Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • as you mention the bpa sounds like its a scummy private car park lot blue badges mean nothing on private land anyway.............. so a failure to display something that is meaningless on private land anyway is a money grabbing scam moved to the private parking forum dx dx
    • who is it from  a council or a private parking company?
    • As per the heading, received a parking charge for failure to display a blue badge in a disabled bay on a retail park.  I am a blue badge holder, disabled/wheelchair user with a Motability vehicle. I received the charge as 'notice to keeper' I was not the driver. I don't have a valid driving license so use a carer. The notice arrived a week after the alleged incident. It states that as the 'driver' failed to pay the charge in full  hence, it is now the keepers responsibility ( the notice was dated 2 days after the alleged infringement and as no notice to driver was on the vehicle, I don't know how they expect the driver to be able to either pay or dispute the charge if they are not aware of it) Anyway, really looking for help how to reply. I cannot remember if the badge was correctly displayed or not. Photos taken of car miss a bit where I store my badge if not displayed so it would be possible to see a badge even if not 'correctly displayed" . It was a bit of a sh**ty day weather wise, gusty and raining  (as seen on the photos which reminded me of the actual day) so it is possible that badge blew to the floor as the driver was helping me out of the car into wheelchair. There is no windscreen photo showing that a PCN to "Driver" was stuck on the window either. The car park is free. There are no Parking Signs at all near the disabled bays that one could read to adhere to any terms and conditions. The whole row of disabled bays - of which are there many only state badge holders ( does not stipulate Blue Badge Holders) The notice states that the parking company is a member of the BPA and Operating in accordance with the British Parking Association's Code of Practice. The BPA, section 19.1 State that at least one parking sign should be near the disabled bays, in a position that can be easily  read by by a disabled person without leaving their car in order to decide to be bound by such terms. We returned to look for signage on the retail park and could not find one sign that was near the bays. The only sign we could find was high up on a pole but not near the bays. Someone had to get out of the car and stand on tip toes to be able to take a photo of a sign. I would be grateful if someone could help or point me in the right direction. It is now  15 days since the alleged incident and 7 days since I received the notice.
    • also just to clarify is it required that I physically post to both the county court and Evri? I read in another thread you can just email Evri a copy since they will just rescan whatever you post anyway (if they even read it)
  • 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
      • 162 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

Mr Gary Kettle


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6690 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

This is the same story as Mr M Bowden at HSBC - just waiting for confirmation of this...

 

BTW wilipwoy - did you get the Halifax lawyer's name?

Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.

 

All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are tmes when I greatly enjoy the thought of getting the banks to repay the money they have unlawfully taken. There are also times when I enjoy the thought of making the banks jump through hoops- an experience they enjoy inflicting on others.

 

Finally there are times when I enjoy the whole damned thing. This is one of those times.

 

PS If the signatory on the letter is computer generated it does rather torpedo the manual intervention argument.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gary's not real? I was so looking forward to speaking to him :( lol

25/06/08 - NatWest - Prelim letter

09/03/06 - Halifax - Settled 27/4

22/03/06 - Capital One - Settled 24/6

17/04/06 - Nationwide - Settled 8/9

 

 

Hit the DONATE BUTTON and give 5% back to support this site!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you request a transcript of the tape? It would make good reading.

Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.

 

All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find this totally unbelievable. Just when I thought there was nothing else that the Halifax could do that would surprise me they pull yet another rabbit out of another hat!!!

 

Surely it can't be right that they just make up a name for a computer generated signatory? After all they are required to be so meticulous now in the collection of our personal data all in the name of combatting fraud.

 

Surely they are required to advise us that this is a computer generated signatory and not a real person? Why do they not sign their letters "for and on behalf of Halifax PLC" instead of leading us to believe that Mr Kettle really exists?

 

This one really does beggar belief!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I don't know who is fooling who. If you Google the

Chartered Institute of Bankers combined with Garry R D Kettle, you will be taken to a list of the Fellows of the Chartered Institue of Bankers, one of whom is Garry R D Kettle, who is listed as working for Halifax plc. That's a lot of effort for someone who doesn't exist. Methinks the lawyers are having a bit of fun!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It could be that he's left and they have just carried on using his name.

 

 

That looks about right to me. When you google his name He does appear as a fellow of CIB, but when you open the corresponding pdf document that lists all the fellows, his name no longer appears.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just about to post a really silly comment then.....

 

Does this mean that the letters are not legally binding then

 

But of course they arent legally binding even if signed with the blood of the chairman

 

Silly me!

Paul

 

Halifax Status

LBA Sent 11/04/06

1/3 offered by phone 20/04/06 - Rejected

BCT Status

Statements Recieved 31/03/06

Capital One Status

Recieved Lie/Reply 24/04/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

;) Pm me in private, I have a genuine piece of the Berlin Wall to sell to you :D...

 

Ive got the ships wheel from the Titanic. I think thats why they couldnt turn the damn thing:rolleyes:

Paul

 

Halifax Status

LBA Sent 11/04/06

1/3 offered by phone 20/04/06 - Rejected

BCT Status

Statements Recieved 31/03/06

Capital One Status

Recieved Lie/Reply 24/04/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for enlightening us re Mr Gary Kettle. We suspected he did not exist last year when he started 'borrowing' money from our account and I tried to speak with him. Even the manager of my branch was not told he wasn't real. She could get nothing from his department and we were no wiser as to the sudden slashing of our overdraft.

 

I am sending a preliminary letter tomorrow to claim back £1778-00 mostly from the past eighteen months. If it wasn't so serious, it would be laughable. But I will wait for my money back before smiling.

 

Cheers all and good luck.

 

Warm wishes

Andy Moore

Link to post
Share on other sites

That looks about right to me. When you google his name He does appear as a fellow of CIB, but when you open the corresponding pdf document that lists all the fellows, his name no longer appears.

 

It doesn't on the PDF document, but I think I looked at the HTML page and saw it there. But perhaps he has left Halifax. His bonus should allow him to retire to the Bahamas!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't on the PDF document, but I think I looked at the HTML page and saw it there. But perhaps he has left Halifax. His bonus should allow him to retire to the Bahamas!

 

His bonus allowed him to BUY the Bahamas, and most of it came from my account

Link to post
Share on other sites

Google works by "crawling" a document and indexing its content. Suggesting that GK once appeard on the page when it was crawled, but since then he has been removed and the page hasn't been crawled by google since.

 

Cheers,

Leigh

Halifax A/c #1:

Court Claim Submitted: 05/06/2006 £1,836.36 - SETTLED IN FULL 22/06/2006!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 03/07/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6690 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...