Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Post the NTK up here for the regulars to double-check. I highly doubt it's compliant with POFA though. Ignore the deforestation that comes unless it's ever a letter of claim. Any luck with the organ grinder?
    • Probably the case @lookinforinfo Also an update, I've got the registered keeper letter. Just to check that I continue to ignore it until PAP letter comes in?
    • Thanks very much Bank. I've now done a lot of reading and have drafted my Letter of Claim as attached. I look forward to your comments. 16Apr24 draft Letter of Claim against Parcel2Go.pdf16Apr24 draft Letter of Claim against Parcel2Go.pdf16Apr24 draft Letter of Claim against Parcel2Go.pdf
    • ive already CAREFULLY explained how it all works earlier. what you will have to pay is already preset and detailed on the court forms/TfL stuff you already have. you wont be asked any questions upon your financial means etc. thats not under debate . you wont be asked upon any mitigating circumstances, you have pleaded guity which you always SHOULD.  the ONLY 2 reasons you are attending is to: 1) after finding the TfL prosecutor... plead directly face to face before you go in to try and get an OOC (you can bring up or say anything/everything you like ...anything that might get them to agree) 2) if 1 fails...show your genuine remorse face to face to the magistrate, BRIEFLY mention how a criminal record would hinder your future then hope they take pity on you and dont also record this on your file.  PS its only declarable/shows there for one year anyway. regardless to what an employer might ask in job questionnaires past 1yrs you forget about it. they cannot see it even on enhanced DBS etc etc. you should not latterly ever appeal a criminal record for this type (1yrs)  of 'offence' its not worth it and if you lose said appeal it will cost your dear in terms of additional wages grabbing and court fees. and extends the time it shows if you lose too. dx  
    • hit letter of claim follow post 2 despite repeated requests, the claimant has failed to produce any enforceable paperwork.
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4016 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

Just came across a nasty piece of work while searching for PC parts on line. The firewall went wild, and started blocking all sorts of connections.

 

Turns out a service called "Markmonitor" (64.124.14.70) was trying to connect to my network. Bit of research and it seems this company, part of Reuters, is monitoring services across the internet for "copyright reasons."

 

But what the hell were they trying to connect to my PC for?

Dabs and PCWorld have nothing to do with copyright!

Anyone else heard of this service?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'd check you've not got a spamming Trojan

 

run combofix

from the bleeping computer site

 

in safe mode with networking.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a Trojan dx100uk, Least if it is then the script kiddie writing it has a guaranteed job with Sophos! Yes I can bock firewall ports, or use the hosts file, but Your average housewife wouldn't have know anyone was looking at her PC or how to do that. Wasn't Google just recently slapped for doing something similar? Reauter Thompsan seem to be selling a service to promote inspecting PC's while users are browsing. Does anyone know anything about the service they are selling?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen this ALOT. Because of the new 'COOKIES POLICY' where websites have to ASK you if you want to have cookies or not , have started including that bloody irrortatin * (after their clause)... THis is what you have to watch out for, BUT BUT BUT, INHO, I cant think that this is enforceable as there was no * to match it up to at the end of the page. They rely on the fact that you CALL them and then discuss it, then it makes sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My advice is:

 

1) MAC OR WINDOWS - CONFIRM BEFORE YOU GET IT - Google is you friend!

 

2) MAC OR WINDOWS: ALWAYS READ COOKY POLICY! SOmetimes they encroach (usually by accident) on your personal data from the original company) - so DELETE COOKIES

3) Don't give ANYONE access to your MAc THIS INCLUDES:

iPhones, iPads and iMacs.

To-date they dall collaborate and share documents,...

 

I hope this helps from a mac user perspective. From here I can only deal with scemarios n whatever

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats Q.I. I'll watch for that next time I'm browsing. Crazy ... It seems reasonable if you connect to a server that YOUR computer identifies itself, but it can't be reasonable that the server collects information you don't wish to divulge.... let alone a completely different server. I thought that was part and parcel with the new cookie law. Thanks for the info

Link to post
Share on other sites

Usually it seems 'innocent'. Cookies can hold quite a bit of information, sucha s your browsing history or your search patters.

 

have you seen on FaceBook that whenyou log on that if any advertising flashes up on the sidebars, its usually in relation to what you've searched for or what kind of site you've been to?

 

On another note, I've thought, if it is a Trojan or AdWare, then you should give your computer an enema (as to put it) lol

 

There's loads of cleansing programs out there. one i use with my clients and personally on windows machines is called "Spyware Seek and Destroy" or "Spyware S+D". I know it sounds like a childs game, but its very efficient and best of all, FREE!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looking at it myself, they fire up a port 113 connection which is called an IDENT connection.

 

Older computers/systems/servers used to have an IDENT server running whicvh gave some information away. Just ignore it, it's nothing interesting

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...