Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Honestly you are all amazing on this site, thank you so much for your help and time. ill keep an eye out and only return when i receive a claim letter for sure also, i updated my address with amex and tsb before i even missed payments. the initial address was my family home but i dont reside there. to avoid a bombardment of letters there i have now updated my address, will they send all threats etc to the new address? Or old address?   do you reccomend i send both tsb and amex my update in address via a letter?
    • Your point 4 deals with that and puts them to strict proof .....but realistically they are not in a position to state that within their particulars they were not the creditor at the time of default but naturally assume the OC would have...so always worth challenging and if you get a DJ who knows his onions on the day may ask for further evidence from the OC internal accounts system. 
    • I see, shame, I think if a claim is 'someone was served' then proof of that should be mandatory. Appreciate your input into the WS whenever you get chance, thanks in advance
    • Paper trail off the original creditor often confirms the default and issue of a notice...not having or being able to disclose the actual copy or being able to produce a copy less so. Creditors are not compelled to keep copies of the actual default notice so you will in most cases get a reconstituted version but must contain accurate figures/dates/format.     .    
    • Including Default Notice Andy? Ok, I think this is the best I can do.. it all makes sense with references to their WS. They have included exhibits that dates don't match the WS about them, small but still.. if you're going to reference letters giving dates, then the exhibits should be correct, no? I know I redacted them too much, but one of the dates differs to the WS by a few months. IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim. 1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 24/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
  • 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

Kingston Eden Street Bus Lanes


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3103 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 394
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Suppose the legal advice is along the lines of: Just go for it- send out £130 demands to all pending cases, get as much cash in as possible, don't spend money on chasing non-payers, but for heaven's sake sort your procedures out.

 

If the appeal period/"discount" is voluntary and PATAS rulings on one case not binding on another, RBK might be able to save face & maximise revenue & take the opportunity to start again. Some people will just pay up through ignorance/intimidation. There are bigger brains than mine on this forum- would it be useful to think through possible responses to different scenarios so that unequivocal and consistent advice can be given to people trapped by this crazy system?

 

 

D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

 

I have just completed appeal letters for 2 PCNs that I received for apparantly contravening the questionable bus lane in Eden Street. The first PCN was for the 3rd September and the second was for the 11th September, just 9 days later! I do not know the area so was totally unaware that I had committed an offence. I requested image documentation which shows I am travelling behind a double decker bus which obstructs my view from all road signs (these are questionably) and any road surgace markings as the bus was directly over these when I entered the crossroads. Unfortunately the first PCN did not arrive until after I had entered the road for a second time 9 days later.

 

I would never knowingly contravene a bus lane and I would most certainly never knowingly contravene a bus lane for a second time just 9 days later.

 

I am hoping my appeal letters are accepted as this has to be one of the most unclear bus lanes I have ever known. It is a joke.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

 

I have just completed appeal letters for 2 PCNs that I received for apparantly contravening the questionable bus lane in Eden Street. The first PCN was for the 3rd September and the second was for the 11th September, just 9 days later! I do not know the area so was totally unaware that I had committed an offence. I requested image documentation which shows I am travelling behind a double decker bus which obstructs my view from all road signs (these are questionably) and any road surgace markings as the bus was directly over these when I entered the crossroads. Unfortunately the first PCN did not arrive until after I had entered the road for a second time 9 days later.

 

I would never knowingly contravene a bus lane and I would most certainly never knowingly contravene a bus lane for a second time just 9 days later.

 

I am hoping my appeal letters are accepted as this has to be one of the most unclear bus lanes I have ever known. It is a joke.

 

 

Lets us know how you get on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Case Reference:2110276103Appellant:Mr Kevin GrangerAuthority:Kingston Upon ThamesVRM:RJ10ESGPCN:KT55400629Contravention Date:16 Dec 2010Contravention Time:16:26Contravention Location:Eden StreetPenalty Amount:£120.00Contravention:Being in a bus laneDecision Date:21 Sep 2011Adjudicator:Alastair McFarlaneAppeal Decision:AllowedDirection:cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Enforcement Notice.Reasons:Mr. Granger appeared on behalf of his wife, who was the driver and owner of the vehicle.

 

The Enforcement Authority's case is that Mrs. Granger drove her vehicle along a bus lane in Eden Street on Thursday 16 th December 2010, which was prohibited.

 

Mr. and Mrs. Granger are residents of Kingston and Mrs. Granger knows the bus lane restriction in Eden Street well. She has consistently maintained that the bus lane sign had its cover over at the time and therefore she relied on this as indicating that the bus lane was not in operation.

 

The Enforcement Authority accept that there is an ability to cover the sign - which is to allow the road to be used by all traffic, when this is necessary at the request of the police.

 

Mr. Granger contends that there was a problem with the catch securing this cover and that this was acknowledged by the Enforcement Authority's staff in phone calls.

 

I have considered the CCTV evidence and this does not show the state of the sign at the time. I accept Mrs. Granger's account as truthful and therefore I find there was no contravention as the sign was covered at the material time.

 

Accordingly this appeal is allowed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have considered the CCTV evidence and this does not show the state of the sign at the time.

 

Yet another example of the Council failing to provide reliable and proper evidence. The bus lane is closed at the moment for roadworks.

