Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I would suggest that you stop trying to rely on legal theory – as you understand it. Firstly, because we are dealing with practical/pragmatic situations and at a low value level where these arguments tend not to work. Secondly, because you clearly have misunderstood the assessment of quantum where there are breaches of obligations. The formula that you have cited above is the method of loss calculation in torts. In contract it is entirely different. The law of obligations generally attempts to remedy the breach. This means that in tort, damages seek to put you into the position you would have been in had the breach not occurred. In other words it returns you to your starting position – point zero. Contract damages attend put you into the position that you would have been had the breach not occurred but this is not your starting position, contract damages assume that the agreement in dispute had actually been carried out. This puts you into your final position. You sold an item for £XXX. Your expectation was that you your item would be correctly delivered and that you would be the beneficiary of £XXX. Your expectation loss is the amount that you sold the item for and that is all you are entitled to recover. If you want, you can try to sue for the larger sum – and we will help you. But if they ask for evidence of the value of the item as it was sold then I can almost guarantee that either you will be obliged to settle for the lesser sum – or else a judge will give you judgement but for the lesser sum. This will put you to the position that you would have been had there been no breach of contract. I understand from you now that when you dispatch the item you declared the retail cost to you and not your expected benefit of £XXX. To claim for the retail value in the circumstances would offend the rules relating to betterment. If you want to do it then we will help you – but don't be surprised if you take a tumble.  
    • I was caught speeding 3 times in the same week, on the same road. All times were 8-12mph higher than the limit. I was offered the course for the first offense and I now need to accept the other 2 offenses. I just want to be ready for what might come. Will I get the £100 fine and 3 points for each of them or do I face something more severe?  These are my only offenses in 8 years of driving.
    • I'll get my letter drafted this evening. Its an item I sold, which I'm also concerned about, as whilst I don't have my original purchase receipt (the best I have is my credit card statement showing a purchase from Car Audio Centre), I do unfortunately have the eBay listing where I sold it for much less. But as I said before this is now a question of compensation: true compensation would seek to put me back into the position I was in before the loss ie: that title would remain with me until my buyer has accepted this, and so compensation should be that which would be needed to replace the lost item. But in the world of instant electronic payment, it could be argued that as I had already been paid, the title to the goods had already transferred, and I was required to refund the buyer after the loss. And so, despite my declared value being the retail price - that which is needed to return me to my pre-sales position, the compensatory value should be the value I sold it for, which being a second-hand item from a private seller is lower. I still believe that I should be claiming for the item's full value, rather than how much I sold it for, as this is the same for insurance: we don't insure the value we paid, but rather the value of the item to put us back into the position we would be in if we ever needed to claim. Its for the loss adjuster to argue the toss
    • amusing that 'bad economic judgement on behalf of prior party ISN'T a major reason to wingers to move to deform yet immigration is, where record levels of such has been driven by the right wings terrible brexit and the later incompetent dog whistle 'proposals largely driven to whistle to the right wingnuts Just seems to confirm the are clueless numpties 'wetting their own shoes   Has farage bought a property in Clacton yet?   yet concern for the NHS is listed as a major issue even by those saying they are moving to deform  
    • Also, have you told us how much you paid for this vehicle? Are there any other expenses you have incurred – insurance, inspections et cetera? How far away from the dealership do you live?
  • 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

falling foul of the 14 day timescale rip off


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4743 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 Every one,

 

Just a quick note to see if i am right,

 

I received a ticket for not parking entirely in a parking bay markings of which i am happy to pay,

 

i recieved this ticket on the 02nd March 2011 at 10:31:11 i worked out that as long as i paid the fine by the 16th May 2011 i would only have to pay the £25.00?

 

When i called to pay the fine on the 16th i was told i was one day too late and the clerk said i would have to pay £50.00

 

when i asked why she said you include the first day ie 02nd and add 13 day which is the 15th i then explained that they had not given me the full 14 days as they way i see it 02nd March 10:31:11 to the 3rd MARCH 10:31:11 is 1 day ( 24 hours ) this would give me uo to 10:31:11 on the 16th to pay, she then told me that they do not use the time only the date.

 

I said it does not explain this on the ticket and that the wording is very misleading her answer was yes i know most people have this problem.

 

i then asked why if they know it causes most people problems why dont they amend the tickets to show the exact date the fine must be paid. ie

 

to recieve your discount of 50% this fine must be paid by "DATE"

 

or if you pay this fine by "DATE" you fine will be reduced by 50%

 

She then told me well how do you think we make more money.:-x

 

I have appealed against the £50.00 charge but as yet not recieved a reply.

 

Has any one got any suggestions

 

Regards

 

MH

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who issued the ticket?

Link to post
Share on other sites

another person who insists on doing this kind of business on the telephone and who doesn't record calls. If you had a recording of the admission that yes many people have the same problem, this would have been the killer argument and you can sit have successfully have appealed.

 

You should still have a chance but it won't be as easy. I agree with you on your reading of the timescales. It is clear that although the ticket might have been issued at 1030, it would not actually have been served until the time you saw when you return to your car. This might have been much later – and for many people it would be. On the basis of what they are saying, they could have issued a ticket at 5:00 PM and expected that day to count.

 

I suggest very strongly that you make a detailed note of the telephone conversation that you had – particularly referring to the statement that was made by the council employee that many people have this problem.it may be interesting to do a Freedom of Information Act enquiry to find out exactly how many people do appeal on the basis of a misunderstanding of the time period.

