Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 1st letter image.pdf1st letter 2nd page.pdf
    • Many thanks for the replies and advice!   I what to send this email to the Starbucks CEO and the area manager. Your thoughts would be appreciated.   [email protected] [email protected]   Re: MET Parking PNC at your Starbucks Southgate site   Dear Ms Rayner, / Dear Heather Christie,   I have received a Notice to Keeper regarding a Parking Charge Notice of £100 for the driver parking in the Southgate Park Car Park, otherwise infamously known as the Stanstead Starbucks/McDonalds car park(s).   Issued by: MET Parking Services Ltd Parking Charge Notice Number: XXXXXXXXX Vehicle Registration Number: XXXX XXX Date of Contravention: XX.XX.XXXX Time: XX:XX - XX:XX   After a little research it apears that the driver is not alone in being caught in what is commonly described as a scam, and has featured in the national press and on the mainstream television.   It is a shame that the reputation of Starbucks is being tarnished by this, with your customers leaving the lowest possible reviews on Trustpilot and Trip Advisor at this location, and to be associated with what on the face of it appears to be a doubious and predatory car park management company.   In this instance, during the early hours of the morning the driver required a coffee and parked up outside Starbucks with the intention of purchasing one from yourselves. Unfortunately, you were closed so the driver walked to McDonalds next door and ordered a coffee, and for this I have received the Notice to Keeper.   It is claimed that the car park is two separate car parks (Starbucks/McDonalds). However, there is no barrier or road markings to identity a boundary, and the signage in the car park(s) and outside your property is ambiguous, as such the terms would most likely be deemed unfair and unenforcable under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   I understand that Starbucks-Euro Garages neither operate or benefit from the charges imposed by MET Parking. However, MET Parking is your client.   Additionally, I understand that the charge amount of £100 had previously been upheld in court due to a ‘legitimate interest in making sure that a car park was run as efficiently as possible to benefit other drivers as well as the local stores, keeping cars from overstaying’.   However, this is not applicable when the shop or store is closed (as was the case here), as there is no legitimate interest. Therefore, the amount demanded is a penalty and is punitive, again contravening the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   As the driver’s intention of the visit was genuine, I would be grateful if you could please instruct your client to cancel this Notice to Keeper/Parking Charge Notice.   Kind regards
    • I received the promised call back from the Saga man today who informed me that the undertakers have decreed it IS a modification and they will need to recalculate a quote individually for me. However it all sounds very arbitrary. The more I think about it, and with help from forum replies, the more I am sure that it is not a modification. If for example the original seatback had become damaged by a spillage or a tear, I would be entitled to replace it with the nearest available part. The problem is when it comes to a payout after an accident, there is no telling what an individual insurer will decide when he notices the change. I am still undecided which of the two best routes to go with, either don't mention the replacement at all, or fill in the quote form without mentioning, and when it comes to buying the insurance over the phone, mention it at the time.
    • Please post up their letter so we understand what they've asked. You need to cover up your name and address and their reference number. HB
    • Hello,  I received the standard letter.  I don't understand No. 3: If this is in relation to a ticket irregularity, then if you were unable to produce a pass because you did not have it with you or if your pass was withdrawn because you were unable to produce a valid photocard to accompany it, please enclose a photocopy of the pass/photocard with your reply. Question: do i enclose my photocard? my partner's freedom pass was confiscated.
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4937 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 there,:???:

Does anyone know if Jacobs still 'work' for Durham County Council? I had problems with them last year and all three of the bailiffs have left Jacobs (according to the register). Rumour has it that Jacobs have also lost their contract with DDC, but they might have just left of their own accord. The reason I would like to know is because my case is currently being investigated and it seems strange that 3 people have jumped ship and the council seem to have changed their preferred firm of bullies..oops, I mean bailiffs. I'd feel a lot better if I knew that this firm had been given the boot!

