Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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

Bryan Carter letter


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4366 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

hi new here and hoping for some guidence

recieved a letter today in the post,

 

Our Client: arrow Global guernsey Limited

Claim NO. ********

Outstanding Balance: £601.00

 

From Informations recieved it would appear that you are in employment and are paying other account but not this one

 

this position is totally unacceptable and in seven days time we intend to instruct an enquiry agent to ascertain where you are working, following which we will apply to the court for an attachment of earning order to be issued

 

once an order has been made the court will instruct your emplyer to deduct a set amount from your wages each month to pay the outstanding judgment

 

you can avoid all this by completing the direct debit mandate overleaf and return it to us or by using the enclosed payment card

 

please do not delay

 

if you require assistance you can also speak to one of our friendly account managers in order to help work out what amount is reasonable and affordable

 

yours sincerly

Bryan Carter

 

ive never spoken to anyone on the phone from them so i dont know where they have got his info from about me working

 

must be from an an orange contract i had back in 2007 which i stopped paying due to loss of job around august time in 07, i contacted orange about my circumstances but they said i was stuck with the 18 month contract.

 

it went away for a good 5years and popped up again recently

 

im 22 and dont have the foggist where to start with this so any help would be great,

 

thanks andy

Edited by andy225000
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi Andy,

 

First thing you need to do is to check your Credit Files, Equifax & Experian are the biggest, they offer free 30 day trials but please remember to cancel within the 30 days otherwise you will be charged.

 

An attachment of Earnings can only be granted once a CCJ has been issued and you have defaulted on the payment of the CCJ.

 

You need to check your Credit Reference File to see if a CCJ has been awarded and Bryan Carters have obtained one by default.

 

Have you moved around frequently or moved recently with no mail forwarding system?

 

As to Statute Barred - if in Scotland, it is 5 years from date of last payment (Approx. August 2012), for England/Wales it is 6 years making SB Approx. August 2013.

 

Do not worry if a CCJ does show on your Credit File, this can be easily set aside as you did not know nothing about it.

 

Stigman

Edited by Stigman

NEVER telephone a DCA

If a DCA rings you, refuse to go through the security questions & hang up!

 

If I have helped you, click on the star & say thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd write back in the same way they wrote to you - as follows

 

Dear Uncle Bryan

 

I DO NOT ACKNOWEDGE ANY ALLEGED DEBT FROM YOU, YOUR CLIENTS, ASSOCIATES OR AFFILIATES

 

Your information about my employment status is worrying, what clause in the terms and conditions of the alleged debt allow you to seek this information without informing me of the fact?

 

This information is required from you within 7 days, otherwise court proceedings will be issued by me without further referral to yourself, and this would be for a minimum claim of £1,000.

 

I would of course have to inform the SRA of this court case as they are your governing body and need to know that you have been less than truthful, as a solicitor I am sure you are aware of the gravity of this offence and your licence could be recinded.

 

I am not therefore completing the direct debit mandate as you have not provided sufficient information regarding this alleged debt. Please provide the date the last payment on this alleged account was made by myself so I can ascertain the vaidity of this alleged debt.

 

If you require any further information from me this costs a minimum charge of £25, including Litigant in Person fees per letter.

 

Go forth and do not bother me again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...