Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I found that the parkin attended has a car with CCTV camera on it, however as I stated earlier, it seems that he did not take video of my car otherwise they would have stated so in the SAR. parking car .pdf
    • The rules state that "approved devices may only be used in limited circumstances"  I was not a threat. I was not present. I did not drive away. I think he has not fulfilled the necessary requirements justifying issuing me a PCN by post therefore the PCN was issued incorrectly and not valid.  What are your thoughts?  
    • I have also found this:  D.2 Service of a PCN by post: 54) There are some circumstances in which a PCN (under Regulation 10) may be served by post: 1) where the contravention has been detected on the basis of evidence from an approved device (approved devices may only be used in limited circumstances) 2) if the CEO has been prevented, for example by force, threats of force, obstruction or violence, from serving the PCN either by affixing it to the vehicle or by giving it to the person who appears to be in charge of that vehicle 3) if the CEO had started to issue the PCN but did not have enough time to finish or serve it before the vehicle was driven away and would otherwise have to write off or cancel the PCN 55) In any of these circumstances a PCN is served by post to the owner and also acts as the NtO. The Secretary of State recommends that postal PCNs should be sent within 14 days of the contravention. Legislation states that postal PCNs must be sent within 28 days, unless otherwise stated in the Regulations. This from London Councils Code of Practice on Civil Parking Enforcement.  The question is what is an approved device? Certainly, he had the opportunity to place the ticket on my car and I didn't drive away.  I looked further and it seems that an approved device is a CCTV camera - It seems that the photos taken were not actual film but images and it is not clear if they are taken from a video or are stills. I'm guessing if it was moving images then the SAR would have stated this.    From the Borough of Hounslow website: "There are two types of PCN issued under the Traffic Management Act 2004, which governs parking contraventions. The first is served on-street by a Civil Enforcement Officer, who will observe a vehicle and collect evidence before serving the PCN either by placing it in a plastic wallet under the windscreen wiper, or by handing it to the driver. The second is a PCN served by post, based on CCTV footage taken by an approved device, which has been reviewed by a trained CCTV Operator."   From Legislation.gov.uk regarding approved devices: Approved Devices 4.  A device is an approved device for the purposes of these Regulations if it is of a type which has been certified by the Secretary of State as one which meets requirements specified in Schedule 1. SCHEDULE 1Specified requirements for approved devices 1.  The device must include a camera which is— (a)securely mounted on a vehicle, a building, a post or other structure, (b)mounted in such a position that vehicles in relation to which relevant road traffic contraventions are being committed can be surveyed by it, (c)connected by secure data links to a recording system, and (d)capable of producing in one or more pictures, a legible image or images of the vehicle in relation to which a relevant road traffic contravention was committed which show its registration mark and enough of its location to show the circumstances of the contravention. 2.  The device must include a recording system in which— (a)recordings are made automatically of the output from the camera or cameras surveying the vehicle and the place where a contravention is occurring, (b)there is used a secure and reliable recording method that records at a minimum rate of 5 frames per second, (c)each frame of all captured images is timed (in hours, minutes and seconds), dated and sequentially numbered automatically by means of a visual counter, and (d)where the device does not occupy a fixed location, it records the location from which it is being operated. 3.  The device and visual counter must— (a)be synchronised with a suitably independent national standard clock; and (b)be accurate within plus or minus 10 seconds over a 14-day period and re-synchronised to the suitably independent national standard clock at least once during that period. 4.  Where the device includes a facility to print a still image, that image when printed must be endorsed with the time and date when the frame was captured and its unique number. 5.  Where the device can record spoken words or other audio data simultaneously with visual images, the device must include a means of verifying that, in any recording produced by it, the sound track is correctly synchronised with the visual image.
    • Hearing took place today.  Case dismissed with costs awarded. Neither UKPC or a representative turned up.  Apparently they messaged the court on 7 May asking for their case to be considered on paper.  Never informed me, which was criticised by the judge as not following procedure.  I was really annoyed as I would have preferred for the case to be thrown out before the hearing, or at least face them in court and see them squeal.   They are just playing a numbers game and hope you blink 1st!   Ended up having to change my flight, but  the costs awarded softens the blow. Was asked to confirm it was my signature on both the witness statement and supplementary statement.  Wasn't asked to read them, said she could see my arguments made and the signs were insufficient and no contract formed. Took maybe 10 mins in total.  Judge did most of the talking and was best for me just to keep quiet or confirm any statements made. Happy to have won as a matter of principle and have costs awarded. Maybe not worth all the time and hassle for any newbies or the technologically challenged.  But if you are stubborn like me and willing to put in the time and effort, you can beat these vultures! I big shout out to everyone who helped on the thread with their advice and guidance, special mention to FTMDave, thank you sir!  Really appreciate everyone's efforts. All the best!
    • I plan to be honest to avoid any further trouble, tell them that the name should be changed to my official name
  • 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

Mucky Hall, Old YB


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4711 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

Afternoon everyone.

