Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • anotheruser0000
      Parking Fee Paid But Input Incorrect VRN

      By anotheruser0000 · Posted

      Thank-you dx for your feedback. That is the reason I posted my opinion, because I am trying to learn more and this is one of the ways to learn, by posting my opinions and if I am incorrect then being advised of the reasons I am incorrect. I am not sure if you have educated me on the points in my post that would be incorrect. However, you are correct on one point, I shall refrain from posting on any other thread other than my own going forward and if you think my post here is unhelpful, misleading or in any other way inappropriate, then please do feel obliged to delete it but educate me on the reason why. To help my learning process, it would be helpful to know what I got wrong other than it goes against established advice considering the outcome of a recent court case that seemed to suggest it was dismissed due to an appeal not being made at the first stage. Thank-you.  
    • dx100uk
      Parking Fee Paid But Input Incorrect VRN

      By dx100uk · Posted

      you can have your humble opinion.... You are very new to all this private parking speculative invoice game you have very quickly taken it upon yourself to be all over this forum, now to the extent of moving away from your initial thread with your own issue that you knew little about handling to littering the forum and posting on numerous established and existing threads, where advice has already been given or a conclusion has already resulted, with your theories conclusions and observations which of course are very welcomed. BUT... in some instances, like this one...you dont quite match the advice that the forum and it's members have gathered over a very long consensual period given in a tried and trusted consistent mannered thoughtful approach. one could even call it forum hi-jacking and that is becoming somewhat worrying . dx
    • anotheruser0000
      Highview/DCB(L) ANPR PCN - Letter of Claim - Now Claimform - overstay - Riverside Retail Park in Norwich, Norfolk.

      By anotheruser0000 · Posted

      Yeah, sorry, that's what I meant .... I said DCBL because I was reading a few threads about them discontinuing claims and getting spanked in court! Meant  YOU  Highview !!!  🖕 The more I read this forum and the more I engage with it's incredible users, the more I learn and the more my knowledge expands. If my case gets to court, the Judge will dismiss it after I utter my first sentence, and you DCBL and Highview don't even know why .... OMG! .... So excited to get to court!
    • lookinforinfo
      Highview/DCB(L) ANPR PCN - Letter of Claim - Now Claimform - overstay - Riverside Retail Park in Norwich, Norfolk.

      By lookinforinfo · Posted

      Though it would be Highview you would  pursue. DCBL are nonentities-on their best day,
    • anotheruser0000
      Highview/DCB(L) ANPR PCN - Letter of Claim - Now Claimform - overstay - Riverside Retail Park in Norwich, Norfolk.

      By anotheruser0000 · Posted

      Yep, I read that and thought about trying to find out what the consideration and grace period is at Riverside but not sure I can. I know they say "You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is"  but I doubt they would disclose it to the public, maybe I should have asked in my CPR 31.14 letter? Yes, I think I can get rid of 5 minutes. I am also going to include a point about BPA CoP: 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place. I think that is Deception .... They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other! One other point to note, the more I read, the more I study, the more proficient I feel I am becoming in this area. Make no mistake DBCL if you are reading this, when I win in court, if I have the grounds to make any claims against you, such as breach of GDPR, I shall be doing so.

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

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

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Was late producing ticket - now they want to take me to court - help!

Vincenzoo
 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4946 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

Vincenzoo

Vincenzoo

Posted
Posted

I left my season ticket behind one day and was stopped and issued with a penalty fare ticket. I was told if I produce my ticket I wouldn't have to pay the fine. He didn't mention I had 21 days to do so and I sent it in late.

 

Revenue Protection then refused my appeal and fined me £60. I wrote saying it was unfair and now they've sent me a summons to court!

 

Given that I had paid the fare so am not avoiding paying for my travel it seems grossly unfair. Less like revenue protection and more like extortion.

