Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I found that the parkin attended has a car with CCTV camera on it, however as I stated earlier, it seems that he did not take video of my car otherwise they would have stated so in the SAR. parking car .pdf
    • The rules state that "approved devices may only be used in limited circumstances"  I was not a threat. I was not present. I did not drive away. I think he has not fulfilled the necessary requirements justifying issuing me a PCN by post therefore the PCN was issued incorrectly and not valid.  What are your thoughts?  
    • I have also found this:  D.2 Service of a PCN by post: 54) There are some circumstances in which a PCN (under Regulation 10) may be served by post: 1) where the contravention has been detected on the basis of evidence from an approved device (approved devices may only be used in limited circumstances) 2) if the CEO has been prevented, for example by force, threats of force, obstruction or violence, from serving the PCN either by affixing it to the vehicle or by giving it to the person who appears to be in charge of that vehicle 3) if the CEO had started to issue the PCN but did not have enough time to finish or serve it before the vehicle was driven away and would otherwise have to write off or cancel the PCN 55) In any of these circumstances a PCN is served by post to the owner and also acts as the NtO. The Secretary of State recommends that postal PCNs should be sent within 14 days of the contravention. Legislation states that postal PCNs must be sent within 28 days, unless otherwise stated in the Regulations. This from London Councils Code of Practice on Civil Parking Enforcement.  The question is what is an approved device? Certainly, he had the opportunity to place the ticket on my car and I didn't drive away.  I looked further and it seems that an approved device is a CCTV camera - It seems that the photos taken were not actual film but images and it is not clear if they are taken from a video or are stills. I'm guessing if it was moving images then the SAR would have stated this.    From the Borough of Hounslow website: "There are two types of PCN issued under the Traffic Management Act 2004, which governs parking contraventions. The first is served on-street by a Civil Enforcement Officer, who will observe a vehicle and collect evidence before serving the PCN either by placing it in a plastic wallet under the windscreen wiper, or by handing it to the driver. The second is a PCN served by post, based on CCTV footage taken by an approved device, which has been reviewed by a trained CCTV Operator."   From Legislation.gov.uk regarding approved devices: Approved Devices 4.  A device is an approved device for the purposes of these Regulations if it is of a type which has been certified by the Secretary of State as one which meets requirements specified in Schedule 1. SCHEDULE 1Specified requirements for approved devices 1.  The device must include a camera which is— (a)securely mounted on a vehicle, a building, a post or other structure, (b)mounted in such a position that vehicles in relation to which relevant road traffic contraventions are being committed can be surveyed by it, (c)connected by secure data links to a recording system, and (d)capable of producing in one or more pictures, a legible image or images of the vehicle in relation to which a relevant road traffic contravention was committed which show its registration mark and enough of its location to show the circumstances of the contravention. 2.  The device must include a recording system in which— (a)recordings are made automatically of the output from the camera or cameras surveying the vehicle and the place where a contravention is occurring, (b)there is used a secure and reliable recording method that records at a minimum rate of 5 frames per second, (c)each frame of all captured images is timed (in hours, minutes and seconds), dated and sequentially numbered automatically by means of a visual counter, and (d)where the device does not occupy a fixed location, it records the location from which it is being operated. 3.  The device and visual counter must— (a)be synchronised with a suitably independent national standard clock; and (b)be accurate within plus or minus 10 seconds over a 14-day period and re-synchronised to the suitably independent national standard clock at least once during that period. 4.  Where the device includes a facility to print a still image, that image when printed must be endorsed with the time and date when the frame was captured and its unique number. 5.  Where the device can record spoken words or other audio data simultaneously with visual images, the device must include a means of verifying that, in any recording produced by it, the sound track is correctly synchronised with the visual image.
    • Hearing took place today.  Case dismissed with costs awarded. Neither UKPC or a representative turned up.  Apparently they messaged the court on 7 May asking for their case to be considered on paper.  Never informed me, which was criticised by the judge as not following procedure.  I was really annoyed as I would have preferred for the case to be thrown out before the hearing, or at least face them in court and see them squeal.   They are just playing a numbers game and hope you blink 1st!   Ended up having to change my flight, but  the costs awarded softens the blow. Was asked to confirm it was my signature on both the witness statement and supplementary statement.  Wasn't asked to read them, said she could see my arguments made and the signs were insufficient and no contract formed. Took maybe 10 mins in total.  Judge did most of the talking and was best for me just to keep quiet or confirm any statements made. Happy to have won as a matter of principle and have costs awarded. Maybe not worth all the time and hassle for any newbies or the technologically challenged.  But if you are stubborn like me and willing to put in the time and effort, you can beat these vultures! I big shout out to everyone who helped on the thread with their advice and guidance, special mention to FTMDave, thank you sir!  Really appreciate everyone's efforts. All the best!
    • I plan to be honest to avoid any further trouble, tell them that the name should be changed to my official name
  • 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

Harassment from British Gas on a £10k bill NOT MINE!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4418 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,

 

For over a year, a major utility company has demanded over £10,000 from me which I do not owe! Over last year, they sent almost 100 letters requesting payment or communicating about my "account". They sent 9 letters in December alone. A request under the data protection act showed that they do not have a contract with my name on it, but changed the name on another account to mine on the say-so of a malicious third party. I have told them this repeatedly. They respond vaguely, then just send more bills.