 

Today my wife received a call on her mobile from Mucky Hall wanting to speak to me! Due to the DPA they could not tell her anything but gave her a Ref and Contact number.

 

I phoned Mucky Hall (recorded the call) to see what it was about. It transpires that they are working on behalf of the Lewis Group with the original debt belonging to Yorkshire Bank. The amount they claim is owed is just over £700.

 

I DID NOT ADMIT OR ACHKNOWLEDGE THE DEBT BELONGING TO ME!

 

A bit of background to the alleged debt. I banked with YB for 14 years but haven’t been a customer now for almost six years. I had two accounts with YB, my main account that my wages were paid into and a second account that I paid my bills from by DD. I then had a weekly Standing Order that paid a fixed amount from my main account to my second account. This was something my local branch advised me to do.

 

For the most part it worked, occasionally I would not have enough in my second account to cover the bills and YB would then take the required amount of my main account THEN inform me.

 

In January 2005 for some reason they stopped paying my bills. By April 2005 it looks like they had stopped paying all my bills including my mortgage. At the time I was doing a lot of overtime and staying at my fiancés house so I wasn’t checking my mail. In May 2005 I even had a substantial redundancy payment in my main account.

 

I took three months off work and got married. In October 2005 I have a new job and went to get my wages out and my card didn’t work. I phoned the bank and was told my account had been closed. Two weeks later my house was repossessed and found out my loan had been defaulted as well as other outstanding debts.

 

Fast forward to today and this is the first I have heard anything about this debt.

 

I believe this debt is solely made up of charges and interest.

 

I informed mucky hall to remove the telephone number as it does not belong to me and everything in writing to me.Mucky Hall claim that they started working on the account in March 2011 and that they last payment was in January 2007! It wasn’t made by me!!!

 

What's my best next step?

 

Thanks in advance.

Edited by xboxer
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you not consider taking the bank to court? Did you inform the FOS of their actions, or lack of them?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest I always thought I would probably be the one to blame for not checking my mail.

 

I've currently started SARing my old loan company, next was going to my old mortgage then the bank.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I ment to say in my original post I have never gave any financial institutions my wifes mobile number, in fact it is still in her maiden name!

 

Also with regards to YB messing up my DD's the first I knew of it was when my house was repossessed!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to write to MHall and tell them you require everything in writing. That letter has to go by recorded delivery or they will deny ever having received it.

 

In the same letter demand Mhall proove their claims that a payment was made in January 2007. This will have to include how much was paid, by whom and how and where. To fob you off with a vague claim is not good enough. Tell them that without documentary proof that you owe this debt and they have the right to even contact you let alone chase you for money you will not give them the time of day. In the next paragraph demand their complaints procedure. They are supposed to have one but I'm not aware of anyone having ever seen one. It will however show Mhall's drones that perhaps you know more about your rights than they do.

 

This should put Mhall to flight and you can then start demanding what happened in this matter from Yorkshire Bank. The fault appears to lie with them and youshould be prepared to start a major offensive against them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree to a certain extent, but corresponding with Muckhall with a letter sent recorded delivery wouldn't be any use IMO.

 

If you wish to correspond with them, then send them the prove it letter and send it 2nd class, and obtain "Proof of delivery"| from the PO counter, that is all you will ever legally require to show a judge, but as this is in the hands of Muckhall, it will never get to that stage, they only deal in statute barred and unenforceable/unrecoverable debts (they like to call them delinquent)

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?428-General-debt-letter-if-you-know-nothing-of-the-debt

 

As for their mobile phone contact, it is your wife's phone, she has a choice of who she speaks to and who she doesn't, if it continues after being told to STOP, then keep a diary of events regarding the calls and report them to the Police for the criminal offence of harassment.

 

I still do not understand why you would let the bank get away with having your house repossessed? If there was any case for taking them to court and suing them, then this would have been right up there with money laundering!

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning,First off thanks for the replies.When I spoke to Mucky Hall yesterday when I asked for more details (amount and by whom) about the supposed last payment their excuse was that they only limited information and couldn’t see those details.I know for a fact that I haven't made this payment as I had no bank account and that checking my credit file this morning YB have a linked address record with my address wrong. lol Let's see what they come back with when I ask for proof of the payment. :-DI should add that Mucky Hall are only working on behalf of the Lewis Group and don't own the debt.At the time when the repossesion happened I had a lot going on and didn't really know my rights. Since discovering this site I have started SARing various companies with intentions of reclaiming PPI and charges. But if there is a case for YB to answer to then I will chasing that up as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stay off the phone, you have no evidence of this call taking place least of all what was discussed.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK thats good! Make a transcript of that call, and keep it by the phone, that way if they ring again you will be able to refer to it, highlight the salient points and note the time they were made during the call, then you will be able to reply, "At 13.44 your phone operative stated XY & Z, why has this not happened?"

