Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
  • 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

£1500 stolen from checked baggage: Small Claims?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4742 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 everyone,

 

I flew Turkish airlines and on my return my bag was not on the carousel. I reported it missing and collected the PIR form. The next day I received the suitcase and the padlock had been ripped off (including the handles) and around £1500 worth of personal items (included a couple of electronic items) had been stolen from my luggage.

 

I submitted a written claim to Turkish Airlines for the damaged bag and included receipts for the missing items.

 

Turkish airlines sent a letter back stating that they would offer me $405 (equivalent to around £250) with the following statements:

 

1) The airline's liability is limited by the Montreal Convention.

2) Valuable items including valuable electric equipment (underlined by them) should not be included in the checked baggage.

3) If the carrier offers an excess valuation facility, a declaration can be made prior to the flight and applicable charges can be paid. As this was not done in my case, my missing electrical items will not be taken into consideration.

4) If I accept the offer, I have to sign a release saying no further action will be taken and that I cannot claim from my own insurance.

 

I've read a couple of online articles that says the Montreal convention does not make any distinctions for valuable items - "Airlines may try to say that they are not liable for valuable items. But, the legislation makes no exceptions, therefore they are liable for items such as cameras," bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/moneybox/3862749.stm

 

Also this website states that if my claim is not met, then I should consider the Small Claims Court: thetravelinsider.com/travelaccessories/lostbaggagerights.htm and that my chances of winning if I have receipts and the claim is not huge.

 

Turkish Airlines own website states the maximum they will pay according to the Montreal Convention is 1,131 Special Drawing Rights, approximately £1,101 turkishairlines.com/en-INT/services/passenger_services/pursuant.aspx

 

Is my claim for the full amount £1,101 valid and can anyone suggest the best way to write back to them and try to persuade them to pay out the maximum amount?

 

If not, could anyone tell me the best way to go about a Small Claims Court action? Can I have any input on the the venue and the timings? Are there any draft Letter Before Action letters I could read?

 

Thanks everyone

 

(PS, anyone posting that I should not have placed electrical items in checked baggage will be ignored. Kicked myself enough over this.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there. You may have answered your own question about the electrical items, but others here know more than I do. In case it helps, did the flight leave from the UK?

 

Were you insured for this trip please?

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe an obvious question but did you have travel insurance? If not then your household contents insurance usually covers you for items removed from the house temporarily. Also certain credit cards give you free travel insurance.

If none of the above applies then one of the other more knowledgeable CAGGERS will be along shortly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, yes I do have travel insurance through HSBC Premier but have not tried to claim through them yet as I thought I would inform the Manchester Airport police first and get a crime reference number and then to get Turkish Airlines Manchester office to begin an investigation.

 

My letters have been to the Manchester office of Turkish Airlines and their General Manager responded with the £250 offer. I am pretty sure that this is a deliberately low offer to try and get rid of me so will write to them again, but wanted some advice off here first about my rights and how to draft a Letter Before Action (and whether I can go the Small Claims Court or MoneyClaim Online route?)

 

If they pay me the full amount according to the Montreal Convention (£1100) then I may write the rest off to experience.

 

The inbound flight was from Jeddah-Istanbul-Manchester and upon arrival at Manchester the bag was missing. Outbound was the reverse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have insurance then why are you wasting your time with the airline. You have a crime number from the police so claim on your insurance and then claim off the airline for any excess the insurance policy has.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of setting up the airline as an adversary, I would concentrate on solving the crime. There should then be a common purpose.

 

What do the police have to say? There should not have been an enormous number of individuals with access to the luggage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...