Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • BankFodder
      Two day break at Widbrook Grange "luxury" hotel fell far from standards it was sold by.

      By BankFodder · Posted

      Thank you. Please will you repost your images in one single multipage PDF file – the right way round et cetera.  
    • BankFodder
      Faulty Nissan Qashqai From Big Motoring World

      By BankFodder · Posted

      And just to reiterate – I'm sorry if the message above sounds a bit harsh. We have to get the message out to other people who visit this thread as well. I realise that you are having a difficult time and we will do our best to help you, of course
    • CydneyCoco
      Two day break at Widbrook Grange "luxury" hotel fell far from standards it was sold by.

      By CydneyCoco · Posted

      The last photo shows the overflow carpark looking at the block which our room was located. When we got out of the car my partner thought that the building was for staff accommodation.  The unsecured bedroom window opened onto this car park.
    • BankFodder
      Faulty Nissan Qashqai From Big Motoring World

      By BankFodder · Posted

      Also I see that you are doing a lot of this on the telephone – and without any written confirmation. This is a big mistake. You need to start taking this matter seriously and so everything should go in writing. If you have telephone calls then they should normally be recorded. Read our customer services guide. You should make notes about every telephone call and then you should send an email to your telephone correspondence confirming what they have said or what they have agreed. It is important that you keep detailed paper trails here. Of course we may be jumping the gun and maybe big motoring world will step up to the mark – but I'm afraid that they have a lousy reputation has you have seen and so you need to start practising survival techniques and protecting yourself. You say for instance in your letter of rejection that the mechanic told you on the telephone that the gearbox needed replacing. Do you have any other evidence of this conversation? This is going to sound a bit harsh – but other people will be visiting this thread as well for their own purposes. You conducted their research about this company before you bought the vehicle. You now are fully aware that this is a company which can be very difficult to deal with and causes a lot of problems for many of their customers and yet you are still taking a telephone/verbal approach. Do I need to say any more? Also one of the documents you put up is an email exchange but it is not clear who is writing to who or what dates. If you showed this email to somebody in a pub they would be asking lots of questions about who sent the first message, who sent the second message, what dates were they sent et cetera. Please think about this before you post things. Please can you clarify the details of that email exchange. Please will you present the information carefully. We are all volunteers here and we have to rely on you to do the spadework
    • CydneyCoco
      Two day break at Widbrook Grange "luxury" hotel fell far from standards it was sold by.

      By CydneyCoco · Posted

      I told the DM that the room was not acceptable because of the reasons already mentioned. He informed me that they were full that night and that they could move me to the room next door (would not solve my problem with the rooms location). Told the DM that I could not stay in the room provided for the night so left no option but to leave. DM did not reply and I walked out.  

  • 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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • 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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • 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
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • 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
        • Like
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All
Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Parking on Private Land - Trespass Notice

andydakin
 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4317 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

DBC

DBC

Posted
Posted

But what is the actual loss? Not some hypothetical figure.

 

Could I ask you Spec1 what are your motives for registering on this forum and posting here. Are you connected to any private parking company, are you a lawyer or law student or are you just reading all this in books?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Spec1

Spec1

Posted
Posted
But what is the actual loss? Not some hypothetical figure.

 

Could I ask you Spec1 what are your motives for registering on this forum and posting here. Are you connected to any private parking company, are you a lawyer or law student or are you just reading all this in books?

 

Please read my posts again, you do not have to prove loss in an action for trespass, the loss to the landowner is posted on the sign, this is what he will have to pay the company for issuing the notice,

I can not see why a Court would have a problem in awarding this loss to the landowner, as he has to be placed in the same position before the tort of trespass occurred. My motives are simple I am trying to point out you can continually attempt to talk about a subject where there are objections to actions, however if your action creates a damage in trespass which you have recieved clear warning not to do, it is an almost impossible to defend, that is where the problem lies,.

Link to post
Share on other sites
DBC

DBC

Posted
Posted

So what are you. A PPC stooge, a lawyer or law student and why did you specifically join this forum to comment on this issue?

 

Regarding the loss. It has to be a true loss , not some figure plucked out of thin air.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Old Snowy

Old Snowy

Posted
Posted
Please read my posts again, you do not have to prove loss in an action for trespass

Correct. However, unless you can quantify the loss caused directly by the trespasser then whilst you may well obtain judgment you are only going to be awarded nominal damages. The fact that a figure of £100 is posted on a notice does not transmute them magically into damages simply because they are there. You must be able to prove that this expenditure or loss was caused directly by the trespasser concerned.

 

Do you provide VAT invoices for the charges you levy?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Spec1

Spec1

Posted
Posted
So what are you. A PPC stooge, a lawyer or law student and why did you specifically join this forum to comment on this issue?

 

Regarding the loss. It has to be a true loss , not some figure plucked out of thin air.

