Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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

appeals service overload


worried33
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4213 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

My DLA appeal is under way.

 

Dispite me contacting the DLA people 2 weeks ago saying that the DM should ring me if any doubts, they just proceeded with the appeal which gives me the impression no effort was made to gather evidence.

 

As I said before if I get in ESA SG I will likely drop the appeal.

 

The letter I got today from the tribunal service states a min waiting time of a whopping 68 weeks. Reduced to potential 40 weeks if I accept one in a different area. Crazy stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes and the repurcussions of them incorrectly rejecting me is now larger as DLA is now used to excempt people on housing benefit single room rate as well as possibly affecting future council tax awards from april.

 

Either the DM's dont know the criteria for DLA or they knowingly rejecting legit claimants. I gave them a lot of evidence in the call with names of doctors, specialists etc.

 

The tribunal service overload seems to indicate I am not a one off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely horrendous:(

How can they be justifying the added expense of the appeals system?

But then again who is ultimately in charge of the Justice system now? "I will lie to you through my slimy, smiling teeth to try and get you to believe that the pain, stress and disabilities that you think you have can be cured by our Draconian methods and poverty Chris Grayling"

Link to post
Share on other sites

... The letter I got today from the tribunal service states a min waiting time of a whopping 68 weeks. ...

 

The delay is getting longer. And we have all the fun of PIP Tribunals yet to come! Might explain why they're looking for 314 people to help out ...

 

http://jac.judiciary.gov.uk/selection-process/selection-exercises/forthcoming/1657.htm

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all I waited 80 weeks in Essex and that was with a change of venue, original venue was at least another 12 weeks, wished I had waited as lost the appeal, so now we are looking to take it to the upper tiribunal if Benefit Welfare Advisor can find error of law so have to wait again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi sorry RaeUK,

 

I didn't make myself clear enough, my tribunal was for DLA, had ATOS medical the day before tribunal scored 39 points and was put in the support group, as stated previously I have made a 3rd claim for DLA (posted yesterday) with copy of ATOS report and reams of other evidenceincluding letter from pain management consultant and private medical from GP (paid for by me) so hopefully 3rd time lucky. Fingers crossed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi RaeUK,

Thats ok we all carry on as though everyone knows what we are talking about. At the moment I am trying to get my industrial injuries benefit increased from 30%that was awarded 25 years ago after my industrial accident that started all this in 1987. I have also applied for constant attendance allowance as well, see how it all goes, I will keep you all posted. Thanks again for all your helpful replies

Link to post
Share on other sites

I contacted the Tribunal Service today (18/10/12) as Iam waiting for my statement of reason. I informed them in 15/9/12 just after my Tribunal. They have said that the waiting period to receive statement of reason paperwork is now eight weeks plus. I cannot go any further until I get that paperwork. That is even after getting my local MP involved and writing to the Tribunal Service on my behalf. What a mess. The whole system is loaded against us.

Best wishes to you all

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I got mine after 3 weeks after waiting 18mths for the hearing (DLA) when it came full of lies. The judges notes I cannot even read and I used to work for a GP and can normally understand scruffy writing. The paperwork is with the Welafre benefit worker at the moment looking for an error of law, to see if we can go to the uppe rtier, its just 1 long waiting game. Lets hope we are still alive to reap he rewards if we succeed..

Link to post
Share on other sites

The delay is getting longer. And we have all the fun of PIP Tribunals yet to come! Might explain why they're looking for 314 people to help out ...

 

http://jac.judiciary.gov.uk/selection-process/selection-exercises/forthcoming/1657.htm

 

I wish I was well enough, I'd apply for that.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^ funny you should say that, estellyn. I had you and a couple others in mind when I read it ... :D

 

Yeah, I don't think one of the adjustments they'd be willing to make would be my own dedicated toilet no more than 10 feet from where I'm sitting, that I can use every five minutes throughout the day if needed, and somewhere to lie down - oh and a shower for any....accidents :oops:.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

That does sound like a good idea. Except, I can't guarantee when I'm not so tired or would actually be capable of working.

 

I'd be ok if they provided a bed in the tribunal room - I can listen while lying down. Also they have to not be bothered about me being really late due to having to wait for a break in toilet trips to be able to travel. But yes if the fatigue is too bad I wouldn't be able to shower or get ready - I could turn up in PJ's. Also need to be not too worried about my need for strong opiate painkillers.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought going out in your PJ's was all the fashion these days. :biggrin1: I've often been in shops when women have wandered in to do shopping wearing their PJ's or Dressing gown. :bounce:

 

Well I do like to be in fashion :-)

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...