Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX 2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.   Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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

Long running Three complaint


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4270 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

OK, now this has been going on for well over 2 years now so I doubt I can remember everything that has happened but I'm basically looking if I have anywhere left to go.

 

I had an account with 3 in which I never once used over my monthly allowance - after 18 month (into a 24 month contract) I contact 3 and asked if I could reduce my contact and pay less as I was never anywhere near my monthly allowance.

 

3 agreeded to lower my bill by £10 a month if I paid a £5 admin charge - which I agreed to.

 

That month my bill was correctly charged the new balance plus the £5 admin fee (which came to £25). The next month however I was also charged £25 which I could not understand and presumed that they had accidentally charged me twice for the downgrade. I contacted 3 but the man was very rude and insisted that there was no mistake. I was left with no choice but to make a complaint to 3.

 

I tried to follow 3's complaint procedure - however 40 days after complaining I had heard nothing - I hadn't even been given a complaint number. As a method of last resort I contacted the CEO direct. 20 days went by and I was finally sent a letter from the CEO that simply said the complaints team were looking into it. After waiting a further 20 days from that letter and still having no reply I went to the ombudsman.

 

My complaint to the Ombudsman was that 3 had charged me twice for a service and that they had failed to acknowledge my complaint after 80 days. The Ombudsman - presumably being swamped with complaints about mobile companies has taken nearly 18 months to fully review the situation.

 

The first reply I had from the Ombudsman was that 3 claimed that they had replied to my complaint and they the charge was for calls made outside my normal allowance. My reply was that I had had no reply to my complaint from 3, and that I could provide myemail chain where every 3 days I contacted them to see if they had done anything yet. I also pointed out that I never made any calls outside my allowance and I only had the phone for incoming calls and the internet (I had an all you can eat internet package). I asked for proof of any contact 3 had had with me so I could dispute it and a record of calls I was supposed to have made.

 

The second reply I had from the Ombudsman was that they believed that 3 had replied (still I was given no proof dispite my proof that I was constantly asking for a reply) and a bill that showed a call to an 0845 number that turned out to be my local bank branch telephone number ( I presume 3 used this as they know the bank I banked with and my local address)

 

I replied to the Ombudsman asking how they can know that 3 had replied when they were unable to send proof yet I was able to provide proof that I was constanly asking for a reply - something I obviously wouldn't do if I had had a reply. I also pointed out that I would never call my local bank branch as it would be cheaper to call the 0800 freephone head office number, and even if I had had need to call my branch direct I would not call the local branch as my account is actually held in a city at the other end of the county (as the account is still from when I was a student) - I also pointed out the unlikely fact that - for the very first time in 18 month of having a contact - I would make exactlly £5 worth of calls the month after I reduced my bill.

 

the final responce from the Ombudsman is that they still believe that Three did respond to my complaint (despite the fact that they are unable to provide any proof) and that 3 have provided a bill showing the charge of the phone call (because as we all know it's impossible to fake a bill) and they they will not look at the matter further and their view is I should pay the full cancellation fee - I should have pointed out that after they failed to reply to my complaint I cancelled my contract.

 

So now I am wondeing what more I can do - the ombudsman has ruled against me but doesn't actually appear to have listend to any of the points I have made and their investigation seems to have boiled down to nothing more than asking 3 if they did something and then taking their word for it. Can I take the matter any further - is there such a thing as an Ombudsman Ombudsman? Am I intitled to copies of the Ombudsmans contact with 3 as I do not feel this was investigated properly.

 

Any help people can give will be much appreciated - I'm now going to pay the fee, as I can't claim it is disputed any more (having had a 3rd party say it was valid) but I'd like to claim it back or get it refunded and continue the fight if possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A subject access request asking for a copy of everything held about you would reveal the missing letters etc. Not sure whether they would have to include all of the communication with the ombudsman but it should include the missing letter, maybe call data ...

 

It's unlikely that they would have gone to the trouble of falsifying the raw call data that would be used for a SAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Grumpy – I’ll give that a try, but if they are prepared to lie to the Ombudsman then I see no reason why they wouldn’t send me false details too – particularly as they now have nothing to lose from it as the Ombudsman has refused to look at the matter further.

 

I spoke to the bank this morning but they don’t hold call records this long. They were able to confirm that there is no record of a call on my accounts – but even if I was able to get the Ombudsman to reopen the case (which they say they will not do) I doubt they would accept that as proof that I did not call them (I could after all have been making a non account specific call).

 

I appreciate the feedback that has been given, maybe I should have come here earlier, but these are all based on gathering information then (presumably) taking the proof to the complaints team or Ombudsman, both of which have refused to look at the matter further – really what I was looking for was if there is an authority over the Ombudsman I can go to, as I really don’t feel the Ombudsman investigated this matter at all?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...