Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi Just to be clear a Notice to Quit is only the very start of the Housing Association going down the Eviction route there is a long process to go. Also to be clear if you leave at the Notice to Quit date only and go to the Council claiming you are Homeless they will more than likely class you as Intentionally Homeless therefore you have no right to be given temporary housing by the Council. The only way that works is when the Court has Granted a Possession Order then you can approach the Council as Homeless with the Court Order. As for the Housing Association issuing the Notice to Quit because there investigation has proved it's not your main residence but you have witness statement to prove otherwise. From now on with the Housing Association you need to keep a very good paper trail and ensure to get free proof of posting from the post office with anything you send to them. You now need to make a Formal Complaint to the Housing Association and please amend the following to suit your needs:   Dear Sir/Madam FORMAL COMPLAINT Reference: Notice to Quit Letter Dated XX/XX/2024, Hand Delivered on XX/XX/2024 I note in your letter that you stated that the Housing Association has carried out an investigation into myself and came to the conclusion that I am not using this property as my main residence and have evidence of this and have therefore issued a 'Notice to Quit' by XX/XX/2024. I find the above actions absolutely disgraceful action by the Housing Association. 1. Why have I never been informed nor asked about this matter by my Housing Officer. 2. Why have I never been given the opportunity to defend myself before the Housing Association out of the blue Hand Delivered a Notice to Quit Letter. 3. I have evidence and witnesses/statements that prove this is my Main Residence and more than willing provide this to both the Housing Association and the Court. I now require the following: 1. Copy of your Complaints Policy (not the leaflet) 2. Copy of your Customer Care Charter (not the leaflet) 3. Copies of your Investigation into this not being my main residence.    As well as the above you need to send the Housing Association urgently a Subject Access Request (SAR) requesting 'ALL DATA' that simple phrase covers whatever format they hold that in whether it be letters, email, recorded calls etc. The Housing Association then has 30 calendar days to respond but that time limit only starts once they acknowledge your SAR Request. If they fail to respond within that time limit its then off with a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office (ICO).     
    • Hi Sorry for the delay in getting back to you The email excuse and I do say excuse to add to your account and if court decide LL can't recoup costs will be removed is a joke. So I would Ask them: Ask them to provide you with the exact terms within your Tenancy Agreement that allows them to add these Court Fees to your Account before it has been decided in Court by a Judge. Until the above is answered you require these Court Fees to be removed from your Account (Note: I will all be down to your Tenancy Agreement so have a good look through it to see what if any fees they can add to your account in these circumstances)
    • Thank you for your responses. As requested, some more detail. Please forgive, I'm writing this on my phone which always makes for less than perfect grammar. My Dad tries but English not his 1st language, i'm born and bred in England, a qualified accountant and i often help him with his admin. On this occasion I helped my dad put in his renewal driving licence application around 6 weeks before expiry and with it the disclosure of his sleep apnoea. Once the licence expired I told him to get in touch with his GP, because the DVLA were offering only radio silence at that time (excuses of backlogs When I called to chase up). The GP charged £30 for an opinion letter on his ability to drive based on his medical history- at the time I didn't take a copy of the letter, but I am hoping this will be key evidence that we can rely on as to why s88 applies because in the GP opinion they saw no reason he couldn't drive i need to see the letter again as im going only on memory- we forwarded the letter in a chase up / complaint to the DVLA.  In December, everything went quiet RE the sleep apnoea (i presume his GP had given assurance) but the DVLA noticed there had been a 2nd medical issue in the past, when my father suffered a one off mini stroke 3 years prior. That condition had long been resolved via an operation (on his brain of all places, it was a scary time, but he came through unscathed) and he's never had an issue since. We were able to respond to that query very promptly (within the 14 days) and the next communication was the licence being granted 2 months later. DVLA have been very slow in responding every step of the way.  I realise by not disclosing the mini stroke at the time, and again on renewal (had I known I'd have encouraged it) he was potentially committing an offence, however that is not relevant to the current charge being levied, which is that he was unable to rely on s88 because of a current medical issue (not one that had been resolved). I could be wrong, I'm not a legal expert! The letter is a summons I believe because its a speeding offence (59 in a temp roadworks 50 limit on the A1, ironically whist driving up to visit me). We pleaded guilty to the speeding but not guilty to the s87.  DVLA always confirmed to me on the phone that the licence had not been revoked and that he "May" be able to continue to drive. They also confirmed in writing, but the letter explains the DVLA offer no opinion on the matter and that its up to the driver to seek legal advice. I'll take the advice to contact DVLA medical group. I'm going to contact the GP to make sure they received the SAR request for data, and make it clear we need to see a copy of the opinion letter. In terms of whether to continue to fight this, or to continue with the defence, do we have any idea of the potential consequences of either option? Thanks all
    • stopping payments until a DN arrives does not equal automatic sale to a DCA...if you resume payments after the DN.  
    • Sleep apnoea: used to require the condition  to be “completely” controlled Sometime before June 2013 DVLA changed it to "adequately" controlled. I have to disagree with MitM regarding the effect of informing DVLA and S.88 A diagnosis of sleep apnoea doesn't mean a licence wont be granted, and, indeed, here it was. If the father sought medical advice (did he?) : this is precisely where S.88 applies https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/64edcf3a13ae1500116e2f5d/inf1886-can-i-drive-while-my-application-is-with-dvla.pdf p.4 for “new medical condition” It is shakier ground if the opinion of a healthcare professional wasn’t sought. in that case it is on the driver to state they believed they met the medical standard to drive. However, the fact the licence was then later granted can be used to be persuasive that the driver’s belief they met the standard was correct. What was the other condition? And, just to confirm, at no point did DVLA say the licence was revoked / application refused? I’d be asking DVLA Drivers’ Medical Group why they believe S.88 doesn’t apply. S.88 only applies for the UK, incidentally. If your licence has expired and you meet the conditions for S.88 you can drive in the U.K., but not outside the U.K. 
  • 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

