Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (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 does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
  • 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

Accident Exchange - Do not use.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4238 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

Unfortunatley I have fallen victim to what appears as a very reputable company on the outside.I was in a car accident some weeks ago, the person who caused the crash admitted liability. As I use my car for work purposes their insurance company Admiral confirmed they would supply me with a replacement car. This is when Accident Exchange got involved as Admiral instructed them.The car arrived very late and the delivery chap was in a panick (rushing) as he needed to get the train and go to collect his next car. I was asked to check the car and fuel. I questioned what was being signed about the insurance, what does it cover, can I drive it from variuos work places. The chap replied - You are covered for everything, dont worry, there is no excess either. I signed the docs as him being late caused me now to rush about for work. I asked about excess he said there isnt any.The worse of this being the car was stolen from my home place a few days later, I didnt even know it had gone till the police arrived to say they found the car on fire. First time ever this has happened to me. Which does make me wonder why I was targeted, my other car is high performance wasnt touched! Weird..... Accident Exchange then stated they would not get me another car unless I insured it, they had no interest in me at all. Basically just kept fobbing me off. I then asked what happens about the insurance, constant chasing, I had personal belongings in that car. They have now stated I am not covered for personal items, saying that i was shown an insurance form, which is a complete lie. And the latest is that they are looking billing £2500 excess for their car being stolen!! The MD emailed to say how much this has cost them and how they are out of pocket, they wouldnt be in business if they had losses, even the CEO said he will come back to me. Nothing at all.Ive now put in a county court claim for my items as its not right they can lie and treat people like this. Its disgusting. Bullying tactics are now being used about this claim against them.If your reading this, do not use this company. I will be writting to all their clients as this is not a reputable company, all they care about is the £££ note. Anyone with futher advice, suggestions or even if you have had troubles with this company will really help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, sorry to hear of the problems that you have experienced, this sounds like a complete nightmare.

 

It would appear that Accident Exchange are currently in financial difficulties. I am a Blogger in Havering and I have a post on this matter on The Angry of Havering web site. I cannot provide you with a link because I am a new poster. If you google angry of havering and click on the angry forum, this article has been pasted on my post.

 

I would email the MD again and include a link to this post. I am not very experienced with insurance matters and I hope that some other members may be able to offer you further advice.

 

Can I ask, did you send a letter before claim before issuing proceedings ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The cost to my business from this incident is £42,000 of which our insurers will pay £17,000 and we will pay the balance.

 

 

£42,000! What on earth did you provide as a loan car??

Link to post
Share on other sites

£42,000! What on earth did you provide as a loan car??

 

 

The OP said he had a high performance car so I assume that he got a like for like replacement. This might also be why it was targeted by thieves.

 

I have to say that Steven Evans post about comes across as very fair and reasonable. It is a shame the OP felt he had to resort to issuing Court proceedings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I wonder if the OP had sought a claim directly using Accident Exchange, or other company including solicitors, not the other party insurer, whether they would have provided better than the minimum RTA cover only.

 

Was he advised he had an option? The at fault insurer would have been paying the excesses then wouldn't they, or would the hire agreement in those circumstances include the common damage waiver, or damage waiver insurance.... why contact the other side insurance anyway without knowing the options available, or did they approach the OP?

 

The reply seems decent if not a little innapropriately suggestive maybe

 

I think theres more to it

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
The OP said he had a high performance car so I assume that he got a like for like replacement. This might also be why it was targeted by thieves.

 

I have to say that Steven Evans post about comes across as very fair and reasonable. It is a shame the OP felt he had to resort to issuing Court proceedings.

 

The car was a BMW X3. So not high performance and certainly not worth £42,000. The problem is the company failed to tell me about their excess or even about what the insurance was about. When questioned before I took the car I was lied to. This is why it needs to go before a court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Well I'm sure now once you have all read this your be even more shocked. So I tried to deal with accident exchange, as you can see from the CEO comments its clear that they only care about the money side. Why is it going to cost them £42k for a car worth half that. They don't tell you that their excess for damage is £2500 that's four times the cost of two cars on my current insurance policy. The whole theft was investigated by the police in great detail which I am pleased about as that showed that despite what AE think I was not responsible for the loss of their car. I have been told by a friend of friend in their very own company that they have alluded to the thought that I was responsible for the theft!!! Complete cheek of it.

The judgement was won in their favour as I was not able to submit my defence to the counterclaim as the case was under investigation. Now they have concluded that I am innocent AE got their counterclaim. I have applied for set aside as I wish to have a fair hearing, I have also contacted mail online who want more information as this is of public interest but they will wait till after the case has been decided, I'm happy with that at least more will hear about wrong doing of accident exchange. Watchdog need more complaints about excess before they would take it further. Their biggest client Admiral have been contacted too about my whole case, they are looking into it. Guys in the last 6 months I was a victim of a car theft, I was then accused of that same theft ( proved innocent ) I lost employment, I now have a CCJ for £2500 all because of a company called ACCIDENT EXCHANGE. If your provided a car by them honestly take it back and get a bus. Companies like this can not continue to trade while charging these sky high fees and generally ripping people off. Including their very own clients.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, do you have any legal representation or are you defending yourself?

 

You can instruct a Barrister via Direct Access, they would be able to represent you in court and look through the merits of your case. This is a cheaper alternative to using solicitors and would put you on an equal footing with Accident Exchange.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, do you have any legal representation or are you defending yourself?

 

You can instruct a Barrister via Direct Access, they would be able to represent you in court and look through the merits of your case. This is a cheaper alternative to using solicitors and would put you on an equal footing with Accident Exchange.

 

I have spoken with three separate companies about defending, currently I am waiting to hear back from my insurer Natwest Private as my home contents may cover as this comes under contract dispute too. I am waiting in Admiral as they instructed and paid AE for my car, they could well be dragged into this, they are currently speaking with their legals then coming back to me.

I've not done that before. Can you help and let me know what I need to do. Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would wait and see if you are covered on your home insurance first. If you are then this will be rally good news as you should get solicitors who will in turn instruct a Barrister for the hearing. As this would come under your insurance then you will not have to pay.

 

If you do not have cover you would have to pay for a Direct Access Barrister. My partner and I recently instructed one and for a full days hearing and reading the papers it cost approximately £900. Because our claim is in the small claims court, even if we win we cannot claim this cost back. If the case has been allocated to the multi track, if you are successful you will then be able to claim the costs back from the other side. What part of the country are you from ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would wait and see if you are covered on your home insurance first. If you are then this will be rally good news as you should get solicitors who will in turn instruct a Barrister for the hearing. As this would come under your insurance then you will not have to pay.

 

If you do not have cover you would have to pay for a Direct Access Barrister. My partner and I recently instructed one and for a full days hearing and reading the papers it cost approximately £900. Because our claim is in the small claims court, even if we win we cannot claim this cost back. If the case has been allocated to the multi track, if you are successful you will then be able to claim the costs back from the other side. What part of the country are you from ?

 

I am from London, I'm at the point now that I'm not really bothered about the costs, I know it can take a long time and a lot of money but those are two things I am lucky to have (well not plenty of money as such)

It's now a case of making sure that companies like Accident Exchange don't get away with fobbing people off, lying to their customers and generally ripping everyone off. Even if I lose the court case I can still continue on making sure there clients are aware of how bad a company they are, they are plenty of publications to use. Hell even the CEO comments had to be deleted off this site so that says a lot for the company. I'm sure I can write in to anyone named at companies house and linked to the company. Time is a wonderful thing....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...