Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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

Anyone taken PayPal to the Small Claims over witheld money?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5151 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

  • Replies 91
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Fair comment. I just think it should be less for smaller less expensive items.

 

PS. £25 was the starting/reserve price.

 

They already took £1.10 from my Paypal account. I thought that was their commission, as the listing fee was only 10p.

 

 

If all else fails, kick them where it hurts and SOD'EM;)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's nothing to do with the T's&C's Jimmy. I could have sold elsewhere, but would anyone have seen it. Maybe so, but not many. I can't even think of another auction site but would seriously consider switching if there was one with enough buyers and sellers.

 

Just to save me boring myself with the T's&C's, could you tell me what their commission is on every hundred pounds? I can work any sales commission in the future from that.

 

Cheers Big Ears.

 

 

SOD'EM

 

 

If all else fails, kick them where it hurts and SOD'EM;)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No I cannot because it edepends on the item category, your ststus with ebay, whether you area business or private seller, whether you list when they have any offer on.

 

All clearly on their site. Search for 'fees' and it will all come up.

 

Hope that helps, big nose.:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm...

 

Since the service is limited to E-money, which does not qualify as a deposit or an investment service in the sense of the Law, you are not protected by the Luxembourg deposit guarantee schemes provided by the Association pour la Garantie des Dépôts Luxembourg (AGDL). PayPal enables you to make payments to and accept payments from third parties. PayPal is an independent contractor for all purposes. PayPal does not have control of nor assumes the liability or legality for the products or services that are paid for with our Service. We do not guarantee the identity of any User or ensure that a buyer or a seller will complete a transaction.

 

Underlining for emphasis is mine.

 

On what basis does Paypal then withold funds and fundamentally alter the contract between the seller and buyer? :confused:

In knowledge lies wisdom

 

Mo - not even a bar-stool lawyer, but I'll help where I can...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On what basis does Paypal then withold funds and fundamentally alter the contract between the seller and buyer?

 

Presumably on the basis that they offer greater protection for ebay sales than they do for other transactions. Nobody would buy a high value item on ebay from a new seller without this protection. In return for providing ebayers with the confidence to trade with newbies they put certain safeguards in place. Their ball, their game, their rules.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On what basis does Paypal then withold funds and fundamentally alter the contract between the seller and buyer? :confused:

 

The fundamental alteration is based upon a figment of your own imagination, presumably.

 

In the mean time, what actually happens is that Paypal upholds the terms of the Paypal User Agreement, as agreed by every member, while the contract between a buyer and a seller is absolutely unaffected.

 

Whatever happens with a payment made to Paypal, the buyer or the seller owns the right to enforce the contract of sale. If Paypal refunds a payment the seller could sue the buyer none the less, or if Paypal refuse a refund the buyer could sue the seller none the less, and may well be better off to do so anyway because the rights of a consumer, granted by law, extend a good deal further than what is rumoured to be the usual practice of Paypal.

 

:eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what? I used to *really* respect CAG as a place where people could come and discuss ways to protect consumer rights. Where people were willing to discuss and investigate openly and without rancour find legal ways around dodgy malpractices.

Yeah, lots of blanks were fired in the process, but ideas were exchanged and ways found to negate and nulify illegal practices.

Ask any bank how they feel about CAG.

Ask any DCA how they feel about CAG.

 

But that doesnt seem to be the case anymore. Now it seems this place is just shill city.

 

Hope you guys are all happy, and PayPal is paying you enough to screw up Consumer Action Group for them.

In knowledge lies wisdom

 

Mo - not even a bar-stool lawyer, but I'll help where I can...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

And who exactly is that aimed at?

 

If you want the bottom line, Paypal are doing what you agreed they could do. I hate paypal with a passion and would never use them under any circumstanecs and cirtainly do not work for or support them in any way.

 

But your argument must be based on facts. the fact is you signed up and thus agreed that they can do this. No point throwing toys out the pram if you don't like the truth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And who exactly is that aimed at?

 

If you want the bottom line, Paypal are doing what you agreed they could do. I hate paypal with a passion and would never use them under any circumstanecs and cirtainly do not work for or support them in any way.

 

But your argument must be based on facts. the fact is you signed up and thus agreed that they can do this. No point throwing toys out the pram if you don't like the truth.

 

 

If the cap fits, wear it matey. Just be cause a company (eBay) forces you to use another company (PayPal) doesnt constitute "Oh I signed this, so tough on me."

As members of something called Consumer Action Group, where we percieve a problem with what a company is doing, our aim is to redress that if possible, or to discover ways in which consumers (forced consumers in this case) can at worst negate the effects of that companies dodgy practices, or at best put a stop to them.