Issued an unfair caution!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4943 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

 

I would normally take my motorbike to school on days of fair winds due to the massive bus pass fee (which may i add has still not arrived months after my form was sent!), annoyingly my motorbike broke down the other morning so my step dad gave me a lift in on his motorbike. I have a horse to look after in a near by town (i would usually take the train or the motorbike to get there after school, weather providing). Then from my horse's field i get a lift back from my mum who works near by, on this occasion i had no money on me and due to my lack of motorbike i had to take the train without ticket, the ticket is usually around £2.10, i have had an on the spot fine of £20 before, this time i was caught and told i would only be cautioned due to my valid excuse of not having any other way home, (I do not have a seasonal ticket to send in by the way). However i received a letter today telling me i would be taken to court for not buying a ticket. What will happen, and how much will it cost?

 

Thanks

 

Sean

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I know some people might think it harsh Sean, but the rail companies do not have any obligation to carry anyone who has not paid and cannot pay on demand. The same is true of all transport undertakings

 

The position is that any person who has neither a valid ticket nor means to pay, has no right to board any train.

 

Because you say you have received a letter advising that you face a Summons to Court I am guessing that you are over 18 and the best thing you can do it to write back with a full apology, offer to pay the fare and the reasonable costs that have been incurred by the rail company and ask if they will allow this matter to be settled without the need for Court action.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Receiving a Caution & being cautioned are 2 very different things.

It appears that you did not receive a Caution for the offence but were actually cautioned & interviewed.

It appears a clear case of fare evasion that you will struggle to get out of, read the miriad of threads on here & compose a letter to the prosecutors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, I don't think it was an unfair caution, more to the point might have been a let down in communication when being spoken to by the Staff. I'm assuming it was staff you spoke to, Sean, and not a Police Officer? Either way, it would appear somebody would like to prosecute for an alleged offence, so you can only really contact the prosecuting party as has been said.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No one has answered 'how much will it cost'.

 

Probably becuase we do not know. The prosecuting company will be aware of your previous penalty fare, and have in front of them the Inspector's statement. However it ends up, they will want 'the fare'. If it goes to Court, they will want a contribution to prosecution costs, typically £110.00. In Court, there would also be a fine. This depends on the nature of the offence, whether there are aggravating or mitigating features to the incident. Typically, fines vary between £100.00 and £350.00, but they do vary. A standard £15.00 victim surcharge is always added.

