Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I would only rely on your solicitor in this regard. The other two should not have a view.   And, you are responsible for how the court perceive you. They only have your words and deeds to go on. Expecting them to magically see things your way is not a great tactic.
    • Yes, I don't think there is any downside to doing this. If they decline then you can say that in your witness statement
    • Ok! Do you still want me to work on that letter you discussed above in post #26?
    • Thank you for posting up the required details and well done for apparently not revealing the identity of the driver. I am assuming you are the keeper? The depth of ignorance of the parking companies is absolutely amazing. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 is the law relating to private parking and allows those rogues to be able to transfer the charge from the driver [whose name they do not know] to the keeper after 28 days . This is dependent on them complying with the Act. So many of the don't and Alliance is no different. It would help if we could see what you appeal was and to post the back of the PCN as it is lacking so much of the wording necessary to make it compliant so that in your case only the driver is liable to pay the charge. And of course just entering the ANPR arrival times means that they have failed to specify the parking time which is a requirement..  Because the car park was so busy you had to drive around for quite a while before finally finding a place to park which is when the parking period may  actually begin. The poor dears at Alliance have not grasped that particular part of the legislation as yet. To be fair the Act has only been in place for 12 years so one must make allowances for their stupidity . We shouldn't really mock them- but it is fun. You weren't to know but the chances of winning an appeal against Alliance and the IPC is around 5%-and that is high for them. If they allow you to cancel they lose the chance of making money and they would have had a field day when you were there with so many people being caught overstaying because of the chaos in trying to find a parking space then trying to pay.  Your snotty letter could go something like this- Dear Cretins, Yes I mean you Alliance. After 12 years one would have thought that even you could produce a compliant PCN. Did you really think I would pay you a penny extra considering the time I wasted trying  to pay with  long queues at the parking machine, then trying to get a signal to call Just Park. On top of that you then had the cheek to ask for an additional £70 for what dubious unspecified pleasure? You must have made a killing that day charging all those motorists for overstaying because the queues to pay were do long and even walking to pay from the over flow parking fields takes time. And yes I did take photos of the non existent signs in the fields so please don't give me the usual rubbish about your signs being clearly visible. Oh yes that £70. Please tell me and the Court whether that charge included VAT and if it did, why am I being charged to pay your vat? I am sure the Judge would look carefully at that as well as the Inland Revenue. The truth is you had no reasonable cause to ask the DVLA for my data given the chaos at your car park and I believe that you therefore breached my GDPR...................... I expect others will give their views as well.          
    • opps this is going to get messy then if they don't refund. you should never keep util accounts in credit.
  • 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

law on trespass question


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4098 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

Lets get the legal minds thinking on this one

 

we all know the offence of trespass is now a civil offence, taken from the french word Tort

 

There are criminal elemants to trespass by way of Section 61 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. Within that Act, section v contains the relevant legislation.

 

you may need to read this below to get an idea of the legislation that i have compiled

 

Power to remove trespassers on land.

 

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

 

Even though trespass is a civil matter, the above Act creates a crime of collective trespass.

In this short essay, I will explain the legal position on removing trespassers from private land. The statutory legislation that supports this process is contained within the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.

 

The relevant section is Part V of the said Act.

 

A senior police officer present can direct a trespasser off private land where the occupier has already taken reasonable steps to ask them to do so, and that the landowner now considers that person to be trespassing on his land. The police officer must have reasonable belief that two or more persons are trespassing before directing them to leave. The legislation is contained under Section 61(1) of the said Act.

 

Under Section 61(1) (a) and Section 61(1) (b)) of the said Act:

 

The police officer has to have reasonable suspicion that any trespassers has caused damage to the land or property, and using threatening, abusive or insulting words towards the occupier, family member or agent of the land owner. Section 61(1) (b) of the said Act also prohibits that those persons have six or more vehicles on the land at any one time.

 

If after receiving a direction by a police constable to leave to leave the land under Section 61(1) of the said Act, and fails to leave the land as soon as reasonably practicable, the trespasser shall commit an offence.

 

If the trespasser returns to the private land again after being directed to leave by a police officer within a three month period, the trespasser shall commit an offence. On summary conviction, the trespasser is liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding three months, or a fine not exceeding a level 4 on the standard scale, or both.

 

Now for the main question

 

The above legislation is for land, but take a shopping center which is open to the public, but private property. If a teenager is skateboarding in the shopping center,

 

By what Statutory Authority can

 

!/The security guards remove the individual if he refuses to leave the shopping center

 

2/By what authority can the police remove an individual being its a civil offence of trespass

 

Its statutory regulations that i am after to the above questions

 

thanks for reading

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think that the police can remove under something like public nusience I would have thought that the security guards have no more powers than a member of the public, not sure that tresspass would come into the equation as if the skateborders didnt have skateboards then i assume they wouldnt be asked to leave and having a skateboard dosnt then turn them into a trespasser.

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

what about a security guard wanting to remove a street performer from a shopping center saying the shopping center is private but open to the public property. The security then states he is trespassing as consent has been withdrawn allowing the street performer onto the private property

 

it is the statutory powers that the security guard has in removing the street performer, and the powers the police have if requested to attend is what i am after, being that trespass is a civil tort

Link to post
Share on other sites

not cheat, i am trying to find the statutory legislation private security use to expel alleged trespassers, either with, or encouraged force

 

or has it become an accepted practice with no statutory requirement

 

i cannot find any legislation except the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act

 

any takers

Link to post
Share on other sites

And if they are Im not sure the Legal Forum is the right place to conduct your research...this is a self help forum to advise and help people with genuine legal problems.

  • Haha 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...