You say you "hate PayPal with a passion? Sorry, I'm missing your passionate wish to put any kind of shot across their bows - rather I see your pasionate wish to just bite down harder each time they shaft us again, just because... well, you signed up.

In other areas of CAG, you probably signed a loan agreement - that isnt going to stop you using the law to tell a DCA to go FT when they come after you without a copy of the agreement, or when they're terms and conditions are shown correctly, or they're out of statute, or they told a porky on the POC.

In short, like I said - if the cap fits wear it.

If you arent interested in finding ways to kick PayPal in the nuts, thats fine with me, but take your smirky "Well, you signed up..." shpiel off to your own thread - I can suggest a title if you're stuck for ideas - and maybe some others will feel more inclined to chuck some POSITIVE ideas around, which in my experience has been the more normal behaviour on CAG.

 

Have a honey of a day.

In knowledge lies wisdom

 

Mo - not even a bar-stool lawyer, but I'll help where I can...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The convincing way to kick Paypal in the nuts is to refuse to use it.

 

On ebay.de the vast majority of sellers who sell to the home market (not abroad) continue to accept payments by bank transfer, as they always did, because they think it daft to pay an extra fee to Paypal, and the buyer are content with this, as they always were, because it works.

 

Therefore, because the sellers have the sense to think it through as far as that, Paypal is not yet forced on the German site for fear of an exodus of sellers were ebay so reckless.

 

In the UK the punters are that much more like dogs sat on thistles, somehow expecting somebody to heed their howling but without the sense to shift their rear ends from the cause of the pain.

 

:eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The convincing way to kick Paypal in the nuts is to refuse to use it.

 

On ebay.de the vast majority of sellers who sell to the home market (not abroad) continue to accept payments by bank transfer, as they always did, because they think it daft to pay an extra fee to Paypal, and the buyer are content with this, as they always were, because it works.

 

Therefore, because the sellers have the sense to think it through as far as that, Paypal is not yet forced on the German site for fear of an exodus of sellers were ebay so reckless.

 

In the UK the punters are that much more like dogs sat on thistles, somehow expecting somebody to heed their howling but without the sense to shift their rear ends from the cause of the pain.

 

:eek:

 

Are you aware of how you actually don't use Paypal in the UK though? By which I mean, not are you aware we must use it, I know you are - but in terms of fine details? Like we are told by eBay "You MUST offer PayPal" - and that seems to transmit as "You must accept payment by PayPal if the buyer offers it." Can they make you accept Paypal legally? I would have thought not?

I'm contemplating putting on a couple of items on the basis of "If you'll be paying cash on collection, I will discount your winning bid by 10%" That seems entirely sensible to me, since PayPal will a) screw me around and b) screw a load of fees out of me anyway.

 

Question is, do I fall foul of some deliberately obscure eBay/PayPal cartel rule by doing that?

 

For the record my feedback is now an exemplary 100% now over 14 items, 9 sold, and I'm always upfront with my buyers and bidders who contact me during auctions as to who they are actually dealing with via my bands MySpace page - they know they're not dealing with some pikey out to tuck them up.

In knowledge lies wisdom

 

Mo - not even a bar-stool lawyer, but I'll help where I can...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They not only tell the UK sellers that they must offer Paypal, ebay items fail to appear on ebay.co.uk if listed on another site where the sellers are not obliged to offer Paypal and the sellers fail to.

 

None the less, a good proportion of German sellers would continue to prefer to sell to Germany only, rather than be bothered with any of that.

 

Were a competitor to complain about the virtual monopoly I dare say that a court of law would be no more keen on it than the German sellers, but in the mean time it is much more fun to watch eBay continue to shoot itself in the foot. If you read the reports to shareholders you will find that eBay is not so much more keen on Paypal than anybody else is, because it is badly managed. Paypal struggles to cope on an international basis if only because the regulation of money is that much more strict in some parts of the World. None the less, eBay is stuck with it, there being no viable opportunity to offload Paypal now that the damage is done, in terms of the value of ebay shares over the past five years.

 

:eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can they make you accept Paypal legally?

 

As has been pointed out they tend to cave if challenged but in the grand scheme of things this is worth it to them. Sellers don't get their money that much faster if they fight it anyway. It is heartbreaking to hear of people needing to sell their possessions in order to pay bills and then finding they won't get the money for ages. I suppose the principle is not that much different to an auction house insisting on payment by cash and only ever paying out by cheque, the clearance time is different but the payout is still not instant for the seller.

 

Selling on ebay is not simple and isn't problem free, whatever their advertising says.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...