DDC put the tender out in January this year but there is no further info available. Is there somewhere I could find out which bailiffs are employed by local authorities? Any info would be great.

Cheers!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks hallowich and wonkeydonkey,

 

Will try and find out. Might send the council an email to remind them that we are still after them. I expect the chap from the complaints department who claimed they had done nothing wrong might have joined the amazing disappearing bailiffs. They should be in the circus, although it would be a bit frightening for the kiddies!

Will update any info once I have any.

Tallulah

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Bailiffs cannot act illegally and are covered by law if you feel they have done something wrong, you should first contact the bailiff or contact the council. You can also get independent advice if the bailiff is involved with collecting money from you, free confidential advice is available from your local Citizens Advice Bureau. If you need any more advice please contact the council."

 

Taken from Durham County Council website

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Believe me PT, I have campaigned relentlessly to bring the council to book over this. I have shed loads of emails and letters. They even admitted themselves at one point that the bailiffs may have acted wrongly, but they have refused to do anything about it (apart from maybe sack them?). The case is with the LGO so everything is on ice at the moment. I may sound like a delusional idealist, but I believe we will get them in the end. I have a lot of patience (quite surprisingly, considering this involves those bar stewards Jacobs).

Tallulah

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Yes, I haven't posted for a while as I am still waiting to see what the LGO are going to do. I was also a bit suspicious about giving too much information as I know bailiffs use forums like this. The fact that all three bailiffs who closed down my husband's business (including one who could never be traced on the register) have now 'left' Jacobs has cheered me up no end.

Tallulah

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Tne vilest of the three has no employer listing, but is still registered, the one who claimed to be in charge is working for Phoenix Commercial Collections Ltd. and the other numpty, who tried to hide his car number plate, has never been traced on the register, although I have an email from Jacobs claiming he was a registered bailiff.

Tallulah

Edited by tallulah59
mistake
Link to post
Share on other sites

If they claim he was registered they have to supply the details if you requested them. Did you ever receive a breakdown of the charges applied? Did you ever SAR both Bailiffs and Council?

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Tne vilest of the three has no employer listing, but is still registered,

a lot of councils have it written into the contract that there bailiffs firms cant sub contract out work

 

 

the one who claimed to be in charge is working for Phoenix Commercial Collections Ltd.

every possibility that that his bailiff certificate was void if he hadn't informed the court he had changed employers

 

 

and the other numpty, who tried to hide his car number plate, has never been traced on the register, although I have an email from Jacobs claiming he was a registered bailiff

 

Tallulah

 

did you phone the Ministry of justice to confirm his bailiff status

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

just tried to reply to PT's question but was distracted and got logged out!

Yes. I have a breakdown of costs. They are as follows:

Rates due: £443.12

Visit Fee: £24.50

Schedule 5 Header Charge: £24.50

Removal Fees: £150.00

Attendance/Van: £150.00

Walking Possession: £12.00

Levy Fee: £39.00

Quickfit Removals, low loader for oven: £220.00

Eden Transport, for other goods: £70.00

Electrician, disconnection of the oven: £75.00

Bailiff Waiting Fees: £439.55

Total: £1,647.67

 

Now for the bad news. The reason I was distracted was because I have just received the LGO's response (uncanny, since I have tried not to think about this situation for over a year and as soon as I mention it in a forum I get a result). It's not a good one but at least it is provisional so I can challenge it. Basically, they are using the old chestnut that another remedy was available, i.e. we should have paid the whole amount and then challenged the fees in the Magistrate's Court. British justice, eh? How can you be charged removal fees for someone NOT to remove your goods? Will battle on though, as a lot of lies appear to have been told. Haven't confirmed the bailiffs status with ministry of justice but I need to dig up some info on the one who wasn't on the register.

Tallulah

Link to post
Share on other sites

I note one or two there that could be argued - particularly the Waiting Fee. I appreciate you state Visit Fee, Levy Fee & Removal Fee - were these all done on the same day or different? I have to go out but will be back tonight - hopefully I'll get time to some reading!!