 

How much a railway might settle for will also vary. Write to them and ask if they are prepared to settle. If they are, they will tyell you what they want. Don't forget, the ball is in their court, they do not have to settle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well to a certain extent Wriggler7, (I too have prosecuted Youths, but very rarely for a first case of fare evasion.)

 

It was more the fact that the OP had receieved warning of impending prosecution at the first letter stage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Old Codja comments on your age. I think he is alluding to the idea that railways don't prosecute 'minors'.

 

For various reasons, I spend a certain amount of time in Youth Courts. Our local railway prosecutes Youths too.

From experience, TOCs tend only to prosecute at Youth Courts if the offender in question is somewhat persistant, as I believe Old CodjA has said.
Link to post
Share on other sites

agree entirely, your individual situation was not and never would be construed as a valid reason for not having a ticket or the means to buy one.

I have to also point out a fare of £2.10 sounds like a short-ish journey really: was it impossible to walk it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I would normally take my motorbike to school... (i would usually take the train or the motorbike to get there after school, weather providing).

 

Forgot to point out before Sean that in terms of mitigation (let alone your completely invalid excuse of having no other way home- if there'd been a Taxi rank there, would you have demanded he take you for nothing?!) that although you say you 'normally take [your] motorbike to school' you then say 'i would usually take the train'.

 

This tells us (notwithstanding your previous Penalty Fare for dare we assume, a similar thing?) that you travel by trains and therefore know and understand the contract you enter into on entering a station...

 

...a minor point because not travelling by trains and therefore 'not knowing' is equally no 'valid' excuse; many passengers favour claiming 'I don't get trains' to which the obvious answer is 'Do you drive?' to which the usual answer is 'Yes'; the conclusion drawn tends to be 'What would happen if you were caught without MOT/ Licence/ on a double yellow??!!'

 

Just examples above of what NOT to say Sean... if it aint already.

 

Bon chance! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

"Forgot to point out before Sean that in terms of mitigation (let alone your completely invalid excuse of having no other way home- if there'd been a Taxi rank there, would you have demanded he take you for nothing?!) that although you say you 'normally take [your] motorbike to school' you then say 'i would usually take the train'."

 

Note the words weather providing! Then use your brain, if I've taken the bike, to school, i'm going to be taking it, from school. If i have,'t taken the bike, to school, then I don't have a bike to take from school so I'm going to take the train, hence why the words, weather providing, prevent this from being a self contradictory statement. With the added fact that the part that says: I would normally take my motorbike to school. Does not say anything about how I get home from school.

 

Just for the matter, no, no you may not assume that the previous penalty fare was for a similar thing.

 

As it happens, after since having my summons i have spoken to a solicitor who has told me that case in going to almost certainly be thrown out due the fact the ticket officer was foreign, can't speak English, and thinks a 16 yeah old bloke who has said he just came from school, is a 24 year old bloke who just came from school, I.E. he got my date of birth so awfully wrong it significantly changes my financial state.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Forgot to point out before Sean that in terms of mitigation (let alone your completely invalid excuse of having no other way home- if there'd been a Taxi rank there, would you have demanded he take you for nothing?!) that although you say you 'normally take [your] motorbike to school' you then say 'i would usually take the train'."

 

Note the words weather providing! Then use your brain, if I've taken the bike, to school, i'm going to be taking it, from school. If i have,'t taken the bike, to school, then I don't have a bike to take from school so I'm going to take the train, hence why the words, weather providing, prevent this from being a self contradictory statement. With the added fact that the part that says: I would normally take my motorbike to school. Does not say anything about how I get home from school.

 

Just for the matter, no, no you may not assume that the previous penalty fare was for a similar thing.

 

As it happens, after since having my summons i have spoken to a solicitor who has told me that case in going to almost certainly be thrown out due the fact the ticket officer was foreign, can't speak English, and thinks a 16 yeah old bloke who has said he just came from school, is a 24 year old bloke who just came from school, I.E. he got my date of birth so awfully wrong it significantly changes my financial state.

