As far as I was aware, officially I didn't pay anything to anybody apart from welcome finance for the amounts they set out to include the cash price for the car and the cost of the insurances. But in effect, after much investigation, it appears I would have inadvertently paid half of the insurance premiums as commission to welcome and they then paid half of that amount to the broker, so in a roundabout kind of way I would have paid money to welcome and a broker to cover the amount of commission dealings that went on without my knowledge. This is one of the reasons I have always felt their behaviour was grossly unfair!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Wait a minute, I'd better correct that one too! First they said they didn't pay any commission to anybody, then they said they only paid 2%, then they said they received 45% and paid 22.5% to the broker. I'll get it right in a minute, well it would be a lot easier to understand if they stuck to the same story from the beginning :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ho - how funny - you do need a degree in law and language then to make any sense of the way these deals work:-) This is so similar to my situation and I have to put up with the sarcastic comments from the finance manager about how I simply dont understand the law of agency so i should just go away and multiply :!: stupid ole me - of course you are the one who pays even if it is hidden and sideways - or - are they saying they pay it all cos they are so kind

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ho - how funny - you do need a degree in law and language then to make any sense of the way these deals work:-) This is so similar to my situation and I have to put up with the sarcastic comments from the finance manager about how I simply dont understand the law of agency so i should just go away and multiply :!: stupid ole me - of course you are the one who pays even if it is hidden and sideways - or - are they saying they pay it all cos they are so kind

 

Oh I've had that one too! They love to be patronising, it's what makes them feel so good about themselves.

 

Well if welcome sell an NU policy for £1000, for example, but NU give them £600 when they sell it and then they sell it to the customer for £1000, surely it works out that they have paid £400 for a policy and sold it to the customer for a £600 profit?? Who ends up getting stiffed and who ends up quids in??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Crikey, what a mess! I can see why it has been rumbling on for so long now!!!

I don't think they even care what they say any more, there have been so many different stories it must be impossible for them to remember what they said last let alone what they said first! Unluckily for them I happen to be the kind of person that remembers every tiny detail of everything anybody ever said to me, (ask my husband lol!), so as soon as a new version appears it triggers the "Contradiction Recognition Alert Procedure!!" :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course the obvious question is, did you pay the broker to sort out the finance for you?

 

Not relevant - hurstanger is clear - no motive needs proving. It is either decalred - or not declared. If it is not declared it is secret.

 

The broker simply needs to decalre that they will recieve a payment from the leneder - like mine did when they arranged my mortgage. Not rocket science.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not relevant to your post? As I said DYOR or not the choice is yours. But in your post you didn't only refer to WFS.

.

 

Yes i did - infact i only refred to Mr Palmer.

 

And like i said it has nothing to do with the case i refer to - as the case i refer to does not include commission.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not relevant - hurstanger is clear - no motive needs proving. It is either decalred - or not declared. If it is not declared it is secret.

 

The broker simply needs to decalre that they will recieve a payment from the leneder - like mine did when they arranged my mortgage. Not rocket science.

Oh but Mr Palmer said on the stand at trial that 'Undisclosed' and 'Secret' were different things altogether and just because it was undisclosed it doesn't mean it was secret, in fact 'Secret' is a legal term apparently and didn't apply in this case, but then he also said that they only paid 2% commission so it's anybody's guess really! :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

On that topic, you should check out Flanagan v Nemo... http://www.shoosmiths.co.uk/news/3769.asp

 

Relevant paragraph

 

Nemo only came into the transaction at its latter stages. They had no knowledge of the communications between Mr Flanagan and Central, which Mr Flanagan relied on to establish a fiduciary relationship. On that basis, any claim for procuring breach of fiduciary duty as against Nemo was found to fail as the lender could not have been aware of any special relationship between broker and borrower.

 

This is what makes it distinct from Hurstanger - Nemo had no knowledge. But i bet the paper trail in the OP's case shows a different set of circumstances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh but Mr Palmer said on the stand at trial that 'Undisclosed' and 'Secret' were different things altogether and just because it was undisclosed it doesn't mean it was secret, in fact 'Secret' is a legal term apparently and didn't apply in this case, but then he also said that they only paid 2% commission so it's anybody's guess really! :madgrin:

 

 

oooh - he didnt say that on oath did he by any chance?

 

deliberatley misrepresenting the facts? Or just plain wrong - not a very reliable witness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[Well if welcome sell an NU policy for £1000, for example, but NU give them £600 when they sell it and then they sell it to the customer for £1000, surely it works out that they have paid £400 for a policy and sold it to the customer for a £600 profit?? Who ends up getting stiffed and who ends up quids in??

 

 

The sweet shop deal

Jenny has no money for sweets

Timmy has none either but knows a way to get sweets for Jenny

Jack has lots of money for sweets

Timmy tells Jack that if he gives money to Jenny for sweets he will get a kiss

Jack gives Jenny money for sweets but Timmy wants a kiss too, so Jack tells Jenny that the price of sweets has gone up and that she must give him two kisses

Jenny gives Jack two kisses

Jack tells Timmy that he has had two kisses and one of them is for him.....

:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

oooh - he didnt say that on oath did he by any chance?

 

deliberatley misrepresenting the facts? Or just plain wrong - not a very reliable witness.

Yes he did, he said he had an honest belief in its truth and then squirmed the whole way through it with many desperate looks to his pals for support :razz:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes he did, he said he had an honest belief in its truth and then squirmed the whole way through it with many desperate looks to his pals for support :razz:

 

Report him for perjury - he must have known he was lying, he is head of the legal dept and would collate the evidence.

 

Deliberate misrepresentation - be interesting to know if the Sols knew this - would be one for the SRA.

 

At least report this whole case to the OFT.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Report him for perjury - he must have known he was lying, he is head of the legal dept and would collate the evidence.

 

Deliberate misrepresentation - be interesting to know if the Sols knew this - would be one for the SRA.

 

At least report this whole case to the OFT.

 

Well that was one of the reasons I went to appeal, the whole trial was farcical! The underwriting sheet showed the amount of commission on PPI paid to be £398 but Mr Palmer said under oath that it was only £26, the judge looked at the sheet, ignored it and went with what Palmer said :-x

There was no getting away with at appeal though, the Lord Justice saw straight through their lies :-D Don't worry, I've done as much as humanly possible to highlight every single one of their lies in preparation for the final hearing. It is my sole mission in life to show them up for exactly what they are and I'm not done yet.

 

I suppose there's always some element of deceit in every case, a criminal will always protest his innocence in the hope of getting away with it I presume.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that was one of the reasons I went to appeal, the whole trial was farcical! The underwriting sheet showed the amount of commission on PPI paid to be £398 but Mr Palmer said under oath that it was only £26, the judge looked at the sheet, ignored it and went with what Palmer said :-x

There was no getting away with at appeal though, the Lord Justice saw straight through their lies :-D Don't worry, I've done as much as humanly possible to highlight every single one of their lies in preparation for the final hearing. It is my sole mission in life to show them up for exactly what they are and I'm not done yet.

 

Good

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...