 

I would suggest that if the appeal that you have made so far does not work, that you mount a further appeal – because I think you are allowed to go one up higher to the adjudicator. At the same time you make a Freedom of Information Act enquiry to find out how many appeals they have had on the basis of a misunderstanding of the 14 day limit for discounts. I would also begin a complaint to the local authority ombudsman. The local authority ombudsman process is something that is very underused – but I can promise you that the Council don't like it, and is likely to produce interesting results – not least an attempt to settle the matter with you.

 

Look at the Liverpool Council website and they should be information there about Freedom of Information as well as the process for going to the local authority ombudsman. Although you are bound to say very much money, there is no reason why they should have it and I think it would be an interesting exercise and also very satisfying for you if you succeeded.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if you intend to deal with any more of this on the telephone – whether you intend to do any kind of business on the telephone with any company, any council, any bank, any retailer, – record your calls. You will regret it if you don't

Link to post
Share on other sites

£50/£25 - 50% discount - 14 days discount period...

 

Sounds more like a Council ticket at the Lower Contravention rate to me rather than a PPC.

 

Parked outside bay markings are at the Lower Contravention rate.

Best if the OP confirms.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have appealed against the £50.00 charge but as yet not recieved a reply.

 

Then there is nothing more you can do until you get a written reply. I expect they will reinstate the discount, but if they do not, let us know.

 

Also, can you scan or quote the exact wording on the PCN about payment dates. This could possibly invalidate the PCN!

Link to post
Share on other sites

When i called to pay the fine

 

MH

 

 

 

I do not understand why so many people just want to pay the fine? I am assuming this is a real Council ticket rather than a bogus PCN from a private company?

 

I know you have now put in your first informal appeal but only because you couldn't pay the lower amount. Seems strange logic when you can usually appeal all the way to the adjudicator and pay nothing at all. You only risk possibly being told in due course to pay the full (non-discounted) fine by the adjudicator in the unusual event of you losing. So why on earth more people don't just press on with appeals is a constant surprise to me.

 

I know a lot of people are 'too busy' but I reckon the Councils should work for their ill-gotten gains in parking income! I am a busy Mum of 4 with an OH and a full-time job (my little bit of spare time is spent on forums!) but I would still always appeal any Council PCN all the way to an adjudicator - whatever the circumstances, even if seemingly caught bang to rights.

 

Post back when the Council reject your informal appeal. No point paying it too hastily.

 

If it is a real Council tickets, can you show us pics of the PCN front and back please (just blank out car reg and PCN number).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry i cannot send a copy as my scanner is not working at the moment but here are the details,

 

Date of contravention 02/03/2011

Time of contraventio 10:31:11

Location Moorfields - l2

Vehicle reg ********

Vehicle Colour *******

Tax disc expiry *******

Observed from 10:30:28 to 10:31:11

 

A penalty of£50 is now payable and must be paid not later than the last day of the period od 28 days beginning with the date on which this PCN was served.

 

The penalty charge will be reduced by a discount of 50% to £25.00 if it is paid not later than the last day of the period of 14 days beginning with the date on which this PCN was served.

 

there is no metion that the times of the offence are not included in the 14 days and as in my 1st post as my ticket was served at 10:31:11 this is when the clock should start otherwise they are saying that the ticket might as well been printed at 12.01 that morning. ie they are only giving me 13 days and 13 hours and 29 minutes, as far as i am concerned a day 1s 24 hours long.

 

Regards

 

MH

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are 100% not going to win that argument at adjudication so please forget it!

 

You posted the timing on the PCN yourself and you still think they are wrong?

 

'14 days beginning with the date on which this PCN was served.'

 

Can you take a pic with a digital camera or phone, of the PCN, front and back, all the small print and show us a pic of the bay lines at signs where you parked. This is important information.

 

In the meantime, when do you think the 28 day period is up to make your reps? Just checking that you have your eye on the ball as far as dates are concerned now!

 

And I would email the Council in the morning for a copy of the Traffic Order for that street or car park. They have to provide it to any interested person (do not mention your PCN at all, asking for the Order is a request for info, not an appeal so is separate). It's important to ask for it IMHO as the Order may not even make 'parking outside of bay lines' a contravention...

Link to post
Share on other sites

They way i see it the 14 day period was up at 10:31:11 on the 16th March 2011, the 28 day period will be up at 10:31:11 on the 30th March 2011.

 

I use the the reason that 1 day equals 24 hours, so 24 hours from the time the ticket was issued would be 10:31:11 on the 03rd March 2011 And so on.

 

I called the council to pay the fine on the 16th at 8.30 (i have proof of this call) and was told that i was a day late?

 

I am going to fight this, as i see that the wording on the ticket is poorly written and very confusing.

 

would a court disagree that a day is 24 hours long? i would like them to explain their reason behined it if they did.

 

Cheers

 

MH

 

My argument is that i have not been given the right time to pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use the the reason that 1 day equals 24 hours, so 24 hours from the time the ticket was issued would be 10:31:11 on the 03rd March 2011 And so on.

 

You may use that logic, but the PCN payment system doesn't. If it did, there would be no need to specify "beginning on the date on which the PCN was served". They would just say 14 days.

 

I still think they are more likely than not to allow the discount. Wait and see.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...