Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Central Ticketing - Unfair "Fine".


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5056 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

My girlfriend recently parked my car in some bays we spotted outside our flat.

 

In a nutshell, the whole area is littered with "Parking Notice" signs that state: "You may be issued with a ticketed parking charge [...] if you park without a valid permit"..

 

At least, that's the bit that is specific to me. At every other location I have seen around the estate, where there are parking bays there is a second "no stopping" style sign (red circle, blue interior with a "\" across it) stating the times one can park. And who can park. The bays outside my flat however, have no such smaller sign. My girlfriend looked out for them, but not finding any thought that she was permitted to park in these bays (the bays are actually just outside some empty retail units - so we thought perhaps they would be reserved for customers at a later date).

 

Anyway, I come back to the car and find a Penalty Charge Notice. I wasn't aware of this site, so I write to them to appeal on the grounds that there signs do not make it clear that it is prohibited to park in these particular bays (noting the absence of a "Permit Holders only" sign), providing photos of the area of both the bay my car was parked in, and other bays which have the other clearer signage.

 

They reject this inside a day!! And despite only a day passing, my 14 days to pay up has now reduced to 10. And they've misspelt my name! Shows how much attention they paid.

 

Again, unfamiliar with this site, I reply - pointing out their errors and stating I wish to appeal to the Parking and Traffic Appeals Service. However I have since realised this only applied to Councils, not private companies on private land, which the estate is. They haven't yet replied.

 

My question is: What do I do now? Or rather, what do I do when they reply to me? I seem to have a few options.

 

1) Start to ignore their letters on the basis that they are a private company and have no legal grounds to "fine" me. The only basis on which they can do so is to state that I entered into a contract with them (as I understand it). The burden of proof is therefore on them to prove that I "read and understood" that their generic sign applied to these, otherwise unmarked, parking bays - which obviously I dispute.

 

2) State my argument as in (1) in a letter/email - rather then ignore them.

 

3) Inform them that I didn't park the car (it's true! I didn't! My girlfriend did!) and that they should pursue the driver, rather than me, as owner of the car. Obviously I wouldn't give them her name - but I would feel guilty putting this on her back so am less inclined to do this unless I know she's "safe".

 

Or put another way...

 

Given, I've already initiated contact - do I continue to write to them (using the templates on this site), do I inform them I wasn't the driver and proceed to be unhelpful in identifying who that was - or do I ignore them henceforth?

 

Any advice, greatly received.

 

Molf.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys - I'll keep you posted as to the outcome. I've scoured your boards for success stories, but often people simply disappear!

 

One hopes this is because the bloodsuckers (nice name) went away, rather than they caved and paid the fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they dont come back because it ending however there are many post where regular posters have said after the 5 - 6 letters inc those from there pet corrupt solicitors have sent stupid letter, then it ends , only a few stupid PPC's have braved Court typical are excel and if you google them you will see how they got hammer by the Judges

..

Link to post
Share on other sites

PPC's do not have an appeals service other than sending out an automatic 'Appeal denied' . They are not interested in whether or not the charge is justifiable (it isn't) and are there to make money out of those who are taken in by their silly bits of paper

 

The best course of action which has worked well for myself and others is to ignore everything they send whoever it purports to be from be it Debt Collectors or Solicitors.

 

All contacting does is show them that you exist and may be taking them seriously and are therefore swimming close to hook and might bite if threatened a bit more

 

As with all bullies - ignore them and they lose interest go away

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they refer to it as a fine they are breaking the law

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had my second letter which was in reply to the last letter I sent (before I signed up here and read through many of the threads). Now you would think that any reasonable company would point out that, as a Private Company, they are not subject to the Parking and Traffic Appeals Service. Of course, they are not actually subject to any appeal service what so ever. One cannot "appeal" a bill. One can only contest and refuse to pay it!! I digress... But no... they say:

 

"Your second appeal has been rejected... the charge still stands [insert template reply here, blah blah blah]" - I didn't make a second appeal, you morons!! At least my 10 days has reset. Maybe if I just keep sending them letters they'll keep sending me replies telling me I have 10 days in which to reply!!? :)

 

The temptation to inform them that I have researched their company, that I am aware that the charge is not a fine but an essentially an invoice and that the only way they could ever legally get the money off of me is to take me to court and prove I have breached some "contract" I unknowingly made with them when I parked in an unmarked frikking bay!!

 

Sorry, ranting now. How they can get away with this sort of thing!?

 

Anyway, I won't reply. The ignoring starts now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys - I'll keep you posted as to the outcome. I've scoured your boards for success stories, but often people simply disappear!

 

I have four invoices from CT for not displaying my permit in our underground car park, the earliest dating back to September of 2009. I've received threatening letters but every time they've given up. Hope this helps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...