Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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

Cap1 & CCA return


tamadus
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4940 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

  • Replies 17.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Tam - if I was anywhere near Shropshire, I'd come round and cook a meal for you - if only to join you in the scotch!!

 

BIRD! Will you stop this!!!! The amount of times I have caught you offering favours on different threads is shocking!:o

 

Hide you're scotch Tam!!!:grin:

CLICK ON THE SCALES IF YOU THINK I HAVE HELPED!

 

I AM NOT SCARED ANYMORE!:rolleyes:

 

MBNA - To quote "The Carpenters", We've Only Just Begun..................;):D

HSBC - Settled.

Capital One - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Goldfish - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Tesco - SAR issued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it's the Student Loans Company, one of the most powerful financial institutions in this country.

Nationwide-A&L-Halifax 1-Student Loans Company-NatWest-Virgin Media-Link-Capital One ALL WON!

Thames Credit -statute barred sent 13/11/08

BCW- prove debt letter- 14/08/08

Apex- CCA 14/08/08

Redcats UK- SAR 14/04/09

Call Serve- CCA 14/08/08

Littlewoods- no CCA letter 03/09/08- Lowells now

Wescot- CCA 19/9/08

Capital One/Debitas- now with Lowells

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. All information has been obtained from this site. If you are unsure, please seek professional advice. .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the edits M55 :D

 

Corn will you please stop trying to spoil my chances :rolleyes:

 

Ladybird I have plenty of scotch ;)

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the edits M55 :D

 

Corn will you please stop trying to spoil my chances :rolleyes:

 

Ladybird I have plenty of scotch ;)

 

I am sorry to be the bearer of bad news Tam, but Bird has just offered to "cook something up" for Perseus on my MBNA thread. As I said over there........a culinary harlot!!!:D

 

And she knows I am just jealous..............:rolleyes:

CLICK ON THE SCALES IF YOU THINK I HAVE HELPED!

 

I AM NOT SCARED ANYMORE!:rolleyes:

 

MBNA - To quote "The Carpenters", We've Only Just Begun..................;):D

HSBC - Settled.

Capital One - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Goldfish - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Tesco - SAR issued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry to be the bearer of bad news Tam, but Bird has just offered to "cook something up" for Perseus on my MBNA thread. As I said over there........a culinary harlot!!!:D

 

And she knows I am just jealous..............:rolleyes:

 

OMG Birdy please tell me this isn't true :eek:

 

I'm going to run off to that thread and see is our birdy is a claim winners groupie now :D

 

Anyway Corn I have the added advantage of the good scotch lol

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations, Tam, on your recent triumph. Also on some forthcoming conquests, judging by the recent banter here !! :wink:

 

Just throwing another stick on the fire, here, if I may. I have just heard from a fellow Cap One CCA agreement requestor. We have both received replies stating the agreement was enclosed, when in fact there was nowt else in the envelope !!

 

In addition to their latest trick of tripping up penalties claimants by "failing to understand" their spreadsheet figures, this now seems like another little trick. Anybody else had the same from them ?

 

Please PM me if so, to avoid hi-jack, thank you. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They're ********** and *******, and if anybody out there wavers a jot on that issue, talk to me and I will steady your resolve. *****, plain and simple. *******, nothing else. *********, ******, they need licenses revoking, they need to be hit where it hurts. The temptation to drop my CAG username into a letter to them so they can see what I'm intending to do is very, very compelling, very intense and (unfortunately) a sheet or two too close to the wind of legality.

 

M55, compusure is the means to victory.

 

Those who are calm, focused and determined will achieve their goal. I agree 100%, but I'm going to do a proper job, and any anger I have will be diverted into making sure I do so.

 

Don't mean to sound like a shrink, but that's how I'm trying to deal with these ********* without causing any unneccessary trouble.

 

With a cool head you'll gain more.

 

Tide

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill-k,

 

Is this not an opportunity to write back immediately and state that what they are saying has been enclosed isn't?

 

Could this not be used against them at a later date?

 

On the other hand, maybe they don't have the staff, given the volume.

 

Write back straight away, or telephone, and tell them it is missing. If you telephone, make a note of the date, time, no., and who you spoke to.

