Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
  • 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

NCC street lighting.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4313 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

Firstly can I please apologise if I have posted this in the wrong section only I was struggling to decide which section was the best or most appropriate option.

 

Norfolk County Council are replacing the street lamp posts in our area. The old lamp posts are being replaced with the new lamp posts which have LCD light fittings. There is presently a street light attached to the front of my property which hasn`t yet been changed or converted. The street light is just an arm with a light on the end, the arm is attached to my property at approx bedroom window height with a cable leading along the front of my house a to power box fitted to the side of my house.

 

My question is, Does the highways department or the contractor need my permission before any work is carried out? I have already taken a photograph as a precaution but I am concerned they may have to knock off some render to accomodate a new LCD lamp.

 

I am taking the opportunity to ask these questions in advance and in anticpation of the work being carried out without my consent.

 

Many thanks for all replies and offers of advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have an agreement with NCC that they can have the light on your house? Why not just give them a ring and find out what the plan is? Also ask them what would happen if they damage your property I am sure they have insurance but get it clear before they start work.

  • Confused 1

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have an agreement with NCC that they can have the light on your house? Why not just give them a ring and find out what the plan is? Also ask them what would happen if they damage your property I am sure they have insurance but get it clear before they start work.

 

Thankyou very much for your reply. The light was already on the property when we purchased it some ten years ago. I could ring them but thought the onus should be on them to contact me, besides I`ve had experiences of ringing local authorities before, hanging on listening to music, being handed from one department to another before being informed we`ll ring you back but never receiving the call.

 

I know an ex work colleague who had a telephone pole in his garden, he used to get a yearly sum from BT for having it sited on his property (basically rent money I suppose). Just wondering if the same would apply with my property?

 

I just wanted to have some insight of my rights before any work started on replacing the light.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you could still get them checked although if there was a covenant your solicitor would/should have told you at the time of purchase. I do think you may be entitled to some rent for the light being situated on your house and i appreciate what you are saying about hanging on the phone to the council but it might just be worth it to set your mind at rest. However should they damage your property then they will have to repair it.

dont forget to keep and date the photo.

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you could still get them checked although if there was a covenant your solicitor would/should have told you at the time of purchase. I do think you may be entitled to some rent for the light being situated on your house and i appreciate what you are saying about hanging on the phone to the council but it might just be worth it to set your mind at rest. However should they damage your property then they will have to repair it.

dont forget to keep and date the photo.

 

Thanks very much for your latest reply and the suggestions you make.

 

Been thinking about the deeds and any possible covenant. Our house is approx two hundred years old so I am kind of thinking that street lighting was not an issue at that time, in which case there would be nothing mentioned.

 

Another concern regarding the light is that I have a son who works nights sometimes and sleeps during the day. Surely they would be obliged to give advance notice of any work they intend to carry out?

 

Many thanks for your continued interest in this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes they would have to tell you when they were going to start work or you could just refuse themn access to your property, I still think cost apert you do need to speak to NCC and find out what their plans are, although I did email our CC about a street lighting issue and they did get back to me within 7 days, so email may be an option.

 

Once you have found out when they intend doing the work then I suggest you try and find out if they owe you any rent!

 

Good luck

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Hi,

 

A wayleave agreement would have been made to install the original lantern and power supply on the property.

 

If the luminaire is attached to your property then the NCC PFI Street Lighting company (who would operate and maintain the lights for the next 25 years or so would need to obtain a wayleave with yourself in order to install/reinstall anything there (because you are within your rights to ask them to remove the equipment from your property) and they would have to make good any damage caused.

 

The proposed lantern would be possibly be an LED type and not LCD.

 

Can a freestanding column be installed anywhere in the area - see sentence above.

 

Kry10

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...