Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • A bit of sadly all to rare promising news   ‘Smart’ antibiotic spares the microbiome An antibiotic called lolamicin targets disease-causing Gram-negative bacteria without disturbing healthy gut bacteria. Broad-spectrum antibiotics against these pathogens wreak havoc on the gut microbiome and can allow potentially deadly Clostridioides difficile to take over. Mice infected with antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria survived after being given lolamicin, whereas almost 90% of those that didn’t receive the drug died within three days. Lolamicin did not seem to disrupt the gut microbiome and spared mice from C. difficile infections. Nature | 4 min read Reference: Nature paper
    • Yes that's right-Parking Eye are usually very good at getting their PCNs compliant with the Act. So both being out of time means that PE cannot transfer the liability for payment from the driver to the keeper. So only the driver is liable to pay the PCN not the keeper. I understand from you that at least one of the keepers was not driving at the time which puts them in the clear providing PE are not told who was actually driving on that day. However even if with the other car the keeper and the driver were the same person the driver can still successfully argue that they are not liable to pay. The arguments are that there  appears to be no entrance sign advising that the car park is now private. That no signs were there advising that this was a new car park as it was at that time. That the signs are prohibitory so even if PE do have a contract with the landowner, the contract cannot extend to the motorist as there is no  offer other than no parking for those without a permit. You cannot form a contract with motorists trying to park if you are not allowing them to park there because they do not have a permit.  In those circumstance [parking without a permit ] you may be considered to be trespassing but only the landowner can sue for that not PE. And its not worth the landowner suing because the cost of suing would probably not outweigh the fine for trespassing.   PS  I sent you a private message-not about your case.    
    • Please accept my apologies for the delayed update, but i have been trawling through emails for supporting evidence, you see we are in the consultation phase and there will be three meetings during the process. So as i have said  my role is at risk due to the scoring and mine being low. As explained i never received my report as my line manager left during December and i was on leave. So i was not afforded any meeting, i received no feedback at all, so how am i meant to know any areas to improve or to attain a higher grade. So with this in mind i gathered my supporting evidence, i found the email from my then line manager and the objectives that he set out and we agreed.   I then supplied 20 emails that  showed that not only did i reach the targets, i smashed them, highlighting areas that i had saved the company a considerable amount of money, idented issues  implemented process and solutions with ongoing support. All emails are verified and prove that i should have received the highest possible grade going by their criteria. I also included the email from HR when i challenged  the score and they replied with " the outgoing manager supplied thorough feedback to the incoming interim manager who should have provided this (this was never received, and report i received was blank with just a score. Highlighted was the email from HR stating " a two is not a concerning grade"  well clearly it is as less than a month later it is what was used to decide i was at risk. I have supplied this information to the line manager and the external HR rep that was on the call as i have 48 hours to supply this. Had i had a proper and fair review like everyone else had then i would have been able to provide this evidence when he issued the score, he could not argue with the sheer volume of evidence that i had. This proves what was said to me when i took this position, " there was some politics in me getting the role, their line manager had promised the role to one of his guys, they cant really do anything but watch your back" He should not have promised this anyway as two interviews were required in the process *which i sat) so i earned the right to the role. This was because the three of them knew there was a lot that would be uncovered and they wanted it covering, i started to see this after two weeks, had i not said anything then it would have looked as though i was incompetent or stupid. I did try to work with them on this to remedy but sadly they went the other rout instead.    
  • 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

Automatic removal of Defaults?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4367 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 all,

Thanks for the great advice so far...

Defaults that are your credit file, are they supposed to come off yourcredit file automatically after the 6 years, or do you have request the creditagency to do it?

The reason I ask, is that on my file there are 'some' defaults, but theirdefault dates are pass the six years point...

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

Thanks for the great advice so far...

Defaults that are your credit file, are they supposed to come off yourcredit file automatically after the 6 years, or do you have request the creditagency to do it?

The reason I ask, is that on my file there are 'some' defaults, but theirdefault dates are pass the six years point...

Thanks

 

 

Hi there. Yes, they should drop off automatically on the 6year anniversary but this does not always happen due to system failures and ak of updates - I would drop them a quick line and ask them to remove them - bare in mind that you can mak a Cain against a CRA if they are holding information on you after the 6 year period which is affecting you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly is the 6 year rule? The reason I ask is I thought you weren't liable after 6 years but I have a car loan debt that has been sold on to another company who are still pursuing it. The car was "handed back" around 10 years ago but I can't remember the detail, i.e. whether I handed the car keys back or they repossessed it.

 

I also have a smaller credit card debt that again was sold on to a debt collection company who are still chasing me, that's well over six years old too.

I only mouth my opinion, please look elsewhere for sensible advice! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Sounds like both these debts are Statute Barred.

 

SB happens when no payment nor acknowledgement of a debt is made in the preceeding 6 years (or 5 years in Scotland)

 

Until you tell them that no payment will be forthcoming, they can continue to chase so send them the SB letter in the library. (Recorded Delivery of course)

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I've just read that letter. So in otherwords if I haven't made a payment or responded to them in six years (I haven't, I make a point of NEVER contating DCA's) they have no legal claim to the debt?

I only mouth my opinion, please look elsewhere for sensible advice! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there. Yes, they should drop off automatically on the 6year anniversary but this does not always happen due to system failures and ak of updates - I would drop them a quick line and ask them to remove them - bare in mind that you can mak a Cain against a CRA if they are holding information on you after the 6 year period which is affecting you.

 

Thanks Erimus1 - I have contacted the CRAs informing them to correct the details.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I've just read that letter. So in otherwords if I haven't made a payment or responded to them in six years (I haven't, I make a point of NEVER contating DCA's) they have no legal claim to the debt?

 

 

Correct :-)

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, vey much appreciated. Sorry for hijacking the thread but the subject was so closely linked it seemed pointless to start a different one.

I only mouth my opinion, please look elsewhere for sensible advice! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...