Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • lets not chance missing something important eh? best to scan both sides of everything up to one multipage PDF   dx      
    • Thanks to all. What about (much simplified)   -------   Dear Sir   I am writing to object to the appeal made by the Claimant, Vehicle Control Service (VCS), for claim number XXXXX.   I believe the Claimant ignored the learned Judge's second line in the Order that dismissed the claim: 'And upon the Claimant’s representative stating that without such information and evidence the Claimant could not prove this claim’. The legally qualified representative of VCS conceded at the hearing. Having conceded, they cannot try the case at another court.   Obviously, they have no grounds to use judicial time to appeal in a case where the learned Judge made a decision based upon a clearly stated position of conceding that this claim could not be proved, coming as it did from a legally qualified representative from the Claimant.  Their representative has had their chance to use the arguments, which they are now trying to introduce again.  Not only did the Claimant not use that case law but they actually conceded the point, so the case should be considered closed.   I would like to take the opportunity to iterate the following points.   1.     The legally qualified representative of VCS admitted during the hearing on 30/03/2021 that Southend Airport Company Limited is NOT the landowner. When requested by the Judge ‘who is landowner and where is the evidence’, The Claimant failed to provide the evidence: 1) the owner of the land; 2) the landowner had given VCS the necessary authority to issue parking charge notices and to pursue payment by means of litigation.   2.     The contract provided by VCS appears to be a false instrument.   ‘THIS AGREEMENT is made on the 11th day of JUNE 2019 between WEHICLE CONTROL SERVICED LIMITED (Company No. 02881745 ) … and LONDON SOUTHEND AIRPORT COMPANY LIMITED (Company No. 02078271) …’   According to Companies House, Company Number 02881745 is for London Southend Airport Company Limited, while Company Number  02078271 is East Midlands International Airport Limited.   3.     No contract can exist between VCS and the defendant, as the land is not 'relevant land'. The Airport land is subject to the Airport Byelaws as specified in 'Section 63' of the Airports Act 1986. It is also subject to the Southend-on-Sea Municipal Airport Byelaws 1980. Airport Act confirms that the road on which the alleged contravention took place is subject to the Road Traffic Act 1988 (RTA), by virtue of Section 192(1) of RTA and it being a road “to which the public has access”.   Even that the defendant DID stop where you should not have done, under Airports Act and Road Traffic Act, VCS has no authority to issue parking charge notices and to pursue payment by means of litigation. VCS cannot pursue such case in County Court for breach of contract, whether or not there is one.   4.     I would question the existence of the alleged contract, which the Claimant claims to have been breached by “stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited”. The signage is wholly prohibitive and makes no offer of consideration. In the absence of consideration, no contract exists. It is my position that, the Claimant has no standing, or cause of action, to litigate in this matter.   5.     The Claimant seeks recovery of the original £100 parking charge plus an additional £60 described as “contractual costs and interest” or “Debt collection costs”.  No further justification or breakdown has been provided as required under Civil Procedure Rule 16.4. Previous parking charge cases have found that the parking charge itself is at a level to include the costs of recovery ie: Parking Eye Ltd vs Beavis (2015) UKSC 67.   6.     Reason for stopping should be considered. The sole reason for the defendant to stop was to ask an onsite traffic warden for directions (the drop-off point in this case). Photos received from the claimant show the driver got off and entered the vehicle. The vehicle stopped for only 30 seconds according to the timestamps.   Please refer to my Defence and Witness Statement for more details.    
    • And he would be correct...you are not party to the claim...it is Marston error only they can correct it.  
    • Oh and second doses of pfiser seem to be dropping NHS staff like flies for 24-48 hours - seemingly similar effects to first dose of AZ
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 32 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2997 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 folks

 

CSA has been in touch and have been given the figures etc on what to pay

 

In regards to amounts,

 

If the Ex who is now engaged (proof in paper) is living with the guy and he has a very successful buildings company

 

Should my payments stay the same even knowing this information ? or would they lower knowing that she is with a new guy earning loads ?

 

Thanks all

Edited by somethingelseplease
edit
Link to post
Share on other sites

If I can phone up and request a review due to my ex husband boasting about a pay rise to his mates in the pub then I'm pretty sure you can request a review due to your ex wife now being engaged/living with her new partner. Its certainly a change of circumstances the CSA would be interested in. In the meantime keep paying what has been agreed so things aren't reflected badly on you

Link to post
Share on other sites

CSA has nothing to do with parent (with care) parents wage (unless old rules). It's based on (a percentage) of NRP wages.

