Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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

What exactly are Blair Oliver and Scott entitled to see.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5121 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

Other half has been making minmum payments to BOS for months and has been getting letters asking him to up the payments as they are due for review.

They then sent a letter saying that if he didnt contact them to review they would respond by putting the interest back on the account. At the moment he is just making payments which help reduce the balance and the interest has been suspended. He rang them to say he was even worse off than when he started the payments as things have gone up, rent etc.

 

They have sent out an expenditure form for him to complete which I think he should ignore but hes worried they will carry through the threat of adding interest again.

 

A few things I would like clarification on please:-

 

They have asked for his payslips - Ive said not to enclose them as they know full well how much goes into his account each week from work.

 

If he fills out the form then it will show he has more going out than coming in, are they entitled to my earning details? (I have been threatened by them as well but my Halifax account is in dispute so they are quiet at the moment)

On the form is asks if you are married, single or divorced. Technically he is divorced, we live together but are not married. They will know from records that we are at the same address so whats the best way to handle filling in the form?

 

I feel he should just state divorced and show that more is going out for him than coming in.

If they dont accept the payment as it is, without any increase (which they are not going to get) whats the worst that can happen. We are in rented property and he has no assets as such so I feel he should just carry on making the reduced payment and tell them to do their worst if they think they can get more. He has never missed any payments so to take him to court when there is no more cash would be a bit pointless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

none of their business!!!

send them nothing.

what is this debt?

are they collecting or have they brought the debt?

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply Dx, its a Halifax credit card which was passed to them some time ago and he has been making a monthly payment for a couple of years. They have written to him a few times over the past couple of months and he has just ignored the letters but its because they hjave threatened to start putting interest back on that he has responded this time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Blair Oliver & Snot are Halifax (Bank Of Scotland) in-house collectors.

 

Although they do say in their letters that they are a (Professional)Debt Collection Agency!

 

Don't let them bully you into sending anything as far as payslips or I&E are concerned.

 

Get a copy of the agreement and post it here for opinions.

 

Only pay what you can afford, they CANNOT demand more!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for the replies, we did CCA them and the result was a valid agreement. Thats why we have been paying the token payments.

 

The thoing thats worrying hiom now is the threat to start charging interest again. That will just eradicate all the progress he has made clearing the debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok if they have a valid agreement, write to them and appeal against putting charges back on, tell them that your circumstances remain the same and if they improve, you will at that point increase the amount you can pay.

 

How old is the account, can you post up your agreement for opinions?

Link to post
Share on other sites

when I make an offer t pay I always state that any attempts to increase or attempts to make me increase the offer negates the agreement and all payments will be stopped and the account put into dispute. seems to work none of the accounts I pay are ever messed with again

Link to post
Share on other sites

We are in rented property and he has no assets as such so I feel he should just carry on making the reduced payment and tell them to do their worst if they think they can get more.

 

Tell them this in writing. Remember these are commercial enterprises, they should not be suing people unless there is a reasonable prospect of recovering any money and costs that they are awarded. As your partner has no assets I think that HBOS would be disinclined to take court action against him as what would be the point.

 

If anything, I would say that your husband actually has the power here. They must of already trashed his credit so in real terms they have probably already done their worst. Tell him to make the offer that he can afford and that if they don't like it they can take further action.

 

Like any scenario, show the bully you are not scared and they will back off.

 

Best of luck and best regards,

 

TFT

09/07/09 :)Business Studies BA(Hons) 2:1:)

 

eCar Insurance overpayment - £325

Settled in full - 15/09/08

NatWest Student A/C bank charges - £260

Settled under hardship scheme - 08/06/09

Natwest Business A/C bank charges - £60

Settled in full as GOGW - 20/04/09

Santander Consumer Finance late payment fees - £60

Part settled for £48 - 01/03/08

Peugeot Finance late payment fees - £50

Settled in full before county court hearing - 01/09/09

Peugeot Finance overpayment of £247

Settled in full - 01/12/08

Valley Leisure - complaint about collections agent

£160 part refund of gym membership in compensation - 01/02/09

HFC Bank - complaint about payment deducted from my account on wrong date

GOGW £10 - 01/05/09

Link to post
Share on other sites

If anything, I would say that your husband actually has the power here. They must of already trashed his credit so in real terms they have probably already done their worst. Tell him to make the offer that he can afford and that if they don't like it they can take further action.

 

I fully agree with this post. I deal with 1st Credit, but they're all fairly much the same. They'll threaten you with all sorts of stuff like a 'visit' from someone to discuss the matter (no one ever comes) and bankruptcy; yet they won't bankrupt you (I used to ask them too since it would cost me nothing).

 

After much bullying from them, I've decided not to pay anything to them at all; they can swivel. Morally this is probably not right, but to be honest, I don't care about debt collection agencies; they have no morals themselves.

 

They try to phone me now and again but nothing much really. My partner receives the odd letter, but they can't come up with a valid credit agreement with her signature; so we just ignore them. When they phone and try to get me to answer their security questions I just take the mick and they hang up.

 

I must be nearly at my six year point too, when legally they can't do anything to me.

 

The bottom line is you don't have to worry; they've done their worst by trashing your OH credit rating. I considered suicide at one point because I was sick and tired of all the worry; but looking back worrying was a waste of time and energy because they honestly can't do much to you, in the situation you're in.

Data Protection Act sent to Barclays Bank 15 May 06.

 

Bank statements received 9 May 06. Owed £610 in charges and £31.96 in interest.

 

Prelim letter sent 15 Jun 06.

 

Letter Before Action sent 26 Jun 06.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...