Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So I just found a couple abandoned traffic cones locally by some bins.   A bit squished but free!  So have placed them on the land.  Will wait to see if the cones get moved and signs ignored again this week before I consider rocks/ boulders.
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later the your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. So if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place and park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and then unload the children followed by reloading the children getting seat belts on etc before driving to the exit stopping for cars, pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
    • New version after LFI's superb analysis of the contract. Sorry, but you need to redo the numbering of the paras and of the exhibits in the right order after all the damage I've caused! Defendant's WS - version 4.pdf
    • Hi  no nothing yet. Hope it stays that way 😬
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

Worried please help/ British Transport Police


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4899 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

The issue of asking for a discharge is one of those 'advocacy' questions.

 

You have to plant the seed of considering a discharge, without directly asking for it. I think (and only trying it would tell) that if you march into Court, tell them that they should give you an absolute or conditional discharge, the Magistrates may well say 'no, £175 fine, £110 costs and £10 compensation.'

 

However, if you explain to the Court that you are hard up, andyou have spoken to 'advisers' who have told you that you would have to pay for a proper solicitor, and, as a first time offender, you don't really know what procedures are, you could explain that someone had told you that the Court can give an absolute discharge. It plants the seed without you asking.

 

This is part of the danger of taking 'on-line' advice. If I am wrong, or if another 'reader' mis-understands what I am trying to say, it is 'you' that will suffer, with no comeback against 'me' for my comments. I don't know the Magistrates who will hear this case. I don't know how they reacted to the last bit of similar naughtiness. I cannot see what they look like. Or what you look like, for that matter.

 

completely understood re this is only advise.

 

truth is I cannot afford a solicitor but I am by no means broke.

 

I will plant the seed on honest grounds cause i did actually consult a solic over phone and basically did realsie would cost me too much money for something I would be fined for anyway

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was involved with a case of 'public peeing' brought under the good old Essex Good Rule and Management Orders (For the life of me, I can't remember the enabling Act) many years ago. The father of the accused was a local business man, Round Table, Lions and so on.

 

Te accused had been in 'a club', where both the booze and the birds were cheap. At the end of the night, as was always the case, there were bus loads of Special Constables and a handful of 'regular' officers outside. Drunkenness all around, swearing, pushing and shoving, and the odd bit of pugilism.

 

The 'lad' wandered away from the crowd, he could see that some things were going 'badly'. He avoided the punch ups, but the cold night air affected his bladder as much as the beer had fogged his judgement. He stepped into a rose bush (anybody ever read Tom Sharpe? He must have got the idea from somewhere) and did 'what he had to do'.

 

Stepping from the bush, he found two rotund special constables, who promptly arrested him for 'D&D'.

 

Dad was called, and somehow I was caused to attend the 'nick'. Charge room sergeant (No CPS in those days!) decided that 'D&D' was a tad harsh, as every person leaving the club was 'D' and 90% of them were disorderly. The lesser charge was laid, dad took son home. I think it cost him £25.00 at Billericay Magistrates.

 

In the grand scheme of things, there were many worse things happening outside that club that night, never mind all of the other general villainy that took place in the rest of the town.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the best bit of advice anyone can give in my opinion.

 

It isn't a major offence, in my opinion it is damned silly and inconsiderate, others may take a different view, but it isn't going to have earth shattering consequences if you deal with it rationally and are polite, say sorry, take the punishment (if any) in a mature manner, then move on.

 

I thought I'd better add, that obviously doesn't mean it shouldn't be taken seriously, in my book it is the failure to deal with minor antisocial activities firmly that allows the proliferation of such actions. If there is a minor stigma attached that prevents a repeat, then that's all part of life's learning curve.

 

I'm sorry if that offends anyone, it is purely a personal opinion and as others have pointed out many times, that's all any of these posts are really.

.

 

understood

Link to post
Share on other sites

:whoo:

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...