Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

UKCPM - breharf I


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4971 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 everyone I've taken up everyone's advice on this forum and have received 5 letters for parking in brewery wharf by ukcps.

 

2 of the letters are from a company called court proceedings ltd in oxford street london.

 

the latest letter says final notice before county court action and it says your non payment will result in the immediate commencement of county court action which could result in high financial loss and reducing my chances of getting a mortgage.

 

I have not contacted anyone from the companies in any way but a solicitor friend of mine said I should contact them please can someone tell me what to do as I'm getting pretty worked up about this.

please help me

 

thanks in advance any help appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

Carry on ignoring. Their letters are designed to scare you.

 

Court Proceedings Ltd his new on the block and their name is hilarious. Ask yourself why you have had 5 letters and they still haven't taken you to court.

 

CP Ltd have never set foot in a court in their life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are just in the final stages before they give up and this is almost their last ditch attempt to extract money from you

 

We have all had these silly letters and they are meaningless as the first ones they send

 

Even when requested to I have yet to have a PPC take the court route as they are well aware their chances of winning are around zero

 

Be brave - ignore

Link to post
Share on other sites

Court Proceedings Ltd. The name never fails to make me laugh. Everything they do is designed to intimidate you, particularly the 'pay up or we will ruin your life' letters. Stand firm and leave these low-lifes in the gutter where they belong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry about the misleading title but I read in a different thread that companies only use language like might and not will take you to court and mine said will so this is what concerned me. Thanks for the replies You have put my mind at ease and I will continue to ignore. I have also decided to report them to trading standards for harrasment as they are using a premium rate phone number for their contact details which I believe is unreasonable. I don't think I can change the thread title can I? if so I will do.. thanks again everyone for all the help

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody can threaten to take anybody to court.

 

Doesn't mean they will though. Never seen a debt collection company take anyone to court for a parking company. The charge is so hard to fight for, even without having the extra layer of how the debt has been transferred from one company to the other.

 

Carry on ignoring.

 

Is your solicitor friend involved in contract law? They tend to have different specialities.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody can threaten to take anybody to court.

 

Doesn't mean they will though. Never seen a debt collection company take anyone to court for a parking company. The charge is so hard to fight for, even without having the extra layer of how the debt has been transferred from one company to the other.

 

Carry on ignoring.

 

Is your solicitor friend involved in contract law? They tend to have different specialities.

 

 

Hi AL27 no my solicitor friend specializes in something compeletely different he just said you should never ignore a letter telling you you are being taken to court as if they do take you to court it will look bad on you. I have ignored the 2nd court letter letter now so will let everyone know if it goes any further but I doubt it will after reading the advice on these forums. cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a big difference between the words "may" and "will". Even then their hollow threats never come to anything. There is one debt collector that repeatedly writes to people saying they will visit their house "within 72 hours" but they never turn up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi AL27 no my solicitor friend specializes in something compeletely different he just said you should never ignore a letter telling you you are being taken to court as if they do take you to court it will look bad on you.

 

What rubbish, you should publish your solicitor friends name so we know who NOT to go to if we ever need legal advice. I notice civil matters is not his area, I suggest he sticks to things he knows about

 

I have ignored the 2nd court letter letter now so will let everyone know if it goes any further but I doubt it will after reading the advice on these forums. cheers

 

regards

Please remember our troops, fighting and dying in our name. God protect them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi papsykes,

 

I became acquainted with these [problematic] over a year ago & completely ignored their rubbish from the outset.

 

They gave-up after five increasingly threatening letters, and the same will go for you too.

Don't ever weaken & fall for & let them take you for a mug.

Edited by B & T
Link to post
Share on other sites

What rubbish, you should publish your solicitor friends name so we know who NOT to go to if we ever need legal advice. I notice civil matters is not his area, I suggest he sticks to things he knows about

 

I can't see the point in that. It is clear that this is not his area. He might be just the guy you need if you get in trouble with the old bill or want to set up a trust fund for your kids! :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

my solicitor friend specializes in something compeletely different he just said you should never ignore a letter telling you you are being taken to court as if they do take you to court it will look bad on you

 

Have one of these DC missives in front of me stating that in the absence of payment it will referred back to the PPC for approval to apply for a County Court Judgement against me however they neglect to say that it has to go to court first (this costs them money) and they have to win (impossible) and a CCJ will only happen if they win and I do not pay

 

When I write to someone that requires a reply I always enclose an SAE - if the PPC wanted a reply they would have enclosed one - they didn't - end of the story. Same for the phone number - why should I pay out a premium rate or use a local rate number. If they expect me to phone then I expect a free phone number

 

They will only ever get a response (other than the odd silly letter) when and if I receive properly served court documents or they phone me and I can keep them hanging on for as long as possible

 

I have requested they take me to court several times during their phone calls but so far they have failed to accomodate me

 

Ignore everything except properly served court papers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi AL27 no my solicitor friend specializes in something compeletely different he just said you should never ignore a letter telling you you are being taken to court as if they do take you to court it will look bad on you. I have ignored the 2nd court letter letter now so will let everyone know if it goes any further but I doubt it will after reading the advice on these forums. cheers

 

Generally, yes. But 'looking bad' doesn't affect the facts of the case. The judge makes his judgement on cold, hard fact, not who ignored what.

 

For any normal case I'd say reply, but when you're dealing with a shady company that just sends out threats, replying only encourages them to pester you for longer.

 

Remember this is a [problem] at the end of the day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to UKCPM - brewery wharf I'm being taken to court by ukcps please help
  • dx100uk changed the title to UKCPM - breharf I
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...