 

So I want to strike back and hit them for damages for harassment and the stress and anxiety that this causes. They need to be taught a lesson.

 

The question is, what damages should I claim? Too small and it won't hurt them enough. Too big and I'm not sure if the courts would support it. Any ideas anyone? What about an amount equal to the amount they are falsely claiming from me?

 

All input gratefully received.

 

GC

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is it? - or are you trying to protect them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you checked Ferguson v British Gas, this was a major harrassment case similar to your own and she took them to court and won as she didn't owe the money.

If there are spelling mistakes on my posts, I blame the gremlins tapping my keys. :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I am aware of that case although it didn't actually go to court so there is no record of the settlement. All that went to court is that British Gas tried to get the case struck out as an abuse, but Miss Ferguson was given the all clear to press her case. BG then settled out of court.

 

Hence my original question - what should I demand from BG for damages if I were to press a case. Just threatening them that I will take legal action just makes them go quiet (and then send some more bills).

 

Simon

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will leave the figures to request to others however it seems in Ferguson v British Gas it was most likely a multi track claim as both sides had costs.

 

If you want to claim more than £5000 then its multi track however the small claims limit is going up in April to £15000 therefore enabling you to claim a higher figure without the risk of costs should you submit a court claim. Issuing the claim may allow negotiations to follow.

If there are spelling mistakes on my posts, I blame the gremlins tapping my keys. :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a similar case, BG have been chasing me for the past 4 years with a bill that is nothing to do with me. i have spent 11 hours - 26 phone calls - over 30 emails telling them this they have admitted they made a mistake and the bills are not mine. i have documented the communications. they have said to put in a claim for compensation but i don't know how much i should be entitled to? can anyone help?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would this be of any help....

Who can help resolve a complaint other than the energy company it concerns?

The Energy Ombudsman (now known as the Ombudsman Services: Energy) can investigate complaints for domestic and micro-business consumers that the energy supplier or network operator cannot resolve. They can normally deal with a complaint if it has been with the energy company for 8 weeks or if the company has declared the complaint deadlocked (i.e. they have said they can do no more) whichever is the earlier. The Energy Ombudsman can ask your supplier or network operator to apologise and can take practical action to resolve a complaint and, in some cases, make a financial award.*

You can contact Ombudsman Services: Energy via:

*

Telephone: **** 0330 440 1624 or 01925 530 263

Fax: *** *********** 0330 440 1625 or 01925 530 264

Textphone: **** 0330 440 1600 or 01925 430 886

Email: ************ [email protected]

Website: ******** http://www.os-energy.org

*

There is also an online complaint form and enquiry form.

Gbarbm

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a similar case, BG have been chasing me for the past 4 years with a bill that is nothing to do with me. i have spent 11 hours - 26 phone calls - over 30 emails telling them this they have admitted they made a mistake and the bills are not mine. i have documented the communications. they have said to put in a claim for compensation but i don't know how much i should be entitled to? can anyone help?

 

That would be 11 hours plus research & extra stress. Do you know if they updated your credit files as well? That would be worth another few grand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I am aware of that case although it didn't actually go to court so there is no record of the settlement. All that went to court is that British Gas tried to get the case struck out as an abuse, but Miss Ferguson was given the all clear to press her case. BG then settled out of court.

 

Hence my original question - what should I demand from BG for damages if I were to press a case. Just threatening them that I will take legal action just makes them go quiet (and then send some more bills).

 

Simon

 

Truye but it is often mentioned as a presecedent (the first where a company was made liable for harrasment instead of an individual).

 

Heres an example I've come across (interesting to me as it involves my freeholder/landlord !) > http://www.residential-property.judiciary.gov.uk/Files/2011/April/10002QUQ.htm

 

Heres the BG v Ferguson case (although it was 'settled' out of court) > http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2009/46.html

 

Id cvertainly mention it in any correspondence with BG !

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will leave the figures to request to others however it seems in Ferguson v British Gas it was most likely a multi track claim as both sides had costs.

 

If you want to claim more than £5000 then its multi track however the small claims limit is going up in April to £15000 therefore enabling you to claim a higher figure without the risk of costs should you submit a court claim. Issuing the claim may allow negotiations to follow.

 

That's interesting. I've still no idea what to hit them with, but perhaps the same amount as they are falsely claiming from me, which is upwards of £10k. Maybe I should wait for the small claims limit to allow that - or maybe that will be interpreted as not being that bothered!

 

Simon

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's interesting. I've still no idea what to hit them with, but perhaps the same amount as they are falsely claiming from me, which is upwards of £10k. Maybe I should wait for the small claims limit to allow that - or maybe that will be interpreted as not being that bothered!

