Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi All I have now received a Final Reminder, which I have attached. Can you confirm that I should still ignore this letter and take no further action. It does not appear to say "Letter of Claim" anywhere on the document but I just wanted to check with you all. Many thanks FightUnfairParkingTickets Parking Charge Final Reminder issued 29th May 2024.pdf
    • Hello I am a resident of a communal block of flats owned by a Housing Association and since Tuesday 14th May 2024 Matthews and Tannert had put up scaffolding for a job on the roof last week, which was up for the best part of nine days. They had removed the scaffolding on Thursday 23rd May 2024 but my Sky box is still not working because of the satellite dish outside, and I was wondering whether the scaffolders had touched the dish while it was there and as a result had probably knocked the dish and probably made the dish go out of signal or whatever. I needed someone to check this out as well as to see my Sky box to see what could be the problem, and hopefully sort this out. I have had my Sky Digibox for many years and I have got recordings saved on them that I have had a long time - it would break my heart if I had lost them forever.       I contacted Sky but I almost made the mistake of accepting an offer where I would have to pay £31.50 and wait a whole month without television in my front room for it. I am in debt at the moment and I don't want all this on top of everything else - thankfully I have since cancelled it two weeks later when I told the person on the phone that it is the dish which is at fault as well as the fact that I live in a communal Housing Association property, and so that is one of very few weights off my mind. I emailed the Housing Association's Repairs department and they said that they will contact an electrical company to come out and see to the dish outside. I received a telephone call on Friday 24th May from the man to say that he will arrive on Wednesday 29th May 2024 to do the job. He arrived at around 9.40 am on Wednesday as promised; he went into my flat and had a look at the Sky box and saw the blue screen on my front room TV set, indicating no signal. He also looked outside as to where the dish was.  The main problem was that the ladders that he had with him were not enough to reach the dish outside as the dish was towards the top of the building - obviously the Health and Safety aspect of the job didn't allow him to do this. He then mentioned that whether he could do the job as a result of getting onto the roof and doing it like that as the dish is closer to the top. He said that he needed the key to enter the loft part of the building in order to reach this, and he needed to contact the Housing Officer at the Housing Association who had key to this, but lo and behold, he came on the Wednesday to do the job, and guess what? Wednesday was the Housing Officer's day off and so therefore he was unable to contact him for the key so that he could do the job! I just couldn't believe it myself. I am personally annoyed because this has not been sorted, and the man who came to do this is also annoyed because he came all the way to Nottingham from Peterborough, and he said to me that he won't get paid if he cannot do the job, so you see, we are both angry about this for different reasons. We are both in the same boat with regards to frustration, and we both want to see a conclusion to this, once and for all. Sometimes I wish that I didn't live in a flat which is in a communal building and I am thinking of getting a transfer to a one bedroom flat that isn't in that sort of place. I pay around £85 a month in a Direct Debit to Sky to receive their TV services which I cannot use at the moment, and I don't have much money in my bank account as it is due to one thing and another. I also pay nearly £14 a month to TV Licensing so that I can legally watch TV in my front room. I pay for Sky hence the fact that I want the Sky service in my front room and not Freeview. Also, as the General Election is coming up in five weeks' time, I want the satellite TV to be working properly so that I can catch up with what is on the news channels, and I feel rather "cut off" from that at the moment, and I want it working in time for Thursday 4th July 2024 for ovbious reasons . I have Freeview in my bedroom, but that is not the point  - I don't want to be limited to my bedroom every time I want to watch TV. I have tried putting the Freeview in te front room but it doesn't seem compatable for the same uses that I usually have Sky for.  Sunday 9th June 2024 is Day 27 of the satellite TV not working in my flat, and I feel that something needs to be done about this. You can take this message as a complaint if you like, but nevertheless, I want this message to be acknowledged and also something to be done about what has happened. I have enough on my plate with regards to health problems and depression without things like this making things worse. I would appreciate it if something was done.  I don't like naming and shaming but it is Matthews and Tannert's fault that I am in this situation in the first place, and sometimes I wish that I could sue them. In a nutshell, I have had more than enough after being without TV in the my front room for nearly four weeks. Also, at a time like this, I am missing so much of interest on TV what with the General Election comning up in just a few weeks.
    • There's no facility for a settlement "out of court" as such. But matters that are started under the "Single Justice" (SJ) Procedure can often be concluded without the defendant appearing. The SJ procedure, as the name suggests, involves a single magistrate, sitting in an office with a legal advisor, dealing with matters "on papers" only. Nobody else can attend. The SJ deals with straightforward guilty pleas. Anything where the SJ believes the defendant should appear, or which should be dealt with by the "ordinary" court are adjourned o a hearing in the normal magistrates'  court .As well as this, all defendants have the right to a hearing in the normal court if they wish. Nobody is forced to have their case heard under he SJP.  In particular, as far as traffic matters go, a SJ will not disqualify a driver and if a ban is to be considered, the case will be passed over to the normal court. Because, following your SD, you will be pleading Not Guilty (and offering the "deal"), your case would usually be heard in the normal court, meaning a personal appearance. To be honest, performing your SD at the court is a more straightforward way of doing things. It avoids any possible hitches involved in serving he SD on the court. But of course, as I said, most courts have backlogs which mean an SD may not be quickly accommodated. If you do end up doing your SD before a solicitor, check with them the protocol for serving it on the court. Do let us know what the solicitor says about Wednesday.    
    • Welcome to posting on CAG cabot, people will be along soon to help you try to sort this out. Please complete this:  
    • Quotes of the day penny mordaunt came out swinging with her broadsword, and promptly decapitated sunak while Nigel Farage, representing Reform UK, made contentious claims about immigration policies, which were swiftly fact-checked during the debate.   Good question though raised at labour about the 2 child benefit cap, which I broadly agree with, but the tory 'trap' assumes tory thinking - rather than child centric thinking. There should be no incentives to have kids as a financial way of life paid for by everyone else ... ... BUT the kids should not be made to suffer for the decisions of their parents Free school meals would feed the kids, improve their ability to learn, and incentivise them to go to school. As an added benefit ... it would invest in our nations future.   How far this should go is a matter for costing, social intent and future path of the nation, but not feeding our nations kids is an abomination. There should be at least one free school meal per day for every child who attends school. Full Stop. Its the cheapest and most effective investment in our future we could make.
  • 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

