Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • An update! I emailed both Andrzej.Tuleja and James_Goldsmith at Whirlpool dot com. I got a phone call from their executive team a couple of days later, and a replacement part dropped on the mat a week after. She was quite apologetic, however, also reiterated the "90 day warranty" period on customer fitted parts, and did not comment when I mentioned that the CRA also applies as I was a consumer buying from them directly. So I now have a spare door switch if the machine decides to eat another in the future! Cheers all!   Note dx100 that the "Hotpoint CEO" you linked to is not related to the hotpoint appliances, but some kind of marketing app.
    • yep, throw that morality card out the window....9/10 you never owe a DCA ANYTHING!! they are NOT BAILIFFS!!
    • (See the link to DVLA’s INF188/6 document I posted above, page 4 as cited) “I have a new medical condition that I have told the DVLA about on my recent application. Can I drive? As soon as the DVLA receives your correct and complete application for a new licence and as long as you meet all the Section 88 criteria, you may drive. It is important that you are satisfied that the medical condition you have declared on your application does not stop you from driving. If you are unsure, check with your doctor or healthcare professional before you make a decision. You can also look up your condition in the ‘Assessing fitness to drive’ guide, which you can find at www.gov.uk/dvla/fitnesstodrive to see whether you meet the medical standards for driving. As this guide is intended for healthcare professionals, it can be complicated. Your doctor or healthcare professional should be able to help you if necessary." It seems that DVLA think that S.88 does apply for applications disclosing a new medical condition after all. Why might this be so, and what of “qualifying application" and "relevant disability"? S. 92(1) imposes on the driver a requirement to disclose a relevant disability. S.92(3) requires the Secretary of State to refuse such an application disclosing a relevant disability ….. EXCEPT S.92(4) requires the Secretary of State to grant such an application if the relevant disability is “adequately controlled”. Hence my belief S.88 can apply for medical conditions (if the driver meets the medical standard of fitness to drive) as the application remains a qualifying application IF the driver meets the medical standard of fitness to drive, until DVLA (on behalf of the Secretary of State) say it doesn’t, provided the driver believes they meet the (medical) standard. Additionally, at (or before) June 2013 (as noted in my previous post) the medical standard for fitness to drive for conditions involving excessive daytime sleepiness was changed from “completely controlled” to "adequately controlled".  
    • CFO Bill Guan allegedly led a team at the news outlet that was behind a global money laundering scheme.View the full article
    • Anyway, I've asked my Booking.com flat-rent-out-bloke what needs to be done on the Booking.com portal to cancel a reservation. I got a late message "I'll let you know tomorrow".
  • 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

Car towed away as ticket fell off window


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4767 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 Guys, can anyone offer advice.

have parked in this particular car park for a few months now, every day and I always buy an all day ticket.

Today I did the same and it ran out at 17:19. I got to the car park at 17:10 and my car was missing. At first I thought it was stolen, but did wonder if it had been towed. I rang the number advertised gave them my registration, and they confirmed it was towed for not displaying a valid ticket. the ONLY explanation is the ticket fell off the dashboard.

The PPC are now demanding £390 to release the car, and £40 storage overnight, and even when I show them the ticket they will not refund the money.

I do not have £430, can anyone offer some advice?

thanks

Working to remove my debts

Link to post
Share on other sites

they have advised that I have to pay them first to even get access to the car, and then when I get the ticket from the car to show it had been paid for, they will not give a refund.

Working to remove my debts

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely! Cash only.

Went to collect the car tonight, they refused to let me sign paid in protest on the receipt, and ripped it up and wrote others out. every time I did this they ripped it up. however I did record the conversation and I told them it was paid in protest despite them telling me they don't do reciepts with that.

The ticket was in the car, it had fallen from the windcsreen onto the seat face down so you couldn't see the time and date, however it quite clearly shows the expiry date and time, which was well after they took the vehicle.

The fact the ticket had fallen down, I am wondering if A) I can claim that they supplied innefective tickets and that would be why it fell off, and b) because the ticket was actually valid at the time the car was removed, they didn't incure any losses

Working to remove my debts

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, here is how the law stands. This all revolves around the law of TORT. In short, a landowner can demand compensation for losses casued by you 'trespassing' on their land. This is invoked by way of them using a contractor (the **** you met) who charge a fee from you. They achieve this by stealing your car legally and then holding it to randsom.

 

However, there is no trespass as you were there by mutual consent. They said you could stay if you paid, which you did. KEEP THAT TICKET!!!!!! So, there was no loss and thus no requirement for any charge.

 

Now, where it gets sticky. There is absolutely zero chance of you ever getting a refund from the **** you met, but you have to go through a process. That involves writing to them and demanding a refund. They will either refuse or ignore you. Give them 14 days in which to refund. Mark your letter 'letter before action' and send by recorded delivery or ideally specail delivery.

 

When they do not pay you will have to sue them. BUT also sue the landowner as joint defendant. Get their details from teh council or land registery. Take photos of the signs on display and do not lose that ticket. Anyone needing to see it can have a photocopy. Take the actual ticket to court.

 

In court you will win and be awarded all your money back, but the **** will not pay - hence why you jointly sue the landowner. They are not going anywhere so you can recover your money that way.

 

T

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that, Appreciate your help. What they told me was I breached that contract as the ticket wasn't in the window as it should have been, therefore they were unable to prove at removal the car should have been there, therefore I have no leg to stand on Are they correct?

Working to remove my debts

Link to post
Share on other sites

Proportional compensation.

 

IF you hadn't bothered buying a ticket, the landowner would have lost out on the revenue he was entitled to, whatever an all day ticket costs (£10?????). So does it seem proportional to then tow the car away? Of course not. They could have issued a ticket and add on reasonable costs for doing so, pushing it up to say £40. But no, let us arrange for a big truck to come in and take your car, which costs them about £12 in total costs and then stitch you up for £430.

 

Absolute scandal and will eventually be stopped once this namby pamby coilition government starts to push laws through to protect victims.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its clear from this that they have penalised you which is something a PPC (or anyother private company) cannot do. It would be interesting the hear how thay would convince a judge that this was anything other than a penalty

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It comes down to consent. It's doubtful it's possible to consent to the act of clamping from a non-intentional act and where no trepass has occurred.

 

Who is the landowner?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...