 

Any ideas? Should I go to court? Or is that madness?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Stigy

Stigy

Posted
Posted

It was wrong of the Revenue Protection Staff to say you wouldn't have to pay the PF if you produced your season ticket in the first place, as unfortunately you had already commited a byelaw offence (18.1) for failing to be able to produce a ticket for your journey on demand. Although it may seem unfair to you, these time limits of appeal are in place in order to remain consistant in all cases of appeal. How long did you think you had to produce your ticket? Surely the normal thing to do would be produce it as soon as you located it? At least that way IRCAS or IPSS (think that's what the latter is...) could reject your appeal but still only make you liable for the Penalty Fare!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Vincenzoo

Vincenzoo

Posted
  • Author
Posted
It was wrong of the Revenue Protection Staff to say you wouldn't have to pay the PF if you produced your season ticket in the first place, as unfortunately you had already commited a byelaw offence (18.1) for failing to be able to produce a ticket for your journey on demand. Although it may seem unfair to you, these time limits of appeal are in place in order to remain consistant in all cases of appeal. How long did you think you had to produce your ticket? Surely the normal thing to do would be produce it as soon as you located it? At least that way IRCAS or IPSS (think that's what the latter is...) could reject your appeal but still only make you liable for the Penalty Fare!

 

Thanks for the response. To be honest I forgot about it, which is why I sent proof of my ticket in late. It is still proof of purchase, whether it's within their entirely arbitrary time limit or not. It strikes me that Revenue Protection should be about protecting revenue not generating income from fares that have already been paid. I'm guilty of forgetfulness but I feel I am being mugged here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Stigy

Stigy

Posted
Posted
Thanks for the response. To be honest I forgot about it, which is why I sent proof of my ticket in late. It is still proof of purchase, whether it's within their entirely arbitrary time limit or not. It strikes me that Revenue Protection should be about protecting revenue not generating income from fares that have already been paid. I'm guilty of forgetfulness but I feel I am being mugged here.
What would you have done had the RPI/A just charged you the full single fare for your rail journey and not chosen to PF you? Probably wouldn't have liked it much, as no doubt in your opinion you should have been given the benefit of the doubt. The point I'm trying to make here is that what ever amount you were charged, to you it would have looked like you were being mugged. Unfortunately people do try and play the system like this, and the RPA/I was just playing it safe with the Penalty Fare. Had he/she had any doubt as to whether you intended to defraud the company, then they would have gone straight down the unfortunate road that you seem to have gone down now.

 

21 days is 21 days, and it's the same with most appeals processes I'm afraid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Vincenzoo

Vincenzoo

Posted
  • Author
Posted

To be honest, I would have accepted a single fare but wasn't given that option. It would have been £3.10. I still had to buy a ticket for the rest of my journey so the railway is already up on the deal. I appreciate it's my own stupid fault, but it is absurd to have to pay so much for, well, nothing. It seems like opportunistic money making from honest passengers to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Stigy

Stigy

Posted
Posted
To be honest, I would have accepted a single fare but wasn't given that option. It would have been £3.10. I still had to buy a ticket for the rest of my journey so the railway is already up on the deal. I appreciate it's my own stupid fault, but it is absurd to have to pay so much for, well, nothing. It seems like opportunistic money making from honest passengers to me.

Unfortunately I can't really offer any advice that you'll like the sound of, and I'm pretty sure it'll be the same with the other members. Presumably it's the TOC that sent you the summons to court? What did the summons say? Whatever happens now, it's likely to cost you I'm afraid. What train company is this, out of interest?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Vincenzoo

Vincenzoo

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The summons came directly from the Magistrates Court. It states I was unable to produce a season ticket and did not respond to their letters, though it does include a copy of my letter, which was sent after the 21 day limit. I guess it would have been Southeastern Trains as it was at Waterloo East. Am expecting a child within days yet am expected to fork out £128.10 for a £3.10 fare I had already paid. My fault and they are within their legal rights but that doesn't mean it's morally right. I wonder what revenue they are protecting when there is no revenue missing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SRPO

SRPO

Posted
Posted

They are probably just trying to recoup their costs from administering a system of checking tickets that should have been shown on the day but due to your actions wasnt.

Personally I dont think it will proceed at court IF you have later produced a valid ticket for the journey concerned.

(Lots of people produce a ticket either not theirs or purchased after being stopped in the mis-guided belief that will be ok).