HELP! Car towed from outside my own flat.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4714 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

We have a management company that runs the site so do I jointly sue them with TGS or the landowner? It'll cost me money to find out who the landowner is according to the freehold company for all I know it could be Joe Bloggs. He then employs a management company to look after the land for him. So do I need to find out who Mr Bloggs is or will the management company hold equal responsibility in the eyes of the law? They, after all, supposedly hold a contract with TGS (which no one has ever seen).

Link to post
Share on other sites

You sue the management agent, AND TGS as they inherited the mess from Scanlans, The MA is jointly and severally liable for the actions of their Agent TGS, and as the penalties are unenforceable you sue both,. You are more likely to get your money back off the managing agent however, I would also involve your MP and the press.

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have emailed my local MP who is a keen campaigner against PPCs and is he is already aware of the goings on around our site. I have also contacted the Manchester Evening News to see if they are interested in running a story.

 

Thanks for the advice so far, just working on the LBA!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you should sue TGS, TheManagement company and more importantly, also the landlord as the LL would have appointed the management company!

 

This is what I thought too but it'll cost £150 to find out from the freehold management company who the landlord is!! Is it safe to assume the management company acts on behalf of the landlord and therefore shares equal responsibility?

 

Just been to get quotes for damage to my car during the unlawful towing incident - £256.54!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would keep it to the management company and the towing company.

 

The management company were the ones who instructed them to operate on your car park. They may argue that they didn't instruct the towing company to act in that manner. But they are responsible for how they acted whatever they did.

