Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Just a typo change that I'd make for the last line. Maybe also add something that says "I assume you will be fully aware that you cannot rely on a clause of a contract that you do not produce."
    • Hello, Firstly, and most importantly I am sorry for your loss. I would go back to the bank with the death certificate and ask them to step in. Remind them firmly but politely that there is no limit for DD claims   Please let us know how you get on.
    • My wife is the named person to his bank account with him having Dementia being his daughter (I say named person she still is but he recently passed away and the deputyship application has now being stopped by the solicitor as it's no longer needed) We've only just got the Death Certificate so the bank will be the next step informing them. She went to the bank and explained the situation but even being his named person the bank said she didn't have the power to stop DD without any legal documents (virgin money) was the bank. She could have copies of bank statements that was about it.
    • I see you said you tried to stop the DD but it seems that didn't work. May I please ask why that didn't work? You should be asking your bank to cancel the DD and I don't see why they would have objected, hopefully you can clarify this. I agree that you should be making a claim here against your bank and ask them for a DD refund. There is no timeframes for this.
    • Thanks DX,   I wasn't aware we could do that for that length of time. I'll ask my wife to check with the bank this week
  • 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

You Must Return Your Driving Licence Now


Catalin Vlase
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4353 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

I received a letter from the DVLA with the following content:

 

Date: 28/02/2012

 

Our records show that on the above mentioned date you were convicted of a driving offence but either did you not produce your driving licence or only produced part of your driving licence to the court.

 

The number of valid penalty points currently shown on your driver record mean that your driving licence will be withdrawn under the provisions of the Road Traffic (New Drivers) Act 1995, with effect from the fifth day after the date of this letter.

 

You must send us your driving licence (both the photocard and paper counterpart if you have a photocard licence), with the reply slip in the enclosed envelope.

 

You should note that the revoked licence no longer covers you to drive

 

You are entitled to obtain a provisional licence if you wish to continue driving, but you will be required to comply with the "learner" conditions attaching to that licence until you pass another driving test (theory and practical). to recover all previously held full entitlements the retest must be for one of the categories held prior to the revocation. A test for a category not previously held will result in a full licence for that category only.

 

On the 29th Feb 2012 I was stopped by the Road Traffic Police and checked my Insurance, Mot, Licence and said everything is fine.

 

On the 2nd March 2012 I was stopped again by the police and checked my details on their computer and told me that I am not entitled to drive and that their records shows that I driving without a licence. The police then seized my car. I explained to them that I have a letter from the DVLA stating CLEARLY that the licence is revoked after five days of issuing the above letter "driving licence will be withdrawn under the provisions of the Road Traffic (New Drivers) Act 1995, with effect from the fifth day after the date of this letter". The police asked to present the evidence of this letter to the police station as soon as possible.

 

On the same day my car was seized, I went to the police station with the DVLA letter and the clerk at the police station confirmed that the letter is correct and took a copy and apologized for the mistake but said that the application was processed and there is litter they can do.

 

Now my car is the lockup park. I was not able to retrieve my car as they claim there is "no policy cover that allows me to retrieve the seized car by police" although I was with another qualified with fully comprehensive insurance cover driver.

 

Summary

 

I am clearly within my legal rights to drive the car within the duration stated in the DVLA letter:

 

DVLA letter issued on 28 Feb 2012

Driving Licence to be withdrawn with effect from the fifth day after the date of this letter. 3 March 2012

Car was seized on 2nd March 2012

 

It is crystal clear that my car was seized illegally by the police and I am here looking for professional advice on the matter as the police is taking the case to court.

 

 

Thanks for your interest

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vehicle has to have a valid active policy in place on it to be driven on public roads... doesn't matter if person you was with had comprehensive cover or not. Need to have a policy in place in their name, you can purchase temp insurance cover from various brokers or on the internet.

Twitter - @memgrubb

--

If my post helped - please click the star icon below.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vehicle has to have a valid active policy in place on it to be driven on public roads...

 

The OP is pointing out that the car did have insurance in place on 2nd March and that he was still entitled to drive on that day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

"With effect from the fifth day after the date of this letter".

 

I am not sure that this is compliant with section 7 of the Interpretation Act !!!

 

Under section 7, a document is "deemed as served" in the case of 1st class post on the 2nd working day after posting and that in the case of second class mail, on the 4th working day after posting !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

"With effect from the fifth day after the date of this letter".

 

I am not sure that this is compliant with section 7 of the Interpretation Act !!!

 

Under section 7, a document is "deemed as served" in the case of 1st class post on the 2nd working day after posting and that in the case of second class mail, on the 4th working day after posting !!!

 

There is no mention of first or second class post, or a time scale in s.7 Interpretation Act. Only that service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, prepaying and posting a letter containing the document, and to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Raykay.....

 

Thank you for your response ( it just goes to show that you are "keeping me on my toes"....) !!!

 

 

Section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 relates to documents served by post. HOWEVER, the original Practice Directions for this Act were revoked by JR Bickford Smith; Senior Master of the Queen's Bench Division on 8th March 1985 and substituted by new Practice Directions on 16th April 1985. This provides as follows:

 

 

Service of Documents - First and Second Class Mail

 

 

"With effect from 16 April 1985 the Practice Direction issued on 30 July 1978 is hereby revoked and the following is substituted therefore:

 

 

1.

Under S7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 service by post is deemed to have been effected, unless the contrary has been proved, at the time when the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.

 

 

2.

To avoid uncertainty as to the date of service it will be taken (subject to proof to the contrary) that delivery in the ordinary course of post was effected:-

 

(a)

 

in the case of first class mail, on the second working day after posting;

(b)

 

 

in the case of second class mail, on the fourth working day after posting.

"Working days" are Monday to Friday, excluding any bank holiday.

 

 

3.

Affidavits of service shall state whether the document was dispatched by first or second class mail. If this information is omitted it will be assumed that second class mail was used.

 

 

If there is any further doubt....please read paragraph "e" of the attached that also refers to the Practice Direction:

 

 

 

http://keycases.parkingandtrafficappeals.gov.uk/docs/MON773-R.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...