Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
  • 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

Crazy charges from DLC/Orange


Darkly
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4811 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

Hello,

 

I received a letter from Orange on the 6th Feb 2011 demanding full payment of £170.81 which I owe or risk debt collection. I replied in letter and stated that I had currently lost my job and can only afford to pay them £5 a month. They didn't reply.

 

Then I've just (23/02/11) received a letter from DLC demanding £862.24 on behalf of Orange. How can this be right? These are some crazy charges, they don't give any information on what they are for or my original debt. The letter is all jumbled up too, words over other words and I can only just make out that its on behalf of Orange.

 

Any advice would be much appreciated! Im a total newby to this sort of stuff and have no legal knowledge at all.

 

Thanks guys.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the best advice i could give is to go and see citizens advice.

 

do not i repeat do not contact the DCA by phone, do everything by post keeping copies for yourself, they will try to bully and scaremonger you into paying the lot but don't give into them the ball is firmly in your court. ask them for the proof of what you owe and explain the situation you are in and wait for them to act.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, were you within the minimum term of a contract? If so the bill will be for the remaining months of the contract.

 

Deal in writing as dee_jay says.

 

The nasty thing about all this (which I don't think you will have realised yet) is that Orange will have put a black mark on your credit file that will stay there for 6 years.

If in doubt, contact a qualified insured legal professional (or my wife... she knows EVERYTHING)

 

Or send a cheque or postal order payable to Reclaim the Right Ltd.

to

923 Finchley Road London NW11 7PE

 

 

Click here if you fancy an email address that shows you mean business! (only £6 and that will really help CAG)

 

If you can't donate, please use the Internet Search boxes on the CAG pages - these will generate a small but regular income for the site

 

Please also consider using the

C.A.G. Toolbar

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

I received a letter from Orange on the 6th Feb 2011 demanding full payment of £170.81 which I owe or risk debt collection. I replied in letter and stated that I had currently lost my job and can only afford to pay them £5 a month. They didn't reply.

 

Then I've just (23/02/11) received a letter from DLC demanding £862.24 on behalf of Orange. How can this be right? These are some crazy charges, they don't give any information on what they are for or my original debt. The letter is all jumbled up too, words over other words and I can only just make out that its on behalf of Orange.

 

Any advice would be much appreciated! Im a total newby to this sort of stuff and have no legal knowledge at all.

 

Thanks guys.

 

The charges DLC are pursuing you for are most likely for the remainder of your Orange contract, if you were only a couple of months into a 18 or 24 month contract they are likely to be sizeable.

Edited by Human Writes
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

If that is charges for the remainder of the contract period, they would be quite a lot, but not all would be justifiable.

 

If they took you to court I don't believe that they would get more than the outstanding value of the phone that they supplied (the discounted value, not the retail price).

 

I wouldn't pay Orange anything that they hadn't invoiced me for. I would write to Orange and dispute the outstanding amount in the first instance, certainly would not phone DLC. Definately don't disclose any other phone numbers to them ...

 

They will add a default to your credit record, when this is over you can look in the Debt -> CRA forum for possible ways to try to remove this

Link to post
Share on other sites

Orange have multiplied the remaining number of months in the contract * monthly amount to give the amount they claim

 

Although they say that the phone is free, they get them at vastly reduced costs and take that out of the monthly payments. The rest is for calls.

 

However, that does not represent their actual costs - just what you had agreed to pay for the contracted period where they were providing the service

 

But for the remainder of the contract, they are not providing the service. If they took the OP to court (and their claim was defended) then they could only claim their actual losses. That would be pro rata what they had paid for the phone.

 

What I am suggesting is that the OP should be able to get quite a hefty discount on that balance to settle the matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Orange have multiplied the remaining number of months in the contract * monthly amount to give the amount they claim

 

Although they say that the phone is free, they get them at vastly reduced costs and take that out of the monthly payments. The rest is for calls.

 

However, that does not represent their actual costs - just what you had agreed to pay for the contracted period where they were providing the service

 

But for the remainder of the contract, they are not providing the service. If they took the OP to court (and their claim was defended) then they could only claim their actual losses. That would be pro rata what they had paid for the phone.

 

What I am suggesting is that the OP should be able to get quite a hefty discount on that balance to settle the matter.

 

If the OP has agreed to pay them a set amount from a minimum term then does not do that then they will have lost payment for the remainder of the term and they could claim for that as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies guys. I've worked it out and realised that the amount owed is infact the remainder of my bill. Stupid of me not to realise but nevermind, now I know.

 

I've just sent a 'prove it' letter to DLC, just waiting to hear back. I was just wondering if there are any letter templates that let them know I can only afford to pay £5 a month to them as I have little to no disposable income.

 

Thanks for the help already!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...