Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • next time dont upload 19 single page pdfs use the sites listed on upload to merge them into one multipage pdf.. we aint got all day to download load single page files 2024-01-15 DBCLegal SAR.pdf
    • If you have not kept the original PCN you can always send an SAR to Excel and they have to send you all the info they have on you within a month. failure to do so can lead to you being able to sue them for their failure.......................................nice irony.
    • Thank you and well done  for posting up all those notices it must have have taken you ages.. The entrance sign is very helpful since the headline states                    FREE PARKING FOR CUSTOMERS ONLY in capitals with not time limit mentioned. Underneath and not in capitals they then give the actual times of parking which would not be possible to read when driving into the car park unless you actually stopped and read them. Very unlikely especially arriving at 5.30 pm with possibly other cars behind. On top of that the Notice goes on to say that the terms and conditions are inside the car park so the entrance sign cannot offer a contract it is merely an offer to treat. Inside the car park the signs are mostly too high up and the font size too small to be able to read much of their signs. DCBL have not shown a single sign that can be read on their SAR. Although as they show photographs which were taken the year after your alleged breach we do not know what the signs were when you were there. For instance the new signs showed the charge was then £100 whereas your PCN was for £85. Who knows, when you were there perhaps the time was for 3 hours. They were asked to produce  planning permission which would have been necessary for the ANPR cameras alone and didn't do so. Nor did they provide a copy of the contract-DCBL  "deeming them disproportionate or not relevant to the substantive issues in the dispute" How arrogant and untruthful is that? The contract and planning permission could be vital to having the claim thrown out. I can find no trace of planning permission for the signs nor the cameras on Tonbridge Council planning portal. and the contract of course is highly relevant since some contracts advise the parking rouges that they cannot take motorists to Court. I understand that Europarks are now running that car park which means that nexus didn't  last long before being thrown out.....................................
    • Hi,   I am not sure if I posted this already here but I don't think I did. I attach a judgement that raises very interesting points IMO. Essentially EVRi did their usual non attendance that we normally see, however the judge (for the first time I've seen in these threads) dismissed the notice and awarded me judgement by default because their notice misses the "confirmation of compliance" paragraph. in and out in 3 minutes (aside from the chat at the end with the judge about his problems with evri) Redacted - evri CPR loss.pdf
    • Just to update this. I did apply to strikeout and they did not attend the hearing. I won by defualt and the hearing lasted 5 minutes (court only allocated 15). The judge simply explained that the only matter he was really considering is if the Defendant could have any oral evidence to defend the claim. However he said he had decided that based on their defence, and their misunderstanding of law, and their non attendence he did not think they had any reasonsable chance so he awarded me SJ + Costs on the claim form + the strikeout fee. Luckily when I sent the defendant the order I woke up the next day to a wire trasnfer for the full sum of the judgement
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Civil enforcement help please


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5115 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

Hi,this is my first ever post,I have decided to join the CAG forum after reading numerous threads about parking charge notices. I live on the Isle of Wight and have an issue with a parking ticket I was issued after being ten minutes late back to the car after watching a film in Coppins bridge car park.Two weeks later I recieved a letter asking for £75 and this would increase to £150 if not settled within 2 weeks.This is when my research started,I found an article in that weeks local paper telling people not to pay as it is unenforceable,however next weeks paper said the opposite.This has left me confused and worried especially after recently receiving a baliffs letter demanding a sum in excess of £230.My wife did try and contact the civil enforcement people in Liverpool and explained we had lost the letter and were going to pay,but no further communication.Sorry f I have missed any details,please ask and I will fill you in.Thanks for any help you can offer me in this confusing matter awol345

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the alleged offence take place on council land or private land. If on private land just ognore it.

Not sure where Liverpool comes into it unless thjis is a seperate issue and another ticket.

Can you please clarify your post in a bit more detail so that we can answer it as appropriate? Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming CE are not acting on behalf of a council, (the council name will be clearly shown on the PCN), then you should completely ignore tehm

 

Do not appeal

Do not telephone them

Do not write to them

Do not reply to their mail

Do not pay them

Link to post
Share on other sites

The car park in question always used to be free,I mean it never had ticket machines/pay and display.Hence my lack of warning.The Liverpool thing is merely where the notice was posted from,nothing else.I have received parking tickets from the local council (not for at least a year)and paid them.This is entirely different not to mention alot more expensive.My wife is convinced its a [problem] but now the baliffs are sending me letters Im not so sure

Link to post
Share on other sites

baliffs, sending you letters , dont think so , read them again its toothless [causing problems] DCA's

 

it it actuallys says its a letter from a baliff , scan it and post it removing your details

..

Link to post
Share on other sites

I found this on the internet

A total of 297 car-parking spaces. This comprises of Furlongs car park which has 96 on-site car-parking spaces. In addition, there are a further 201 public car parking spaces on the adjacent Upper Coppins Bridge Car Park, which is accessed via a footbridge across the A3020.

The Upper Coppins Bridge Car Park is controlled by the local authority.

The Furlongs car park is free however there is a maximum stay of1.5hours The Furlongs carpark is the one I was in hope that helps

Link to post
Share on other sites

The baliff letter is from a company called Newlyn.Unfortunatly my wife ripped the letter up.She was quite angery and has done the same to all the letters we received,not good I know.Like I say she is convinced its a [problem] and saw no reason to keep them,and took great comfort in tearing them into tiny pieces!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also there was no mention of the local council on the letters,it is exactly the same as others I have veiwed on the forum.Headed Civil enforcement ltd blah blah Liverpool etc.Also has the scales of justice on it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reply from IW Trading Standards

Thought you may be interested in this from IOW

 

Thank you for your enquiry.

 

Civil Enforcement Ltd were contracted by the landowner in December 2009 to protect the car park from overstaying and denying business to the other companies on the site.

 

The issue is civil and contractual and not one this service is able to become involved with. The terms of the contract are clearly stated at the entrance and there are signs within the car park. If a driver parks in the car park they are deemed to have accepted those terms (ie staying no more than 90 minutes). If the driver breaches that contract by staying longer than 90 minutes, the landowner is entitled to losses.

 

The company is acting within the British Parking Association guidelines, which again makes it difficult for this service to act.

 

If you feel that the company has acted unfairly you may wish to register a complaint with the British Parking Association

Link to post
Share on other sites

if that refers to the ticket , correction >> [problem] INVOICE you received then you can ignore it , pity you didnt have the Newlands letter ( they may well send you another one ) because if they claim they are acting as Baliff's in the matter of a PPC Invoice without it being to Court their in the deep brown stuff

 

by what you have said it would would be safe to just ignore their petty attempts to [problem] you

..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou thats music to my ears,however you can't help feeling sorry for those who pay/will pay in the future.Something should be done to stop innocent motorists being the victims of PPCs Wheel clamping etc is absolutely discusting and so so wrong!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...