 

If NRP is struggling, they can ask for variation. Question is, in 10 years time do u want to say to your kids ' I contributed (££) each week to your upbringing' or 'well your mums bf had loads of money, I thought he could take over financial responsibility'

 

I am a remarried pwc and would be happy for ex to stop contributing (I'm much better off financially than him). He has declined this suggestion though, for the above reason.

 

You can give CSA a call as the rules are always changing with them!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it based solely on the NRP's wages tho? Cos my ex husband has had a payrise yet my money has dropped because he has moved in with his girlfriend and her 4 children. The CSA called it 'a change in his household' circumstances and said it was unfortunate that it coincided with his payrise. I would definitely phone them tho

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ros

Yes sorry, they take into account other children he will be supporting too (in new CSA anywa). I have heard lots of examples of how unfair the old system was (where they take into account household income)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Hi folks

 

Ok I am now starting to make payments to the Child Support Agency (quite a bit) and really don't mind as long as the kid is getting something even though she will not allow me to see her. This was not my fault as the mother had lost the plot before I left her a good few years ago.

 

Thing is I know someone who works in a bank who my ex banks with (and her partner) - I know this breaks all kinds of rules but I just had to know and she will never find out.

 

She is claiming £400 in housing benefit and is also claiming working tax credit ...even though there is no wage coming into her account. He is stated at the same address as her on the banks details and owns a business himself but only takes between £5-800 wage but does do a bit of dipping now and again into the account to obviously not make it look like he's getting more than he should

 

My question is, if the DWP / CSA knew all this fraud was going on would my payments decrease

or would they stay the same? I'm not bothered but just a bit of knowledge

 

What sort of position am I in?

would an anonymous letter with all copies of their engagement (proof was in the paper) details help when sent to DWP, I also have proof of his name on paper and his business name etc

 

I just know that she doesn't need these payments from me as she is obviously living brilliantly just now, I on the other hand could do with that money as I'm finding it very hard to survive

 

thanks for any help

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know what I would do! But it has to be up to you doesn't it.

I expect you'll still have to pay some, doesn't it actually go on what your earnings are rather than hers though tbh?

If you bubbled her, she'll likely get in trouble with the DWP & presumably tax credits if she isn't claiming as a couple, but it may not change your payments?

She's on borrowed time anyway, if he is registered anywhere at her address, they do find out from DATA matching. She's silly to take the risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From my experience your payments should reduce, my ex husband moved in with his GF and her kids 2 months ago and his payments reduced by 25%. She does have four children tho. I think you can phone the CSA and ask for her circumstances to be reviewed but I would guess she would just 'fudge' the paperwork so it still looks like she is on her own etc. Like Jadeybags says tho she is on borrowed time

Link to post
Share on other sites

Life is never fair. You just need to decide what (if anything) you are going to do about it

 

All I woud say is bear in mind your child here. If you did something about this then I bet your ex will tell them that their dad is an evil so and so who doesn't care etc etc. From the sounds of it she has given herself anough rope to hang herself with, its only a matter of time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The way you got this information doesn't just break rules it is also totally illegal. Unless you want your friend fired and potentially imprisoned you should think long and hard before using any of it. Of course as an upright citizen there is nothing to stop you tipping off the csa and dwp about rumours you hear such as they are living together. The fact you even have this information scares the hello out of me.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

you would still.have to pay regardless of her income it will only reduce if you have more children or live with someone who has children

just pay what you are asked and know that you have done right by.your child your ex can never say then.that you didnt provide she will get found out eventually cheats.never prosper !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
The way you got this information doesn't just break rules it is also totally illegal. Unless you want your friend fired and potentially imprisoned you should think long and hard before using any of it. Of course as an upright citizen there is nothing to stop you tipping off the csa and dwp about rumours you hear such as they are living together. The fact you even have this information scares the hello out of me.

 

Completely agree with this post. Whatever the moral rights and wrongs of this, you simply cannot go around using friends' privileged access to personal data to establish your case.Whilst you may score points against your ex, an inquiry into how the 'proof' was obtained would be almost inevitable and your friend's fingerprints will be all over the search history at the bank concerned. This is illegal and your friend WOULD lose their job, quite rightly. In many other areas of CAG, people are trying to deal with gross abuses of their personal data and I doubt that many will agree with or condone the way that you have obtained this information.

 

FWIW I am on your side if your assertions are correct and that benefit fraud is taking place, but for the good of all concerned, stick to the proper channels - report your suspicions and let the proper authorities investigate - if there is wrongdoing it will be uncovered. And keep your evidence obtained via your friend strictly to yourself.

  • Haha 1

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your payments with the CSA will not change unless you have any children in your own house. It is only based on your own income not your ex partners. with regards to the claiming she is single with tac credits you would be best to contact tax credits fraud to tell them any information you have but you can only really give them evidence that you have obtained legally.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...