 

Name the towing company as well but don't hold your breath for them paying out

:???: what me. never heard of you never had a debt with you.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would keep it to the management company and the towing company.

 

The management company were the ones who instructed them to operate on your car park. They may argue that they didn't instruct the towing company to act in that manner. But they are responsible for how they acted whatever they did.

 

Name the towing company as well but don't hold your breath for them paying out

 

Don't see why. They appear to have acted illegally.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would keep it to the management company and the towing company.

 

The management company were the ones who instructed them to operate on your car park. They may argue that they didn't instruct the towing company to act in that manner. But they are responsible for how they acted whatever they did.

 

Name the towing company as well but don't hold your breath for them paying out

 

New management company so OP should go for all three otherwise they will start playing ring a rosies!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the police did their job properly, it would be dealt with in a magistrates court.

 

They would if it was one of their cars clamped at the complex on a shout but if it's a residents car illegally towed then it's civil

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

They would if it was one of their cars clamped at the complex on a shout but if it's a residents car illegally towed then it's civil

 

Sorry I don't agree. According to the OP, the car was removed because the he failed to pay the 'parking charge notices' issued by the PPC. As far as I am aware this is illegal without a court order. Also there is the matter or 'taking a motor vehicle without the owner's consent'. If the PPC do not have the authority to remove the car against what is basically a debt, then surely they commit an offence by doing so. However, if it does turn out to be a 'civil matter' (of which I am not convinced), then whats to stop any Tom, Dick or Harry turning up with a flat bed and removing anyone's car from private property?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I don't agree. According to the OP, the car was removed because the he failed to pay the 'parking charge notices' issued by the PPC. As far as I am aware this is illegal without a court order. Also there is the matter or 'taking a motor vehicle without the owner's consent'. If the PPC do not have the authority to remove the car against what is basically a debt, then surely they commit an offence by doing so. However, if it does turn out to be a 'civil matter' (of which I am not convinced), then whats to stop any Tom, Dick or Harry turning up with a flat bed and removing anyone's car from private property?

 

Sorry SS I was being facetious, I agree that I consider the taking away of OP's car was tantamount to theft, as there doesn't appear to be any consent or written agreement in place for TCS to operate there, so Original MA, new MA, and TCS joint defendants in a claim for restitution and costs for damage to vehicle, during the illegal removal.

 

I was merely indicating the double standards operated by police, in that they will regard the towing of OP car as civil, as there is a misplaced sense that PPS's bailiffs and others are somehow "On The Same Side" as they are. They probably think that there would be too much paperwork with little chance of a conviction.

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

No worries BN... personally I would be speaking to a seior office indicating that I will refer the matter to my MP is the police refuse to investigate.

 

i think i would be going along your lines.

 

if you told the police you owe me £200 and towed their car away would it still be a civil matter

:???: what me. never heard of you never had a debt with you.
Link to post
Share on other sites

i think i would be going along your lines.

 

if you told the police you owe me £200 and towed their car away would it still be a civil matter

 

 

Somehow i don't think so as Shoal have found out:-)

There is merit in SS's contacting MP and press also

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

My local MP is fully aware of what has gone on with these cowboys. He's a fierce campaigner against what he knows is an illegal, immoral, unregulated, criminal activity. This is the second time I have written about the parking - and my next letter will be referring to police apathy!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Quick update for you:

 

LBA sent to PPC and site management company asking for settlement for all costs associated with the unlawful towing of my vehicle plus damage done to it during the process. Neither party replied so court proceedings about to commence against them. My solicitor says we have a very good case given the evidence presented so keeping my fingers crossed. I can't remember if I have mentioned this already, but in a phone call to the management company shortly after the event they disclosed that there is no known written contract in place with TGS Parking! Amazing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Make sure that you claim interest on your money when making the small claims application. You can claim from the date the debt originated (date you paid to have you car released)

 

Have charged interest at 8%. Shame my car is taking so long to fix, it must be ramping up the cost now!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...