 

What train co employs front line staff that can't speak English?

 

My other observations on this are that you own a motorbike and a horse which suggests that you are hardly 'on the bread line'. I don't buy the fact that you had a 'valid excuse' for not having any means to get home other than the train because the simple fact of the matter is that you would make sure that you were adequately prepared for 'bad weather' scenarios by carrying sufficent funds on you in case you have to take the train. I take it you have a mobile phone so as your mother 'works close by', could'nt you of contacted her to obtain some help?

 

Sorry but from your account, I cannot see any 'valid excuses' here to persue solicitor or not. My advice (which has already been given) is to write a nice applogetic letter to the prosecutors. As for the DOB issue; Unless you showed proof of your DOB and the inspector took the details incorrectly from that, you would need to prove that you didn't provide the incorrect info. All the 'non-English' inspector would have to say is that is the DOB you provided... thats assuming the JP will understand him!

 

Please Note

 

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

 

I would always urge to seek professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"almost certainly be thrown out due the fact the ticket officer was foreign, can't speak English"

 

Does this "solicitor" also work for the BNP? What grounds are they for having a case thrown out? May have a valid point on the DOB!

 

 

i did find this mildly amusing,

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm begging to get the vibe that everyone on here is a total...

 

I came on here to find out the extent of my fine.

 

Not be ridiculed as to how valid my "excuse is" so unless anyone has anything useful to say, please, find someone else to preach your crap to.

 

The thread is mainly labeled as it is to attract attention.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm begging to get the vibe that everyone on here is a total...

 

I came on here to find out the extent of my fine.

 

Not be ridiculed as to how valid my "excuse is" so unless anyone has anything useful to say, please, find someone else to preach your crap to.

 

The thread is mainly labeled as it is to attract attention.

 

After that I think you will be waiting a long time for further advice. My suggestion was in all honesty, your best option based on what you have stated. If you think you have been 'ridiculed' on your situ, wait till you get in front of a magistrate!

 

Please Note

 

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

 

I would always urge to seek professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i did find this mildly amusing,

 

You may find it amusing but I do not think you or your Solicitor would if he/she was foolish enough to raise that as a defence.

 

You ask how much it would cost and that is the reason you came here. If you done it properly it would have cost you £2.10. Now it will undoubtedly cost you or your parents a lot more.

 

Also you state you usually use your "Motorbike" I presume as you are 16 you mean a Moped, if not you may find yourself in further trouble in the future!

 

As SRPO stated if you ask questions on an open forum then don't expect the answer to suit your situation. Anything stated in this thread is accurate. It may not be what you want to hear but sometimes and as you are young it can be forgiven it is better to hold your hands up and just say fair cop!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

yet again, another useless answer, and no i do not mean a moped, i mean a motor bike there is a difference and i am well aware of it, i am in ownership of a motorbike, it just happens to have a small engine (technically it's a slightly larger engine however it is restricted and fully road legal, and completely legal for me to ride, just to clear that one up)

 

when i asked about fee's i meant the fine i am likely to be given, not the train fair i don't appreciate being patronized, i;m well aware of how much the train costs.

 

i'm not banking on technicalities causing the case to fall through that would be lovely however

 

if you do happen to know how much the fine is going to be (roughly) i'd appreciate it, if not, please spare yourself the time writing back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"You may find it amusing but I do not think you or your Solicitor would if he/she was foolish enough to raise that as a defence."

 

apologies, my comments about amusement was in regard to the comment made about the BNP.

 

before any other stabs are made at me for this i have no particular views on the BNP and if i did i wouldn't fling them around forums in which i would possible cause and unwanted argument.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm begging to get the vibe that everyone on here is a total...

 

I came on here to find out the extent of my fine.

 

Not be ridiculed as to how valid my "excuse is" so unless anyone has anything useful to say, please, find someone else to preach your crap to.

 

The thread is mainly labeled as it is to attract attention.

 

Hi guys. I strayed onto this thread today and have to say it's been highly entertaining. I'm not sure which planet the OP inhabits. And as for a ticket inspector who doesn't speak English, I do wonder about someone who can't write it intelligibly.....

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...