Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have just read the smaller print on their signs. It says that you can pay at the end of your parking session. given that you have ten minutes grace period the 35 seconds could easily have been taken up with walking back to your car, switching on the engine and then driving out. Even in my younger days when I used to regularly exceed speed limits, I doubt I could have done that in 35 seconds even when I  had a TR5.
    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • 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.
  • 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

Disaplinary for facebook


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5078 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 there,

I work for a national multidrop parcel company, i have worked ther for nearly 3 years, just lately a picture of a company van has surfaced around the networking site facebook, The picture has been defaced, by someone, I was tagged in the picture and so was about 800 other people who work for the company, The company tried to say that it was me that done the photo, but its clear it was done by someone else.

Now a couple of weeks later after recieving a written warning for having the picture i am being disaplined for gross misconduct, Now what i want to know does the company have the right to disapline me over a picture.

I did delete the picture from my profile, but someone had tagged me in it again, i have now got rid of it again, i have had to change all my login details because my account has been hacked into several times, i need help with this, so if there is anyone out that knows the answer then plz get back to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi fatboi20 and welcome to CAG.

 

I'm sorry to say that you have 'hijacked' madisnanny's thread.

 

Someone will be along to help soon, I'm sure, but in the meantime, click on the triangle at the bottom of the left hand [blue] side of your post and ask the site team to start a thread for you. That way, you will have answers to your particular problem and madisnanny can continue with her own queries.

 

We've had a couple of queries like this lately, have a read of the forum if you have time.

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The username of the person who posted the picture should be displayed with the picture. It is usually displayed below the photo on the right-hand side.

 

If this had your name against it, then either you did it yourself or you had left yourself logged into facebook and left it unattended and someone else did it or someone has learnt your login credentials to facebook.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi there,

I work for a national multidrop parcel company, i have worked ther for nearly 3 years, just lately a picture of a company van has surfaced around the networking site facebook, The picture has been defaced, by someone, I was tagged in the picture and so was about 800 other people who work for the company, The company tried to say that it was me that done the photo, but its clear it was done by someone else.

Now a couple of weeks later after recieving a written warning for having the picture i am being disaplined for gross misconduct, Now what i want to know does the company have the right to disapline me over a picture.

I did delete the picture from my profile, but someone had tagged me in it again, i have now got rid of it again, i have had to change all my login details because my account has been hacked into several times, i need help with this, so if there is anyone out that knows the answer then plz get back to me.

 

(a) What evidence do they have to prove the above (in red)?

---Aut viam inveniam aut faciam---

 

***All advice given should be taken as guidance... Professional advice should always be taken before any course of action is pursued***

 

- I do not reply directly to any PMs, but you are more than welcome to enclose a link, in a PM, to your post. Thank you -

Make a contribution to this site... Help the CAG keeping on helping you for FREE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have"nt got any proof wot so ever, yet they still gave me a written warning for being associated with the pic, now someone has now re tagged me in itand now they want to open the original investigation, i have explained that this was"nt my doing and i was simply tagged in the photo. I have contacted facebook about my account being hacked into and all they suggest is i change my security, for which i have done, but some one else has now hacked into, i dont where to go with this,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Thanks for the information...

 

(a) How did your company come into contact with the picture?

(b) Is, or was, the picture depicting the company in a negative way, or offensive way?

© Do you have copies of the e-mails you sent to 'Facebook'?

---Aut viam inveniam aut faciam---

 

***All advice given should be taken as guidance... Professional advice should always be taken before any course of action is pursued***

 

- I do not reply directly to any PMs, but you are more than welcome to enclose a link, in a PM, to your post. Thank you -

Make a contribution to this site... Help the CAG keeping on helping you for FREE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys. If this gets much more complicated, can I mention that our lovely colleagues on the IT forum have answered questions on stuff not all of us employment people, like myself, understand.

 

If and when you need them, fatboi, start a new thread on there and post a link to this thread in case they feel they can help.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi rebel11. I do apologise, that question is far too technical for me.

 

I just meant that we've had a couple of threads recently where caggers have been accused of doing things with IT that have led to accusations or dismissal.

 

The last couple of times, they've been stars at explaining how someone could have or not have been on an inappropriate website, for example. Our OP has been accused of tagging something that he says he didn't and I for one don't have the knowledge to understand if someone else could have done it, say. But the last couple of times, the IT guys were great.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

honeybee

 

Are you talking about tracing IP's?

 

Tracing IP's is a very long winded and difficult process - and often is inconclusive.

 

I think your best defence will be to take a screenshot of the image, along with the associated fields showing who uploaded the image - normally in the bottom right of the image, it says ....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From the album: Consumer Action Group by Joe Bloggs

 

 

G

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...