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

its not just the bailiff who you couldn't find on the register you should be checking out

 

send the council a letter/e-mail under a freedom of information request ask for a copy of there service level agreement with the bailiff company

this will tell you if they are allowed to employ subcontractors

 

bailiff 2 if he was still certificated to another firm his bond may have been cancelled (bailiffs cant work without this bond being registered with the court )

 

perhaps none of these bailiffs should have been collecting this debt

 

I would subject access request the council (they don't charge for this ) and the firm of bailiffs (£10cost) if you haven't done this already

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Thanks PT and Hallowitch,

I'm about to leave for work so won't be back online til around 7.30. Will take all your good advice on board and act on it (emailed the council this morning under the FIA to find out which firm of bailiffs got the tender which they advertised in January 2010. Couldn't help chuckling when I noticed that the new contract started on April Fool's day). All of the fees were done on the same day. They simply turned up and handed my husband a bill for £1,647.67. He offered to pay the original amount plus the attendance fees which came to around £700 but the council refused to accept this.

Tallulah

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was posted by tomtubby it gives you an idea of what to expect in a screenshot but you will need to subject access Jacobs

 

 

 

A Screen Shot is a VITAL document because it is the COMPUTER RECORD of you ENTIRE account and it will show the following:

Amount of Liability Order

Date received

Details of any telephone callslink3.gif made to to bailiff co.

Details of messages etc from the local authority

Brief description of your house (colour of door etc)

Name of any bailiff who has visited your home.

Details of whether a person was at home or not.

Details of any "levylink3.gif" made on goods to include a number plate of vehicle.

Full details of charges put onto your account and by which bailiff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Thanks for that, I will SAR Jacobs and the council a.s.a.p. The reply from the LGO is full of inaccuracies (They claim that Jacobs took the goods immediately because my husband had told them he was closing the business and they 'feared' they wouldn't get paid, which is an outright lie). The LGO also mention the fact that it would have been better if the bailiffs had contacted the DVLA before illegally seizing my mother-in-laws vehicle, which was parked outside the factory, but the decision to release the car and waive the fees 'appears reasonable in the circumstances'! They only did this because I bombarded them with emails and threatened them with legal action and no uplift fees were waived, only the 'fees' for the return of the vehicle which the ignorant b******s tried to get ME to pay. Have received a reply to my foi from the council saying that they will contact me within 20 days to comply with my recent request.

Tallulah

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Yes I have, and it's very interesting! I am planning to use some of this info in my reply to the LGO. I have emails from the council saying that I should 'contact the bailiffs and arrange to pick up the vehicle'. I told them to get stuffed (politely, of course) and get their henchmen to return the vehicle to my mother-in-law at THEIR cost. They did so, but feebly claimed that it was only as 'a gesture of goodwill'. Both the council and the LGO do not appear to have a clue about illegal levying of goods. No wonder the criminal bailiffs run rings around them. They even manage to make these slimy maggots look slightly more intelligent than themselves (only slightly, though!).

Tallulah

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a post on here somewhere and tomtubby explains why a bailiff cant be employed by one firm and work for another its about the bailiffs bond being cancelled when they move firms (i will post it up when i find it)

 

do you know its the distress for rent rules 1988 that covers the legislation for bailiff certification

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1988/2050/contents/made

 

sent you a PM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Thanks. Have added link to my favourites and will have a good look at it. Of the three who attended, number one showed ID, number two skulked around trying to hide his face as I filmed on my mobile He was not on register, and isn't on now unless he has changed his name, number three, who was truly the most obnoxious piece of s**t I have ever come across in my life, claimed that he wasn't even a bailiff and had his own limited company (I have some of this on film). He was on the register and his employers was named as Jacobs. He is still on the register now, but his employer field is blank.

Tallulah.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...