Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Write to the IPC complaining that UKPC have not observed the requirements of PoFA . IPC  Waterside House, Macclesfield SK10 9NR Dear IPC, I am writing to complain about a serious breach of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 by UKPCM. I feel that as it is more a breach of the Act rather than not just  complying with your Code of Practice which is why I am bypassing your operator. Should you decide to insist that I first complain to your operator, I will instead pass over my complaint to the ICO and the DVLA . My story starts with being issued a windscreen PCN on 8/3/24 which was almost immediately removed and a second  PCN was then  sent by post on 13/3/24  [deemed delivered 15/3/24] which I did not receive and had to send an sar to have that particular mess revealed later  but that is not the reason for my complaint. UKPC then sent a Keeper Liability Notice dated 12/4/24 warning me that as 28 days have now elapsed, I as keeper am now liable for the charge.  This is in direct contravention of PoFA since the keeper does not become liable to pay until the day after the original PCN is deemed to have been given which would have been 13/4/24 -a Saturday ]. Not only does it not comply with PoFA but it fails to adhere to your Code of Practice and is in breach of their agreement with the DVLA. You will be aware that this is not the first time that UKPC have fallen foul of the DVLA and presumably yourselves. I have included copies of both Notices for information. You will realise the seriousness of this situation if this is standard practice from the UKPC to all motorists or just those where windscreen tickets are involved since the Law regarding PoFA is being abused and is unfair to misguide motorists. I await your  response which I understand will usually be within a week. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I would think that should be sufficient for the IPC to cancel your PCN though  you should await comments from the Site team before sending your complaint. Don't forget to include both PCNs.  
    • Hi DX, Sorry, fell asleep as I was up all night last night writing that statement. Yes, I attached the rest of the witness statement on post 50, bottom of webpage 2. That's the important part.  It looks like the lawyer who wrote Erudio's Witness statement does not work for them any more. So, I'll have another lawyer representing instead. Not sure if I can use Andy's hearsay argument verbally if that happens.... I did not put it in writing. Apart from not sending deferral forms, my main argument is that in 2014 Erudio fixed some arrears mistake that SLC made and then in 2018 they did the same mistake, sent me confusing letters. What is the legal defence when they send you confusing material?
    • Chinese firm MineOne Partners has been ordered to sell land it owns near a US nuclear missile site.View the full article
    • That isn’t actually what the Theft Act 1968 S1 actually says, BTW. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/section/1 (1)A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it;   The difference between what you’ve said and the Act? a) intent to permanently deprive rather than  just depriving (which is why the offence of “taking without consent” was brought in for motor vehicles, as otherwise "joyriders" could say "but I intended to give it back at the end") b) dishonesty : If I honestly believed A's pen belonged to B, and took it and gave it to B - B might be found guilty of theft but I shouldn't be. 
  • 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 
        • 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

Changes at HFO / Turnbull Rutherford – Quarterdeck Law Ltd


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4200 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 306
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I had a letter in the post two days ago from Roxburghe, the account is still in dispute with HFO Services.

 

Can you report this to OFT - think that you may have already made a complaint to them. Also update your own thread if you like.

 

Thanks for the info!

Please support CAG and they will support you.

donate

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning all,

 

reading this thread, confused and annoyed that a company that is barely in existence can still take me to court tomorrow and have my money held by court.

Anyway to update on turnbull/rutherfords location , I have cut and pasted from the email they sent 5 days ago to my email address kindest in frustration Soaringheights :roll:

 

We ask that you note our change of address, which can be found below.

 

Kindest regards

 

James Bolton

 

Trainee Solicitor

Turnbull Rutherford Solicitors Direct Line: 0208 899 6010

Fax: 0208 849 5719

Email: [email protected]: www.turnbullrutherford.com This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information.In the event of any technical difficulty with this e-mail, please contact the sender or [email protected] Turnbull Rutherford SolicitorsBuilding 3, Chiswick Park566 Chiswick High RoadLondonW4 5YA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Get to the court early and give the Court Clerk the details of the change of company and the trainee solicitors details and ask for them to be put in front of the judge. The judge may strike the case out but you never know. Wonder who will represent this company in court and will they have the full 'facts'?

 

Don't forget to let us know of the result and the name of the person representing HFO/Roxburghe. I am almost certain they cannot use Rox to bring HFO cases to court as Rox was not the original assignee, and their assignee notices only state HFO Services and not Rox... plus the fact that Rox has been dormant for ages. Something rather fishy here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Silly girl,

thanks for reply- gosh you are up early on a sun.

 

I wish I could get to the court, but I am working offshore. ( which they know I do)

I can phone first thing.

 

The email I got informing me of court date was from T/R - James Bolton on behalf of HFO below is the email.

 

HFO Services v

Inboxx

James BoltonFeb 1 (4 days ago)

Our client: HFO Services Ltd Claim No: 6 Dear , Please find...

 

James Bolton [email protected]

Feb 1 (4 days ago)

to me, Laurence

 

Our client: HFO Services Ltd

Claim No:

Dear,

 

Please find attached a scanned copy of the hearing notice listing our client's application for a third party debt order ......................... , Guildford County Court.

 

We ask that you note our change of address, which can be found below.

 

Kindest regards

 

James Bolton

 

Trainee Solicitor

Turnbull Rutherford Solicitors Direct Line: 0208 899 6010

Fax: 0208 849 5719

Email: [email protected]: www.turnbullrutherford.com This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information.In the event of any technical difficulty with this e-mail, please contact the sender or [email protected] Turnbull Rutherford SolicitorsBuilding 3, Chiswick Park566 Chiswick High RoadLondonW4 5YA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a separate thread on this issue, third party debt orders are very dubious ways of getting hold of your funds and I hope you have filed a strong defence against it.

 

I would also apply for a set aside of the original judgement so it can be re-examined in light of the TR issue and the varying HFO companies not having title to the debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I received letters from Roxburghe saying that they have been instructed by their client HFO and are now dealing with "my" account.

They are making an offer because they are "unlike other Debt Collection Agencies would like to assist ...in bringing this matter to a conclusion".

 

Jenny - I think that you need to start your own new thread about this and give us the details of this debt and what has been happening in the past. That way we can advise you properly on how to deal with it. This thread will get very confusing if we start covering different cases

Please support CAG and they will support you.

donate

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Interesting. It appears that this company had a lot of employees. They clearly did not work for HFO Services (as Michelle Kuhler signed herself on witness statements – owed over £3,000) or Turnbull Rutherford (Diana Nelson, whose Linked In profile clearly states Turnbull Rutherford as employer – http://www.linkedin.com/pub/diana-nelson-micm/1b/41a/770 – owed over £7,000).

 

Someone is being economical with the actualité. Some questions need to be asked here.

 

There’s also an inter-company loan from HFO Capital Ltd (Ireland) of nigh on £375,000.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here’s the Companies House PDFs regarding the company’s trading situation. The interesting one with all the figures is the Statement of Affairs.

 

I repeat that this document is in the public domain as a matter of public record.

 

Please be very careful with any comments if you’re not used to looking at documents like this.

Notice of Liquidators.pdf

Statement of Affairs.pdf

Special Resolution.pdf

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said DB,yes everyone please take great care

if making any comment, I'm sure the ''Fan Club,''

and others asscociated with will know how to respod

if needed.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...