Announcements
-
-
Tweets
-
Posts
-
Yes Dave, Cardiff Devil's thread is heading along the same lines. The PPC's either don't know the difference between consideration and grace periods, or they're deliberately trying to confuse their victims. I'll keep my opinion to myself, but either explanation is diabolical! -
@mrscsmith There seems to be some sort of war between the medical centre and the pharmacy, considering the info that Nick has found, so I think you have to start to consider what you will do if the landlord doesn't cooperate by Friday. That is the extended deadline that Countrywide have given you to pay. Pay £60 and the matter goes away. Or refuse to pay Countrywide. We would help you all the way. The law is on your side with the signage designed for gnomes and the 15-minute consideration & grace periods. As you've seen, Countrywide won't accept that though and will destroy half the Amazon by sending you letters that are supposed to be threatening. Eventually they will likely give up as even they know that are on very dodgy ground with a 10-minute stay. However, they do do court as you have seen. That is unlikely in your case. But not impossible, you saw in harni's case that they were so blinded by greed they started two court cases against harni, despite it being quite clear that harni had the law on his side, and of course harni won. But your call. -
What you've found out is dynamite Nick. The correct terms for the initial time-to-read-the-signs period is "consideration period" and for the final time-to-leave-the-car-park period is "grace period". That's what they're referred to in the various Codes of Practice. But learning two terms is asking a bit too much of Benita, bless her, and she refers to them both as grace periods. Anyway, Benita states there is a 5-minute time-to-read-the-signs period as does the medical centre's website - yet on their signs and in their letter to the OP they say there is not. So which is it? How is anyone supposed to make sense of such confusion? But the best bit is that Benita accepts there is a 5-minute time-to-read-the-signs period and a time-to-leave-the-car-park period. This is 10 minutes in the various Codes of Practice. When I did maths at school 5 + 10 = 15 so that is the OP in the clear. It is also a breach of the Equalities Act to not take into consideration that a blue badge holder may need extra time to read the signs and then leave the car park. Bad work, Benita.
-
-
We have already redacted it if you go check it again. Answered above in my past post. .
-
-
Recommended Topics
-
-
Our picks
-
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
-
-
Post in Some advice on buying a used car
BankFodder posted a post in a topic,
Post in Some advice on buying a used car
-
-
Post in Some advice on buying a used car
BankFodder posted a post in a topic,
People are still buying used cars unseen, paying by cash or by bank transfer, relying on brand-new MOT's by the dealer's favourite MOT station….
It always leads to tears!
used car.mp4
-
-
Pizza delivery insurance
BankFodder posted a topic in Postal and Delivery Services,
Pizza delivery insurance.mp4
Parcel delivery insurance 1.mp4-
-
- 2 replies
-
-
-
Recommended Topics
-
style="text-align: center;">
Thread Locked
because no one has posted on it for the last 5027 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
-
Recently Browsing 0 Caggers
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Have we helped you ...?
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:- 923 Finchley Road
London NW11 7PE
Recommended Posts