 

Tide

Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations, Tam, on your recent triumph. Also on some forthcoming conquests, judging by the recent banter here !! :wink:

 

Just throwing another stick on the fire, here, if I may. I have just heard from a fellow Cap One CCA agreement requestor. We have both received replies stating the agreement was enclosed, when in fact there was nowt else in the envelope !!

 

In addition to their latest trick of tripping up penalties claimants by "failing to understand" their spreadsheet figures, this now seems like another little trick. Anybody else had the same from them ?

 

Please PM me if so, to avoid hi-jack, thank you. :)

 

Thanks Bill :)

 

There is no hijack as the question is related to CCA :) Yes I have had very similar 'enclosed is a copy of our latest T&C' and nothing. Just inlcude in the next letter that the enclosure wasn't there so that at least you have it recorded that they cant slip a piece of paper into an envelope.

 

I probably hijack this thread more than anyone :)

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd definitely put this in writing Tide, and make sure I have poroof of postage and delivery, then they have no excuse that they sent the paperwork, when they didnt.

 

One thing I have learnt over the last few weeks is not to give them any space to wriggle out from their obligations, and make sure you have the evidence to support your claims.

  • Haha 1

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks Tam & Tide for the quick response. I am hoping that they have now painted themselves into a corner, and I will now ask for a further copy of the agreement which they admit they have, but obviously haven't !!

 

Was your phantom agreement also Cap One, Tam - and how long ago, if I may ask. ?

 

PS - I never phone, as I want hard copy every time, and I can't think on my feet, anyways !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus as I said earlier, my favourite US credit card company have a 100% cockup record in the letters they send to me. It's great! Long may it continue, put it in writing my precious, put it in writing.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

A question on this DPA breaches point. If a company breached the DPA by giving information to someone they shouldn't by..say..sending a copy of the application/agreement to the card holder's wife who is only an additional card holder, are they required to reveal their mistake? Just asking you understand

Link to post
Share on other sites

yikes, I've been scuppered by that drunken harridan, Cornucopia. No I DID NOT offer to cook for Pers - just said he could be my (our?) bodyguard.

No, I only have eyes for you Tam;) :)

Sorry I have hijacked the thread with such banalities, but that Cornucopia is following me around the site trying to cast slurs on my reputation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks Tam & Tide for the quick response. I am hoping that they have now painted themselves into a corner, and I will now ask for a further copy of the agreement which they admit they have, but obviously haven't !!

 

Was your phantom agreement also Cap One, Tam - and how long ago, if I may ask. ?

 

PS - I never phone, as I want hard copy every time, and I can't think on my feet, anyways !!

 

No it wasn't Cap 1 but they did send me nothing but the signature box, which I will be following up in due course.:)

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wife??

 

Bit close to home. You could look at it like there is an account where several cards are issued. The personal details of the account holder must then remain secure.

 

If there are several signatories, providing the t&c's allow, each may have details of the account.

 

In the majority of cases, the main account holder ONLY is entitled to the information.

 

With respect to revealing their mistake, haven't they already done so? If you are not with your partner, yes, you are entitled to all correspondence / personal information which pertains to yourself, this includes any correspondence between them and any associated parties.

 

GET ALL INFORMATION YOU ARE ENTITLED TO.

 

Make a thorough SAR request - if you have already done so, re-iterate your specific requests for the information required using the SAR on my thread.

 

PhotoMan also has a good SAR.

 

Tide

Link to post
Share on other sites

yikes, I've been scuppered by that drunken harridan, Cornucopia. No I DID NOT offer to cook for Pers - just said he could be my (our?) bodyguard.

No, I only have eyes for you Tam;) :)

Sorry I have hijacked the thread with such banalities, but that Cornucopia is following me around the site trying to cast slurs on my reputation.

 

awww birdie I believe you :rolleyes: plus with 4 blackbelts to my name you dont need another bodyguard:grin:

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

aw...Tam - what a sweetie you are - but don't let that Cornypoker....or whatever she calls herself - come along and try & convince you that I am anything but a sweet, bushy tailed, bright eyed young innocent.

 

And TideTurner - I know not why...that is for you to divulge to us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4940 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...