Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hey,  I've messaged my husband but he is not contactable while he is in work. As soon as he is on his way home I will find out which finance company we used. I'm so sorry, I just don't know.
    • Okay, I have read your claim form. A pity you didn't come to us earlier. You haven't pleaded any legal basis for your claim and you haven't cited the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties Act. How long have you been aware of this forum? We will have to bring that out later when you do your witness statement. Once again, do the reading very carefully. I suggest that you wait until Monday before coming back here and confirming that you have read everything. And in particular, as I have indicated, read the thread which I posted above very carefully and in particular we the details of the contractual terms which were discovered and get a copy for yourself. Post a link to them in this thread as well for other people to see. They are relying on the fact that you don't have a direct contract with them and they are referring to a contractual term which is apparently in the contract between them and Packlink which specifically excludes third parties. You will definitely want to see this. They have tried to rely on this before but they have never produced the contract. In your witness statement you will have to request that they produced the contract in court. In terms of the mediation, frankly we would have advised you to decline mediation. It's all done secretively. Nothing is ever revealed and of course they will try to get you to compromise on the amount of money you are claiming. We would strenuously suggest that you don't give up a single penny. Do the reading that I have suggested, find the details of the contract which I have told you about which accepts direct liability to you, the customer – and post it here.
    • If there is no reply to the "nasty" mail in 48 hours, then please come back here and we can assess what to do.
    • In particular, read this thread carefully. it is a very long thread but be patient with it. Eventually you will come to the witness statement and also had a point where it was discovered that Packlink's terms and conditions make it clear that Evri have a direct responsibility to the claimant and the judge awarded full judgement to the claimant on that basis. We have applied for the transcript but it will probably take six weeks or so. If you're mediation fails and you go to trial then I'm sure that the transcript will be available for you. It puts an end to the claim by Evri that you should claim against Packlink and it puts an end to any need to rely on the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999
  • 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 
        • 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

Help need to defend parking charge/ A S Securi-t, Roxburghe, Graham White


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4602 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, I am trying to help a friend defend a parking charge and need help with a letter to Graham Whites solicitors which will stop them harassing my friend.

 

Background info,

My friend is a drummer in a local gigging band. They were doing a charity freebie one night about a month ago. He has the trailer attached to the back of his car which does make parking difficult anyway. However there is a huge carpark (technically for customers) across the road from the venue which was completely deserted as the shops were shut. Some of the local people use is regularly out of hours and he was advised it would be ok. After the gig, he came out to find a parking fine notice for £100 from AS Securi-t. Again, was advised by other people not to pay as they are just [problem]sters. My friend was really worried about this but went with it as he has no money anyway as he has just been made redundant.

Then a fortnight later received a letter from Roxburgh (UK) Ltd saying the fine was now £150, so he ignored this aswell. However now he is really worried as just received a letter from Graham White solicitors titled 'Notice of Intended Litigation' threatening county court action and adding £207.25 costs so now a total of over £350!!!

Naturally he is really concerned due to rising costs and the fact he has no money anyway. He is a more mature guy who hasnt experienced the scamsters before in his life and is worried that he will just have to pay it. My understanding is that these tickets are unenforceable anyway. I also believe its some kind of contract thing they have to take the driver to court for but they would need to prove that wouldnt they?

Can you help with a short but sweet letter i can send to the solicitors to stop them. I want to help as he is an all round nice guy, not very computer savvy and always goes out of his way to help others.

Thanks

Edited by kken67
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

totally ignore them!!!

 

they go nowhere near court

 

it is NOT a legal fine in anyway-shape or form

 

it is a speculative invoice

 

you keep writing, they'll keep thinking they've hooked a mug

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly, what your friend has is not a fine. No private company has the legal authority to fine anyone. What he has is simply an invoice; an invitation to settle an alleged breach of a contract that purportedly existed between your friend and AS Securi-T in relation to parking. It is not to be feared - indeed once you understand that the whole set-up is intended to frighten people into paying their unwarranted demands because there is no other legitimate means of doing so the whole thing collapses. Your friend may safely ignore all of the this nonsense and get on with his drumming.

 

AS Securi-T is simply a trading name used by a company called VP Parking Solutions Ltd based at an accommodation address in the High Street in Southampton. AS Securi-T Ltd (Note the slightly different trading name) went into liquidation earlier in the year and its affairs are being dealt with by the Official Receiver. If the documents your friend has are headed AS Securi-T Ltd then he should contact the OR in Southampton as the company should not be trading. It will not be a shock to learn that the directors of AS Securi-T Ltd and VP Parking Solutions Ltd are one and the same.

 

As for Roxburghe's they are simply a debt collector with no more power than you or I to collect debts. In essence they can do nothing more than ask your friend to pay although they will dress their "requests" up to look far more worrying and threatening than that. Unless AS Securi-T give him formal notification under the terms of the Law of Property Act 1925 that they have sold or otherwise assigned the so-called debt to Roxburghe's the latter are hamstrung and as much as they might huff and puff, at the end of the day, there is nothing they can do.

 

Graham White's are not a solicitors in any normal sense. The company has just one solicitor and he, Michael Sobell, is well into his 70's. He effectively rents his name to Roxburghe's so they can send out letters that give the impression of escalating the situation. There is no escalation. These letters are simply produced by the person sitting at the same desk pressing a different button.

 

Roxburghe's were informed in May of this year that the Office of Fair Trading was minded to revoke their debt collection licence. The investigation continues. Graham White's also has a fat regulatory file with the Solicitors Regulation Authority in relation to their constant threats of legal action that never go any where.