Even if it did, a bench is likely to give you an absolute discharge with either no or very small costs awarded.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Stigy

Stigy

Posted
Posted
The summons came directly from the Magistrates Court. It states I was unable to produce a season ticket and did not respond to their letters, though it does include a copy of my letter, which was sent after the 21 day limit. I guess it would have been Southeastern Trains as it was at Waterloo East. Am expecting a child within days yet am expected to fork out £128.10 for a £3.10 fare I had already paid. My fault and they are within their legal rights but that doesn't mean it's morally right. I wonder what revenue they are protecting when there is no revenue missing.
What I was trying to say was actually who was the TOC and did they speak to you via the mail at all? So just how long has this been going on for? If you've been summonsed to court it must have been dragging out for some time? There's one of two things you can do now, you can either try and settle the matter out of court, or go to court and plead either guilty or not guilty. Where did the £128.10 come from? Is that how much you'll have to pay to keep the matter out of court?
Link to post
Share on other sites
RPI

RPI

Posted
Posted
It was wrong of the Revenue Protection Staff to say you wouldn't have to pay the PF if you produced your season ticket in the first place, as unfortunately you had already commited a byelaw offence (18.1) for failing to be able to produce a ticket for your journey on demand. Although it may seem unfair to you, these time limits of appeal are in place in order to remain consistant in all cases of appeal. How long did you think you had to produce your ticket? Surely the normal thing to do would be produce it as soon as you located it? At least that way IRCAS or IPSS (think that's what the latter is...) could reject your appeal but still only make you liable for the Penalty Fare!

Some TOC's do have a policy where you will be issued a nil paid PF if you are a season ticket holder and have 21 days to provide a photocopy of your season, only 2 such occasions are allowed in any 12 month period though.

Views expressed in this forum by me are my own personal opinion and you take it on face value! I make any comments to the best of my knowledge but you take my advice at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Stigy

Stigy

Posted
Posted
Some TOC's do have a policy where you will be issued a nil paid PF if you are a season ticket holder and have 21 days to provide a photocopy of your season, only 2 such occasions are allowed in any 12 month period though.

Well, you learn something new every day I guess!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Grotesque

Grotesque

Posted
Posted

Indeed they do; and from the OP's point of view, what makes it worse is that some TOC's will refund any subsitute tickets bought during the validity of the Season.

 

So would have cost him NOTHING in the long run.

 

To Vincenzoo:

 

What reason box was ticked on the PF? 'Fail to carry Season Ticket'?

 

What period was it valid for- your Season I mean?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Vincenzoo

Vincenzoo

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Sorry, but what does TOC stand for?

 

To Grotesque: Yes, the Notice said 'Failure to carry season ticket (not weekly).

 

Though it was in fact, a weekly.

 

Will write a statement in mitigation to the clerk of the Court, including a bank statement proving that the ticket was mine, and see where it takes me.

 

Thanks for all your comments, everyone.

 

To Stigy: The £128.10 comes from the outstanding fare 'avoided' and the sum of £125 which is claimed as a contribution towards the prosecution costs.

 

It's bonkers if it goes to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Stigy

Stigy

Posted
Posted
Sorry, but what does TOC stand for?

 

To Grotesque: Yes, the Notice said 'Failure to carry season ticket (not weekly).

 

Though it was in fact, a weekly.

 

Will write a statement in mitigation to the clerk of the Court, including a bank statement proving that the ticket was mine, and see where it takes me.

 

Thanks for all your comments, everyone.

 

To Stigy: The £128.10 comes from the outstanding fare 'avoided' and the sum of £125 which is claimed as a contribution towards the prosecution costs.

 

It's bonkers if it goes to court.

TOC = Train Operating Company

 

Shouldn't the outstanding fare be the single for the journey you had made? I know that the PF was initially £20, then subsequently incurred the £60 on top of that, but the amount they are taking you to court for shouldn't be that of a weekly ticket, surely? Or am I completely missing the point? The season ticket box being ticked was probably the most appropriate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wriggler7

Wriggler7

Posted
Posted

For further reading, look at the case of Eastern Counties Railways v Woodard. An annual season ticket holder is required to show a ticket the same as any other passenger.

 

Passengers must carry their ticket, and must show it on demand. The Inspector will have heard about cases where 'boyfriend' uses 'girlfriend's ticket' to get out of the station, 'girlfriend' says 'I have left my ticket at home'. It happens. Maybe not in this case, but that is why railways will take a 'hard line' with failure to show train tickets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...