 

Was that you I heard making a racquet in the Market place the other day? :violin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I happened to walk by the inception of the Bus Lane today - they have dug it up for some weeks, to do with gas works. Anyway, they have now added the correct legend to the road - 1048.4 - to include Bus, Taxi, Cycle Lane. (Before anyone asks, the "&" may be omitted according to the regulations.) Of course, it's still impossible to read the word "Bus" as it is painted on a downward slope on approach and, most probably, other issues will still remain on which to fight.

 

All this must be as a result of the adjudicator visiting the location?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I happened to walk by the inception of the Bus Lane today - they have dug it up for some weeks, to do with gas works. Anyway, they have now added the correct legend to the road - 1048.4 - to include Bus, Taxi, Cycle Lane. (Before anyone asks, the "&" may be omitted according to the regulations.) Of course, it's still impossible to read the word "Bus" as it is painted on a downward slope on approach and, most probably, other issues will still remain on which to fight.

 

All this must be as a result of the adjudicator visiting the location?

 

Do you know if the second half past Heals is being enforced, there were a few tickets at the start but not heard of any since?

Link to post
Share on other sites

RBK wrote a long time ago (a year?) saying that they do not enforce that part of Eden Street! Strange, as we have seen at least one PCN on this forum, I seem to remember, to do with the right turn out of Ladybooth Road.

 

Yeah that was the only one I'd seen to, it seems odd they don't bother doing that and Brook street.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The extension of restrictions for the rest of Eden Street is incongruous because, technically, or on the face of it, there is no bus lane there. I am guessing the reason for the blue rondel signs as you turn left at the mini roundabout is merely as a result of no other traffic except buses, taxis and cycles being allowed to even reach that point from either Eden Street contraflow or Brook Street. Also, I expect they would have to put cameras up at Brook Street entrance; however, the signage on the road is still wrong there, too! Maybe we can ask for the TMO!? No matter, I was out there last summer taking pictures and received a few stares from a couple of coppers. Indeed, I had a chat with a particular grumpy one a few months ago about the signage and the recent Houghton decision and all he had to say was he had the power to give tickets for people going down the bus lane through the No Entry sign! Think he had the wrong end of the stick.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I happened to walk by the inception of the Bus Lane today - they have dug it up for some weeks, to do with gas works. Anyway, they have now added the correct legend to the road - 1048.4 - to include Bus, Taxi, Cycle Lane. (Before anyone asks, the "&" may be omitted according to the regulations.) Of course, it's still impossible to read the word "Bus" as it is painted on a downward slope on approach and, most probably, other issues will still remain on which to fight.

 

All this must be as a result of the adjudicator visiting the location?

 

Went shopping in Kinston today and say the new legend on the road, its so bad its comical if you approach the speed hump the 'bus' bit is totally hidden and it looks like a 'taxi lane'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi,

 

I've just received a PCN for this Eden Street Bus Lane - I'm totally outraged. I'm a driver that has NEVER had a PCN or and points before. I'm a regular cyclist and fully agree with sectioning off parts of the road and I'm happy to comply with any road enforcement for valid reasons. However this junctions is a joke in regards to markings. VERY unclear and no prior warning that you can;t drive ahead and HAVE to go right. It's clear revenue generation and NOT traffic policy. I fully feel this is fraud, criminal plain and simple.

 

Has anyone recently got one of the PCN's overturned? what do i need to do? I will take this to the highest court in the land!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Womblefox and welcome to CAG.

 

Well i've just a quick look on Street vIew to remind myself of the layout ect and from what I see there is plenty of grounds for appeal due to lack of adequate signage/road markings. God knows how a stranger to the area would know which way to go. The no left turn for example just before the bus lane would be on my mind rather than the restriction ahead as there dosn't appear to be any advanced warning of the alternative route ect.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The up to date signage is more in line with the law. Things to do immediately are to require:

 

1. Copies of all photographic evidence.

2. Appointment to view the video evidence - all of it, which must clearly show the signage in place on the day.

3. Copy of the new authorisation from the Department for Transport re the signage, any changed diagrams and/or plans.

 

Even though the signage on the road is more correct, the relative positioning with the pole sign is, arguably, not correct. Apologies re my previous post re "AND" and "&": I meant these are interchangeable, not may be omitted. In this case, "AND" is omitted on the road and, as said before, the "BUS" is illegible as it is written on the downward slope in the road. The "AND" omission may well be de minimis (minor); but, let's see what the authorisation states - you can get this direct from the DfT :

 

[email protected]

 

See decision as posted: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?260892-Kingston-Eden-Street-Bus-Lanes&p=3505185&viewfull=1#post3505185

 

Even though the legend/signage on the road has been changed there are other arguments to be used and quoted.

Edited by HYMN AND MI
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would still like an answer to a very simple question:

 

If buses, taxis, cycles & motorbikes can go down this ?100 yard section of road with impunity, how would it compromise the flow of traffic in Greater London if cars, vans & lorries could do so too?

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would still like an answer to a very simple question:

 

If buses, taxis, cycles & motorbikes can go down this ?100 yard section of road with impunity, how would it compromise the flow of traffic in Greater London if cars, vans & lorries could do so too?

 

David

 

I would direct this at RBK boffins i.e. those who drafted the TMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...