 

It is a true loss, what does it matter what I am, I thought you needed debate on this subject, what are you. I have knowledge of this subject, and if you commit trespass you will have almost no defence without authority. All figures are plucjked out of the air like unenforceable parking Notiice fees, which are contract penalties. What i am trying to tell you is private property is not yours or mine to give authority to trespass on, if a landowner does not want you to trespass and he can show the Court why that is you dont stand a hope.:violin:

Link to post
Share on other sites
DBC

DBC

Posted
Posted

So if a put up a notice saying that if anyone wearing a red shirt walks up my driveway they have to pay me £200 it would be as valid as your so-called "damages" notice?

 

You also mention "contract penalties" and private parking companies. It's because they are penalties and not the true loss that they are unenforceable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Spec1

Spec1

Posted
Posted

In a nut shell Yes, even if you wanted them to hop across your land while wearing the shirt, if that is your conndition of use land why not ?

You must remember if you work on a building site you are required to wear high vis, and you fail to do so, although it is not a trespass it is a condition that you must adhere to, and although it not a trespass it is against the law not to, the same as trespass.

 

THERE IS ALMOST NO DEFENCE AGAINST TRESPASS, one can also accidentally trespass, that Is the landowners power and protection as the master of his land, the laws have been tested and tested, but one thing is for sure you will be up against it, if you take him on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Spec1

Spec1

Posted
Posted

Old Snowy,

 

This is not a damage to the security company, it is a damage to the landowner he can prove the damage that has occured by the action of trespass, which was warned to the trespasser before he commited the tort, no argument, that is fact.

 

If the landowner is VAT registered, and the trespassr remits the sum before the hearing he is areeeing to pay an out of Court settlement, he will be able to claim the VAT, of course you know at a hearing this will not be the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites
DBC

DBC

Posted
Posted (edited)

You say you "know about these things", so just tell usl about your legal training and experience so we can all bow to your superior knowledge. On the other hand, if you are just making this up as you go along, we will know we won't have to believe a word you utter. It's as simple as that.

Edited by DBC
Link to post
Share on other sites
Conniff

Conniff

Posted
Posted
Old Snowy,

 

This is not a damage to the security company, it is a damage to the landowner he can prove the damage that has occured by the action of trespass, which was warned to the trespasser before he commited the tort, no argument, that is fact.

 

If the landowner is VAT registered, and the trespassr remits the sum before the hearing he is areeeing to pay an out of Court settlement, he will be able to claim the VAT, of course you know at a hearing this will not be the case.

 

I'm a bit bemused here, what sort of 'damage' are we talking about, it sounds like physical ??

Link to post
Share on other sites
Spec1

Spec1

Posted
Posted
No , it was yet another stupid answer from you.

 

Ohhh, now now, touchy touchy, stupidity is a way someone shows their true colours, like when they get caught get caught with their trousers down, or parked on another's property without permission.

Link to post
Share on other sites
DBC

DBC

Posted
Posted
Ohhh, now now, touchy touchy, stupidity is a way someone shows their true colours, like when they get caught get caught with their trousers down, or parked on another's property without permission.

 

So you think your are correct and everyone on here is wrong. I ask again - just tell us about your legal training and experience so we can all bow to your superior knowledge. On the other hand, if you are just making this up as you go along, we will know we won't have to believe a word you utter. It's as simple as that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Coupon

Coupon

Posted
Posted
Ohhh, now now, touchy touchy, stupidity is a way someone shows their true colours, like when they get caught get caught with their trousers down, or parked on another's property without permission.

 

 

Showing your true colours indeed now.

 

All we are waiting for now is the old chestnut about 'how would you like it if someone parked on your drive?' Go on, let's have a laugh..

Link to post
Share on other sites
Spec1

Spec1

Posted
Posted
Showing your true colours indeed now.

 

All we are waiting for now is the old chestnut about 'how would you like it if someone parked on your drive?' Go on, let's have a laugh..

 

Coupon

 

I am not going to get dragged into the old chestnut senario. I have joined to debate this subject, as yet I have not recieved any information to prove me wrong, Old Snowy has been a good source of debate, however the problem is the landowner will always have the right to protect his property from use of abuse. The hurdles that a trespasser will face in the future, as they have faced since the 13th century is, Courts will and must give the labndowner protection form interference to heir property, as without a remedy against a trespasser people will be given licence to abuse.

 

Of course I would not like another to park on my property, as I am sure the same would be for you. The issue is people with respect do not park on anothers property, respect is what all of us expect from another, surely respect to another, is what this forum is designed to achieve.

 

I have not attempted to debate on the rights of people, who trespass by mistake, trespass to another in relation to land is a touchy subject, as we all want to park where it is convenient or cheap, but conveniance and cost effectiveness is not necessarily lawfull, the old chestnut you take a chance, LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites
Spec1

Spec1

Posted
Posted
You say you "know about these things", so just tell usl about your legal training and experience so we can all bow to your superior knowledge. On the other hand, if you are just making this up as you go along, we will know we won't have to believe a word you utter. It's as simple as that.

 

Ok you got me ime making it up as I go along, one can only hope, why don't you look it up for yourself, or work it out for yourself, looking at the subject locically should surely make you realise you will never have the upper hand with another's private property, there is to much protection against abuse, which you will never be able to defend. I suppose you could try it out and see what happens, you will though without a doubt be up against it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4317 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...