Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you very much for your letter in regard to the above mentioned shipment.  Due to the high volume of parcels coursing through the courier network each day, undergoing continuous processing and handling, certain packages may experience delays or even can get lost in the course of this journey. Please note that due to the time that has passed, this shipment has been declared as lost.  I have today processed the claim and made offers to the value of £75 as a goodwill gesture without prejudice. I do acknowledge that you have mentioned in your letter that the value was higher, however, you did not take out any protection to that amount. The protection for this shipment was £20 and we will not be increasing our goodwill offer any further.    Please log into your account online in order to accept our offer. Once accepted, our accounts department will process the claim accordingly. The claim payment will be processed and received within 7 working days.                                  In addition, a refund of the carriage fee will be processed as a separate payment and will be received within 3 working days.  If I can further assist, please feel free to contact me.   I have also just noticed that yesterday afternoon they sent me an email stating that "after my request" they have refunded the cost of shipping. I did not request the refund so will mention that in my letter as well.
    • Hi I had to leave Dubai back in 2011, during the financial crisis. And only now have I received a letter from IDRWW. Is this anything to worry about about as I have 2 years left until it’s been 15 years(statute barred in Dubai). Worried as just got a mortgage 2 years ago. Could they force me in to bankruptcy? Red lots of different threads on here. And unsure what true and what isn’t. 
    • Not that TOR will see this now he's thrown in the hand grenade. Rayner has plenty of female supporters on X, for a start. As for the council and HMRC, fair enough and I thought Rayner was already in touch with them. That's where it should be dealt with, not the police force. @tobyjugg2 Daniel Finkelstein thinks the same as you about tax. The Fiver theory. How the Fiver Theory explains this election campaign ARCHIVE.PH archived 28 May 2024 17:36:51 UTC  
    • Often with the Likes of Lowells/ Overdales that 'proof' doesn't stand up to scrutiny.   Think about it like a game of poker, they want to intimidate you into folding and giving up as soon as possible, and just get you to pay up and roll over, that is their business model, make you think your cards are rubbish. What they don't expect, and their business isn't set up for it, is for a defendant to find this place and to learn that they have an amazing set of cards to play. Overdales don't have an infinite number of lawyers, paralegals etc, and the time / money to spend on expensive court cases, that they are highly likely to lose, hence how hard they will try to get you to roll over.  Even to the extent of faking documents, which they need to do because the debts that they purchased were so cheap, in the first place. Nevertheless it works in most cases, most people chicken out, when they are so close to winning, and a holding defence is like slowly showing Overdales your first card, and a marker of intention that this could get tricky for them. In fact it may be,  although by no means guaranteed that it won't even go any further than that.  Even if it does, what they send you back will almost certainly have more holes than Swiss Cheese, and if with the help you receive here, you can identify those weaknesses and get the whole thing tossed in the bin.
    • So Rayner who is don’t forget still being investigated by the local council and HMRC  is now begging to save her seat Not a WOMAN in sight in this video other than Rayner  Farage is utterly correct this country’s values are non existent in her seat   Rayner Pleads With Muslim Voters as Pressure From Galloway Grows – Guido Fawkes ORDER-ORDER.COM Guido has obtained a leaked tape from inside a meeting between Angela Rayner and Muslim voters in Ashton-under-Lyne...  
  • 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 
        • 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

PCN for parking on footpath though signs allowed it


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4997 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

I have just received a PCN for “62- Parked with one or more wheels on or over a footpath or any part of a road other than a carriageway”. The parking signs on the road actually said it was ok to park on the footpath but only in marked bays.

 

I parked on the road but not in the marked bays. Unfortunately I didn’t see the latter bit as other roads adjacent to the road didn’t have the “only in marked bays” bit. I wasn’t parked on a yellow line or anything, neither was I causing an obstruction, I would have caused one if I hadn’t parked on the footpath like other cars as it is a very tiny road.

 

Am I likely to be successful if I appeal this fine on the basis that the sign said it was ok to park on the footpath? Am I right in thinking the offence should be something else like “not parked in marked bays” instead of what they have said?

 

I've only paid a PCN yesterday for turning right where not permitted except by buses due to my taking directions from a friend that only knows the bus route. I'm quite angry at myself as it is.

Any advice will be much appreciated. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your quick response. Please see photos attached. The car in the first photo is another car parked in the bay but partially on the footpath too same as the car in front of the signage at the start of the road. The black landrover is me parked on the footpath too but not in the bay.

 

The google streetview (2009) shows there used to be bay markings where I parked but they've obviously since been removed. And the signage must be new as there aren't any showing on streetview.

 

 

PCN.jpg

car parked in front of me.jpg

sign at beginning of road.jpg

front of car.jpg

back of car.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest asking the council to provide a full copy of the resolution made under s.15(4)

 

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=All+Legislation&title=general+powers+act+1974&searchEnacted=0&extentMatchOnly=0&confersPower=0&blanketAmendment=0&sortAlpha=0&TYPE=QS&PageNumber=1&NavFrom=0&parentActiveTextDocId=3475989&ActiveTextDocId=3476011&filesize=26295

 

It may be that where you parked is actually authorised as footway parking but the council has not marked a bay. It's a long shot but every avenue is worth exploring.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.

 

I've read the link but I am non the wiser on what s.15(4) means.

 

Hence am I supposed to ask

 

1) "Can you please provide me with a full copy of the resolution made under s.15(4) not designating the spot my car was parked on as a parking bay" or

 

2) "Can you please provide me with a full copy of the resolution made under s.15(4) as the spot my car was parked on is a parking bay as it was designated as such in 2009?"

 

And is it worth also mentioning that parking on the footpath is allowed per the signs and if I should be fined it should be for not being in the bay and the ticket is wrong. (Assuming they cannot now correct it of course). And just maybe the enforcement officer forgot to take a photo.

 

The charge will remain at the reduced rate as long as I appeal within 14 days so it's certainly worth trying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would caution against writing a letter quoting the PCN number etc, which merely asks for documents. The chances are this will be processed as if it is an appeal, and as no grounds for cancellation are stated, the "appeal" will be rejected. You only have one opportunity to make an informal appeal, so I would say don't risk squandering it.

 

You can get hold of the documents you need - try phoning, emailing (don't give a PCN number) or dropping into the office. Once you have your evidence, then you can put pen to paper properly.

 

As I read it, the section means that a highway authority may "by resolution" permit footway parking. So, if there been a resolution to that effect, then the document will presumably show whether the place you parked is included - and therefore if you are allowed to park there (with or without bay markings).

Link to post
Share on other sites

You only have one opportunity to make an informal appeal, so I would say don't risk squandering it.

 

Are you sure? I thought you can send any number of informal representations until the NTO is issued and the LA have a statutory authority to consider them.

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

News to me Bernie - I'm not saying you're wrong, but why can't someone just stall the system by perpetually writing back, and thus not getting an NTO at all? Surely the first informal will be responded to with a decision letter which (if rejected) states "you now have two options" - ie, pay or wait for NTO. Subsequent letters just get standard replies reitterating that, no?

Link to post
Share on other sites

why can't someone just stall the system by perpetually writing back, and thus not getting an NTO at all?

 

Because ultimately that would be seen as vexatious and in any event, there is no obligation to reset the clock on the 28 days

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...