 

Simon

 

Its unlikely that any damages you have had would warrant an amount of more than £5000 anyway, I think in the Ferguson case there was a lot more to it. If I were you I'd certainly be tempted to make a relatively small claim of perhaps a few hundred, after the Ferguson case BG may be very wary of such claim,s and may even pay up without fighting it or at least make you some sort of offer.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its unlikely that any damages you have had would warrant an amount of more than £5000 anyway, I think in the Ferguson case there was a lot more to it. If I were you I'd certainly be tempted to make a relatively small claim of perhaps a few hundred, after the Ferguson case BG may be very wary of such claim,s and may even pay up without fighting it or at least make you some sort of offer.

 

Andy

 

The ferguson case and mine seem similar, although in her case I gather BG kept claiming a few hundred quid after she had changed to a different supplier. I have never been supplied by BG and they are claiming upwards of 10K and have averaged a communication on the subject every 4 days for a year. They have been asked to stop and have been told they are harassing me. Asking them for a small amount would neither persuade them of the error of their ways nor make it worth my additional stress to pursue it.

 

Unless of course they choose to switch to enforcement action, which they have threatened but haven't started, probably because they know they don't actually have a contract with me.

 

Simon

Link to post
Share on other sites

The ferguson case and mine seem similar, although in her case I gather BG kept claiming a few hundred quid after she had changed to a different supplier. I have never been supplied by BG and they are claiming upwards of 10K and have averaged a communication on the subject every 4 days for a year. They have been asked to stop and have been told they are harassing me. Asking them for a small amount would neither persuade them of the error of their ways nor make it worth my additional stress to pursue it.

 

Unless of course they choose to switch to enforcement action, which they have threatened but haven't started, probably because they know they don't actually have a contract with me.

 

Simon

 

Well..of course attempting to claim mlore than 5k in adamges in very risky as you risk losing anmd paying costs which could easily reach tens of thousands, in the Ferguson case, the Judge did waffle on about the wonder of British justice and the small person taking on big companies but that was mostly crap as nearly every sane individual wouldnt dream of starting such a case due to the risk of losing and facing huge costs, it appears Mrs Fergurson was a one-off brave individual.

 

Still you could pursue them for an amount under 5K and ask the Judge that you can claim costs, unlikely, but worth a try.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Just thinking out loud here,.....I wonder how many customers simply 'pay up' just to get rid of their(BG's) relentless demands.

I personally thought that demanding money with menaces was illegal.

AnyHoo, It should be up to British Gas to offer you compensation for harassment,..and then for you to haggle and up the offer.

A letter every day is certainly excessive, especially when you have repeatedly informed them of their error.

Write to the CEO of Centrica,....It does tend to concentrate their mind,..... and get you to the person you need to be negotiating with.

I know, because I have been there.......

A

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst it may be difficult to get the relevant authorities to prosecute, remember that harasment is a criminal offence that also allows for a civil remedy. It is clear from the Ferguson case that the Court considered the actions by British Gas amounted to harassment and that persistently sending demands for money passed the "gravity test" that would warrant a criminal prosecution. It is worth noting the comments of Sedley LJ at para 53 (quote)

"Parliament's intention in passing the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 was to criminalise the kind of serious and persistent unwarranted threat which is alleged here, giving a right of civil action as a fallback. In this situation it ought not to be left to hardy individuals to put their savings and homes at risk by suing. The primary responsibility should rest upon local public authorities which possess the means and the statutory powers to bring alleged harassers, however impersonal and powerful, before the local justices." ( my bold type-end of quote)

It may be useful as leverage to remind BG of that (that's if they actually read your correspondence.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst it may be difficult to get the relevant authorities to prosecute, remember that harasment is a criminal offence that also allows for a civil remedy. It is clear from the Ferguson case that the Court considered the actions by British Gas amounted to harassment and that persistently sending demands for money passed the "gravity test" that would warrant a criminal prosecution. It is worth noting the comments of Sedley LJ at para 53 (quote)

"Parliament's intention in passing the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 was to criminalise the kind of serious and persistent unwarranted threat which is alleged here, giving a right of civil action as a fallback. In this situation it ought not to be left to hardy individuals to put their savings and homes at risk by suing. The primary responsibility should rest upon local public authorities which possess the means and the statutory powers to bring alleged harassers, however impersonal and powerful, before the local justices." ( my bold type-end of quote)

It may be useful as leverage to remind BG of that (that's if they actually read your correspondence.)

 

BG attract heavy penalties from the authorities for this kind of transgression,.....I have pointed this very thing out to them (BG) in correspondence,....yep, you guessed it, NOTHING.

You have to sue.

Either go to small claims (going up to £15,000 this month) yourself,....OR, get yourself an interested practitioner who is au fait with Harassment cases.

A solicitor's letter (for some reason) seems to carry more weight!!

Seemples!!!

A

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...