 

Put them right on the back webbed foot that will!

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks sillygirl, I will do.

 

I am slowly learning bazooka!

 

My only worry is as I had two accounts will it be the termination of the last account that will be the cause of action?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea, it is for them to make that clear to you, so possibly sending them the "No debt acknowledged" letter would be a good start, then hopefully they will come back with some thing meaningful, like an account number? Alternatively, wait until they send their next lame letter and go from there.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Update time.

 

I decided to wait and see if Mucky would make contact. I finally received a letter from Mucky that was ignored. It was a standard you owe us X amount.

 

I have now received a Meritforce possible doorstep collection visit letter.

 

Now as luck would have it we are having a new front door fitted in a couple of weeks, so if they are willing to wait they will actually be able to collect a doorstep for once! :-)

 

But in all seriousness I will send the No Visits letter.

 

I have been thinking about this alleged debt and think that either the lewis group or YB have combined the two bank accounts to make one debt, if that is the case where to I stand with that?

 

My second account, which in most likelihood makes up most of this debt, stopped having money deposited and withdrawn from it sometime in February/March 2005. So that would at least make some off the alleged debt SB.

 

Any thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Suggest that you make enquiries with YB about last payment dates on the account. If you phone them, they should be able to give you information on the phone or in writing within a few days. I would not rely on any information from Mucky Hall.

 

Once you have the information, you will better informed of what you need to do. It could even by statute barred. Mucky Hall sent around a Meritforce collector to a relative on a statute barred debt, even though they were told it was disputed and unenforceable. Until you get the information and can tell them to foxtrot off, they will continue to be a pain, but they do eventually give up.

 

Offsetting of one account with another is allowed and should in the t&c's.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi unclebulgaria,

 

I pretty confident on the dates, YB had closed my main account by the end of Oct 05, so in theory I only have 4 months ish to go. At the beginning of November they will get the SB letter!

 

It's more a case of the legal ability/stance of combining 2 bank account (both had different accounts numbers) into one debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi unclebulgaria,

 

I pretty confident on the dates, YB had closed my main account by the end of Oct 05, so in theory I only have 4 months ish to go. At the beginning of November they will get the SB letter!

 

It's more a case of the legal ability/stance of combining 2 bank account (both had different accounts numbers) into one debt.

 

It is not the date of them closing the account that is relevant. It is the date of default in regard to payment that was due on the account. This may be many months before the October closure.

 

Don't feel any nervousness about contacting YB for information. I doubt that they are in contact with MH about the account and you are entitled to request the information.

 

YB are entitled to roll up two accounts into one debt. It will be the t&c's for the accounts. Ask them about this and they will confirm the t&c's that apply.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not the date of them closing the account that is relevant. It is the date of default in regard to payment that was due on the account. This may be many months before the October closure.

 

Don't feel any nervousness about contacting YB for information. I doubt that they are in contact with MH about the account and you are entitled to request the information.

 

YB are entitled to roll up two accounts into one debt. It will be the t&c's for the accounts. Ask them about this and they will confirm the t&c's that apply.

 

 

In that case my main account would of been empty about mid September time.

 

If as you say they can roll the two accounts into one debt, I would be asking some serious questions about why they didn't take any monies owing on the second account whilst my main account was still in credit.

 

The second account from what I see stopped paying direct debts around march time but in may of that year I had my redundancy payment of over £20,000, so they should of used some of that to pay account 2.

 

To have the view they are separate accounts until they want to sell the debt on stinks of double standards and in my opinion is a highly dubious practice.

 

But it is the banks we are talking about! :shock:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Suggest that you take up a complaint with YB, rather than just continue a gripe on CAG. If you had two accounts and they were able to offset, I would question why they did not act in your interest. Remember that complaints have to be recorded for FOS/FSA purposes and while a complaint is ongoing, collection activity has to be put on hold. So if you get a complaint registered with YB and send confirmation to MH, they should stop hassling you. If your complaint is later rejected and you decide not to continue with it, then you will be nearer to the debt being statute barred. So complaining is a bit of a no brainer.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi uncleb,

 

Thanks for your help so far, I wasn't posting just to have a gripe, I honestly didn't know what could and couldn't be done.

 

Looks like the best bet will be to contact the bank and see what happens from there.

 

I have also sent the prove it letter to mucky today, so let's see what that brings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...