Announcements
-
-
Tweets
-
Posts
-
By teejay26805 · Posted
ACPOA PCN 190424.pdf 1 Date of the infringement 30/3/24 2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 19/4/24 [scan up BOTH SIDES as ONE PDF- follow the upload guide] please LEAVE IN LOCATION AND ALL DATES/TIMES/£'s 3 Date received 23/4/24 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] No 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? No 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] N Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up Give answer here 7 Who is the parking company? APCOA 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Ludlow Tesco 2856 For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. No -
By Man in the middle · Posted
So not entirely down to the ticket office, then. In fact you have been quite fortunate. The "Section 172" response provides the evidence the police need to prove that you were driving if they wish to prosecute you in court. In England and Wales there is a legal precedent which has determined that an unsigned s172 response does not meet the requirements of that part of the RTA. In effect, an unsigned response is equivalent to no response at all. (This precedent is not recognised in Scotland and there is a strategy to "go unsigned" to avoid conviction). When they receive an unsigned response the police are perfectly entitled to prosecute you for "Failing to provide drivers details" and they more often than not do. This offence carries six points, a hefty fine and insurance grief for up to five years. So you got lucky. The situation now is that the deadline for accepting a course is passed. Four months is the absolute maximum, with some forces cutting it back to as little as three months from the date of the offence. The police will not extend this because if you fail to complete the course before six months has elapsed, they can no longer prosecute you. They can only begin proceedings up to the corresponding date in June (i.e. if the offence was December 10th, they have until June 10th the begin proceedings). You will gain nothing by taking this to court. On the contrary you have a lot to lose. Courses are offered entirely at the discretion of the police, you have no right to one and the court has no powers to order one. Presumably you have been offered a fixed penalty of £100 and 3 points. If you are sentenced in court it will cost you at least three times that, possibly more (depending on your speed and your income). My advice: accept the fixed penalty and do it soon as there is a deadline for that as well and if you allow it to pass your matter will be taken to court anyway. -
put them all in one mass pdf please read upload use the websites listed. dx -
Hi all, I have an update: I have received the documents from the SAR, including photos. It appears that I was parked in a bay with a sign that requires a permit, however the pole that it is on does appear to be behind the barrier - see photo. Also, they documented that they DID NOT apply the PCN to my car because of safety concerns and I DID NOT receive the initial £60 PCN by post- see attached.CamScanner 05-10-2024 15.06.pdf appreciate nay feedback/ advice, current PCN fee stands at £100. CamScanner 05-10-2024 15.03.pdf CamScanner 05-10-2024 15.08.pdf CamScanner 05-10-2024 15.06.pdf -
They said hi is this (name) I said no and they asked if he’s there tell him to contact us in regards to Sainsbury’s I said ok bye
-
-
Recommended Topics
-
Our picks
-
If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,
If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.-
- 1 reply
-
-
Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld
ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,
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
-
-
A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report
WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,
Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299-
- 161 replies
-
-
Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available
BankFodder posted a post in a topic,
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
-
-
style="text-align: center;">
Thread Locked
because no one has posted on it for the last 6309 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
-
Recently Browsing 0 Caggers
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Have we helped you ...?
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS
Recommended Posts