Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
  • 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

Can the settlement method be requested?


Number6
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6494 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

I'm sure this must have been asked before but I can't find any related threads so sorry if I missed it.

 

It seems that LTSB (or their solicitors) always apply the condition that the refund is paid into the account from which the charges were taken. Fair enough..., sort of, I thought originally.

 

Has anyone successfully challenged this condition and got a refund by cheque?

 

The reason I ask is that since my claim went in LTSB have already taken more charges from the account so by the time I actually get the refund most of the surplus that could otherwise be put to useful purpose (like paying some bills) will be eaten up by the subsequently applied charges.

 

So I would then have to start a new claim cycle to reclaim the new charges that were applied thus wasting more of my time.

 

However, if my refund was by cheque then I could pay that into a "clean" account and issue a cheque from there into the LTSB account to cover the charges originally claimed; I could then "debate" with LTSB about the subsequent charges whilst having the full benefit of the refund in the meantime.

 

So has anyone got settlement by cheque? If so did it take much persuasion to get it?

 

Pete

I will not make any deals with you. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own. Number 6

Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends, to some extent, on the condition of the account. Many claims are made against accounts which are already closed. In such a case the bank has no option but to send a cheque.

 

If an account has a debit balance greater than the charges refund, then you would expect the bank try to offset the debt by paying the refund into the account.

 

As to additional charges, when the bank eventually send you a conditional offer, which they surely will, you can suggest acceptance on the basis that they include the more recent charges in the settlement, thus saving everybody time and money. Failing this you will immediately issue a further claim. Many people who have tried this method have been successful.

 

Elsinore

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

When (if) the conditional offer arrives it should be for approx £1500 more than the overdrawn balance was at the time of the claim. The problem is that by the time the offer is made and accepted by me then LTSB will have taken in the order of a further £1000 in charges so if it's paid into the account I'll only get £500 in my pocket (provided of course I can withdraw it before they slap on even more charges!!). So if they won't agree to include the latest charges and interest in the settlement I'll be right back to square one and have to start the whole claim cycle again and wait another three months or whatever.

 

Whereas if I can persuade them to give me a cheque then I'm quite happy to pay back the overdraft as it was at the time of the claim and leave them to stew over the rest.

 

I suppose a lot hinges on how far I'm prepared to risk things by pushing them hard.

 

I just wondered if anyone else has tried to get a cheque and if so how did they fare?

 

Pete

I will not make any deals with you. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own. Number 6

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blimey, Pete, they are being particularly unpleasant to you, aren't they?:o

As they are playing hard ball with you, it's time to play hard ball with them.

 

Provided that you can afford another court fee, why not start another claim now, without preliminaries. That way, when you reach offer stage, they will see that you mean business and, hopefully, agree to settle the lot.

 

Otherwise I don't see them willingly offering a cheque. Would you?

 

Elsinore

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pete. I have a similar probem with recently applied charges. I have just written to them saying I will not discuss settlement unless they do include the charges taken in the last six weeks.(£300) My reckoning is they'll either agree to include them as per my demand or will see me in court which, quite frankly, I would welcome...however scary, as there is no way on this earth any judge would tell them it was ok to charge me £35 for bouncing a £1.99 charity direct debit! Taking a leaf out of mjanet's book and standing my ground. Also remembering that for the first time ever...it's me wearing the trousers! Good luck! Saj x

SEE MY THREAD HERE...http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloydstsb-successes/7358-saj-lloyds-tsb.html

Data Protection Act letter sent recorded delivery 15.5.06

Compliance 1.06.06

PAR letter sent recorded delivery 7.06.06

1st denial received 13/6/06

LBA letter sent recorded delivery 21.06.06 (received 22/6)

Moneyclaim filed 7/7/06, Served 15/7/06

Allocation questionaire returned 28/8/06

Court date 1st December :lol:

SETTLED UNCONDITIONALLY IN FULL 5.10.06

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...