Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hmm yes I see your point about proof of postage but nonetheless... "A Notice to Keeper can be served by ordinary post and the Protection of Freedoms Act requires that the Notice, to be valid,  must be delivered either (Where a notice to driver (parking ticket) has been served) Not earlier than 28 days after, nor more than 56 days after, the service of that notice to driver; or (Where no notice to driver has been served (e.g ANPR is used)) Not later than 14 days after the vehicle was parked A notice sent by post is to be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have been delivered on the second working day after the day on which it is posted; and for this purpose “working day” means any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or a public holiday in England and Wales." My question there is really what might constitute proof? Since you say the issue of delivery is a common one I suppose that no satisfactory answer has been established or you would probably have told me.
    • I would stand your ground and go for the interest. Even if the interest is not awarded you will get the judgement and the worst that might happen is that you won't get your claim fee.  However, it is almost inevitable that you will get the interest.  It is correct that it is at the discretion of the judge but the discretion is almost always exercised in favour of the claimant in these cases.  I think you should stand your ground and don't give even the slightest penny away Another judgement against them on this issue would be very bad for them and they would be really stupid to risk it but if they did, it would cost them far more than the interest they are trying to save which they will most likely have to pay anyway
    • Yep, true to form, they are happy to just save a couple of quid... They invariably lose in court, so to them, that's a win. 😅
    • Your concern regarding the 14 days delivery is a common one. Not been on the forum that long, but I don't think the following thought has ever been challenged. My view is that they should have proof of when it was posted, not when they "issued", or printed it. Of course, they would never show any proof of postage, unless it went to court. Private parking companies are simply after money, and will just keep sending ever more threatening letters to intimidate you into paying up. It's not been mentioned yet, but DO NOT APPEAL! You could inadvertently give up useful legal protection and they will refuse any appeal, because they're just after the cash...  
    • The sign says "Parking conditions apply 24/7". Mind you, that's after a huge wall of text. The whole thing is massively confusing.  Goodness knows what you're meant to do if you spend only a fiver in Iceland or you stay a few minutes over the hour there.
  • 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

goodwill gesture from abbey

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6409 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts



after sending in a preliminary letter for a refund of 650 i today received a letter stating that as the charges do not contravene their regulations they cannot agree to refund them, however as a gesture of goodwill they are prepeared to cancel charges totalling 260.


the actual account was 150 od all in charges anyway, which dont relate to the claim of 650 and was to be a separate claim , and now the account is 70 in credit so they have already refunded what works out 220 and not the 260 offered.


the letter states nowhere that this is full and final settlement.


obviously i will sent the rejection of offer letter , but should i stear clear of using the 70 credit the account is now in as this might constitute accepting their offer? or just use it as part payment and still pursue the outstanding 430 in the rejection letter letting them know that the 150 cancelled charges were not part of the original claim and another will be forthcoming



Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for your reply


i have just spoken to abbey and they stated that the missing 40 is from 2 further reversals ,1 for october and 1 for november which were pending and now i'm confused so if anybody could help me with the following as abbey seem to be overlapping what im claiming for and current pending charges.


at time of prelim letter for charges of 650.

account 120 o/d with these charges not currently being claimed for.


at time of goodwill gesture letter (today)

account 150 o/d adjusted to 70 credit = 220(150 o/drwn +70 now in credit) + 40 pending / the 260 quoted


am i right in thinking that the 40 pending has been taken off the original claim so that i cannot later claim it and they are doing me out of that 40 by confusing the issue and that they have only refunded 220 of the original 650.


surely the 40 of pending charges is to my advantage as it was not in my original claim and that infact i have only been refunded 220 and my letter before action claim should be 430 (650 total) with another claim going in for the 150 o/d charges which have now been covered by the part refund i got today.tough luck for refunding the pending ones abbey i didnt ask you to sort of thing and its their loss?


confused, i am , but it looks like if anyone is making a claim and are o/d with seperate charges , they will try and confuse the issue with claim,current/pending charges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

further to my previous post above i now realise exactly what abbey are trying to do and would be grateful if a mod could go through the below letter , a cross between LBA and rejection of offer letter.


i have done this because the LBA template states that they havn't yet responded to my prelim letter , which they have , and i wasnt sure what one to send first , the rejection or the LBA and was hoping that this would cover both.


if i'm wrong and a certaing set procedure HAS to be followed exactly then advice on what to do next would be appreciated.



(I am frankly shocked that you have operated my account in this way as I had always reposed confidence in your integrity and expertise as my fiduciary.


I calculate that you have taken £645 less 220.00 already refunded to my account.

I will accept the sum of 220.00 offered only as part settlement and on the clear understanding that I will pursue recovery of the remainder, with a County Court claim if necessary.

Although your letter states that you will cancel charges to the sum of 260.00 as a gesture of goodwill, during my telephone conversation with yourselves on 02/10/2006 your representative stated that 40.00 of the amount refunded were reversals of charges due in octobre and November for which I thank you, however these charges were not in my letter dated 14th august and do not form part of my request for refunds of charges or in this letter before action,leaving the amount still owing to myself as 425.00.

I am enclosing a copy of the schedule of the charges which I am claiming. I have already sent you a copy of this in my original letter of the [XXDATE OF FIRST LETTERXX])

thankyou in advance for any advice on this matter

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...