 

That's really not entirely true because Mr Sobell, dear heart, has twice attempted to issue proceedings this year. In the first instance he so badly fouled up his paperwork, missed court-set deadlines and failed to produce evidence that the judge gave up in the end and struck the case out. In the second case proceedings went all the way to the wire obliging the defendant to prepare a defence (assistance provided from here, I might add) only for Mr Sobell to fail to show on the day. That case has also now been struck out.

 

There is nothing to fear. Ignore these threats because the only place they have any substance is on paper. As soon as you start examining the situation everything crumbles to dust.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore it I have a full set of letters saying :

 

1.We are thinking of taking you to court if you don't give us money

2. we are taking you to court

3. you are definitely going to court cos you are the driver and are ignoring my letter

letters tended to drop through my letterbox one a month for five months or so then he got bored and went looking for someone else. I'll have to hunt them out they are quite amusing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

roxburghe debt collectors letters are sent out by dumb jon(gets paid £3-00 per hour),graham white solicitors(not) letters are sent out by janis on the next desk along, she is on work expereince,,they are all one and all in the same building and all part of the same rip off,,i have a drawer full of loo paper from them,,roll on nov 5th to light the bon fire,, with michael sobell on top as the guy.just ignore everything and every threat, relax.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All,

 

I am in a very similar situation by the looks of it.

 

The flat I used to live in had a car park, 'operated' by A S Securi-T and I previously failed to display my permit and got a ticket. Now, I paid (I rang them and argued the amount charged was for £72 but the sign said £60, they said the amount includes VAT but the sign said nothing about VAT, so they agreed and I paid the £60.)

 

Several months later I recieved a letter from Roxburghe saying I had an unpaid parking charge from A S Secuit-T this time for £148. I rang them and they say it's the fine plus their fees. I was suspicous for a number of reasons, firstly no notice was left on my car, I always put the permit on my dashboard ever since the first fine and it happened to be my last day in that flat before I moved out.

 

I have since had letters from them again so I requested them to email me photos, which they have. Annoyingly the photos show the fine on my windscreen and the top of the permit HOLDER on my dash (but no clear shot of the permit in it). I have had a letter from Graham White Solicitors also, entitiled 'FINAL WARNING' and going on about Application to the Court ' Civil Procedural Rules 31.16.....'

 

My concern if I do ignore this is that I have previously paid a fine for the exact same thing a few months ago. Does this put me in a position where I have legally accepted the 'breach of contract' or whatever the wording they use is?

 

Furthermore I no longer live at the address the correspondence is going to AND I no longer own the car the charge is for.

 

What do you recommend I do?

 

Many thanks in advance

 

C

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All,

 

I am in a very similar situation by the looks of it.

 

The flat I used to live in had a car park, 'operated' by A S Securi-T and I previously failed to display my permit and got a ticket. Now, I paid (I rang them and argued the amount charged was for £72 but the sign said £60, they said the amount includes VAT but the sign said nothing about VAT, so they agreed and I paid the £60.)

 

Several months later I recieved a letter from Roxburghe saying I had an unpaid parking charge from A S Secuit-T this time for £148. I rang them and they say it's the fine plus their fees. I was suspicous for a number of reasons, firstly no notice was left on my car, I always put the permit on my dashboard ever since the first fine and it happened to be my last day in that flat before I moved out.

 

I have since had letters from them again so I requested them to email me photos, which they have. Annoyingly the photos show the fine on my windscreen and the top of the permit HOLDER on my dash (but no clear shot of the permit in it). I have had a letter from Graham White Solicitors also, entitiled 'FINAL WARNING' and going on about Application to the Court ' Civil Procedural Rules 31.16.....'

 

My concern if I do ignore this is that I have previously paid a fine for the exact same thing a few months ago. Does this put me in a position where I have legally accepted the 'breach of contract' or whatever the wording they use is?

 

Furthermore I no longer live at the address the correspondence is going to AND I no longer own the car the charge is for.

 

What do you recommend I do?

 

Many thanks in advance

 

C

 

Try reading the above.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All,

 

I am in a very similar situation by the looks of it.

 

The flat I used to live in had a car park, 'operated' by A S Securi-T and I previously failed to display my permit and got a ticket. Now, I paid (I rang them and argued the amount charged was for £72 but the sign said £60, they said the amount includes VAT but the sign said nothing about VAT, so they agreed and I paid the £60.)

 

Several months later I recieved a letter from Roxburghe saying I had an unpaid parking charge from A S Secuit-T this time for £148. I rang them and they say it's the fine plus their fees. I was suspicous for a number of reasons, firstly no notice was left on my car, I always put the permit on my dashboard ever since the first fine and it happened to be my last day in that flat before I moved out.

 

I have since had letters from them again so I requested them to email me photos, which they have. Annoyingly the photos show the fine on my windscreen and the top of the permit HOLDER on my dash (but no clear shot of the permit in it). I have had a letter from Graham White Solicitors also, entitiled 'FINAL WARNING' and going on about Application to the Court ' Civil Procedural Rules 31.16.....'

 

My concern if I do ignore this is that I have previously paid a fine for the exact same thing a few months ago. Does this put me in a position where I have legally accepted the 'breach of contract' or whatever the wording they use is?

 

Furthermore I no longer live at the address the correspondence is going to AND I no longer own the car the charge is for.

 

What do you recommend I do?

 

Many thanks in advance

 

C

 

There was every chance the flat's lease granted rights to the land and you didn't even need a permit either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not a FINE !

Why on earth did you pay them in the first place?

What you do now is IGNORE them!

 

Naivety! I didn't do the research I did this time. Apologies for referring to it as a 'Fine' but you knw what I mean.

 

So even though i've paid previously and been in contact with them about this PCN I am best off ignoring them? I wondered if I could do anything else as I no longer live at the address they have for me and no longer own the car!

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...