Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • A bit of sadly all to rare promising news   ‘Smart’ antibiotic spares the microbiome An antibiotic called lolamicin targets disease-causing Gram-negative bacteria without disturbing healthy gut bacteria. Broad-spectrum antibiotics against these pathogens wreak havoc on the gut microbiome and can allow potentially deadly Clostridioides difficile to take over. Mice infected with antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria survived after being given lolamicin, whereas almost 90% of those that didn’t receive the drug died within three days. Lolamicin did not seem to disrupt the gut microbiome and spared mice from C. difficile infections. Nature | 4 min read Reference: Nature paper
    • Yes that's right-Parking Eye are usually very good at getting their PCNs compliant with the Act. So both being out of time means that PE cannot transfer the liability for payment from the driver to the keeper. So only the driver is liable to pay the PCN not the keeper. I understand from you that at least one of the keepers was not driving at the time which puts them in the clear providing PE are not told who was actually driving on that day. However even if with the other car the keeper and the driver were the same person the driver can still successfully argue that they are not liable to pay. The arguments are that there  appears to be no entrance sign advising that the car park is now private. That no signs were there advising that this was a new car park as it was at that time. That the signs are prohibitory so even if PE do have a contract with the landowner, the contract cannot extend to the motorist as there is no  offer other than no parking for those without a permit. You cannot form a contract with motorists trying to park if you are not allowing them to park there because they do not have a permit.  In those circumstance [parking without a permit ] you may be considered to be trespassing but only the landowner can sue for that not PE. And its not worth the landowner suing because the cost of suing would probably not outweigh the fine for trespassing.   PS  I sent you a private message-not about your case.    
    • Please accept my apologies for the delayed update, but i have been trawling through emails for supporting evidence, you see we are in the consultation phase and there will be three meetings during the process. So as i have said  my role is at risk due to the scoring and mine being low. As explained i never received my report as my line manager left during December and i was on leave. So i was not afforded any meeting, i received no feedback at all, so how am i meant to know any areas to improve or to attain a higher grade. So with this in mind i gathered my supporting evidence, i found the email from my then line manager and the objectives that he set out and we agreed.   I then supplied 20 emails that  showed that not only did i reach the targets, i smashed them, highlighting areas that i had saved the company a considerable amount of money, idented issues  implemented process and solutions with ongoing support. All emails are verified and prove that i should have received the highest possible grade going by their criteria. I also included the email from HR when i challenged  the score and they replied with " the outgoing manager supplied thorough feedback to the incoming interim manager who should have provided this (this was never received, and report i received was blank with just a score. Highlighted was the email from HR stating " a two is not a concerning grade"  well clearly it is as less than a month later it is what was used to decide i was at risk. I have supplied this information to the line manager and the external HR rep that was on the call as i have 48 hours to supply this. Had i had a proper and fair review like everyone else had then i would have been able to provide this evidence when he issued the score, he could not argue with the sheer volume of evidence that i had. This proves what was said to me when i took this position, " there was some politics in me getting the role, their line manager had promised the role to one of his guys, they cant really do anything but watch your back" He should not have promised this anyway as two interviews were required in the process *which i sat) so i earned the right to the role. This was because the three of them knew there was a lot that would be uncovered and they wanted it covering, i started to see this after two weeks, had i not said anything then it would have looked as though i was incompetent or stupid. I did try to work with them on this to remedy but sadly they went the other rout instead.    
    • He'll be asking Truss for advice and help next ... or maybe go straight to a lettuce He already asked Swella How do you survive all those breaches of ministerial code etc She is rumored to have replied - dunno - if the positions were reversed, I'd have sacked me in without a seconds thought
  • 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

PCN with wrong road name


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4027 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

Hello friends,

 

I have received a PCN for waiting on double yellow lines in a London council road. The PCN include the picture of the car parked on yellow line and also mention that the alleged contravention is recorded by the camera.

 

I have attached the copy of PCN. The road name in PCN is incorrect, As you can see in the PCN, the road stated is Northolt Road, but the car was at St John's Road at the same time and that's the road in the picture also.

 

So will it help if I challenge the PCN on the basis that alleged contravention did not occur. The notice says if representation is unsuccessful, will have to pay full fee which is £110. The council will have the video which show my car is waiting on yellow lines eventhough the road name is not correct.

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, challenge the PCN on the basis that alleged contravention did not occur. You were parked in St Johns Road, not Northolt Road as alleged on the PCN, as evidenced by their own video..

 

The council will have the video which show my car is waiting on yellow lines eventhough the road name is not correct.
Doesn't matter, it's what's alleged on the PCN that counts. They cannot re-issue a corrected PCN for the same contravention.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Michael for the quick reply.

 

Thats what I thought. But I needed some assurances that I was right to challenge it.

 

I will go ahead and challenge it and update back with result.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I have appealed and now received the Notice of Rejection letter from council. Please see attached.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]43944[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]43945[/ATTACH]

 

They neither accept my claim nor mention anything about the wrong road name in the PCN. They have now just rejected on the basis of contravetion captured on the CCTV.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They neither accept my claim nor mention anything about the wrong road name in the PCN.

 

From what I can see it acknowledges that you claimed the location was wrong, but says that you provided no evidence.You don't really need to - the onus is on them in considering your appeal, to look into the issue.

 

Out of curiosity - can you post up your appeal letter?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange. Looking back at the first image, it looks like it was taken from an elevated position, so I would think a fixed camera. I wonder how they could have got the name of the location wrong? I would have thought that this info was not able to be altered by them.

 

Anyhow, I think if you are right you should fight on. Have you viewed the footage? It would be a great help if there was some image or footage available which would enable you to prove where the camera was - for example a shop front, which would pin the location down.

 

Do you know if anything like this is available?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't seen the video footage. But I have seen other images from the council website. And from that it is clear that the road is St John's road and is next to the council library building. The address of the library in the council website also says that the road is St. John's road.

 

So I understand now I have to appeal to the independent adjudicator. What should I say on the details of the appeal. Also what evidences can I give to prove that it is an invalid PCN?

 

If I pay the PCN now and then appeal. will the appeal be considered?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What should I say on the details of the appea

Simply that the contravention did not occur. You were not parked in Northolt Rd and that the councils photos are of St John's Rd

 

Also what evidences can I give to prove that it is an invalid pcnlink3.gif?

You could include photos from St Johns Road that show the council's photos in context

 

If I pay the PCN now and then appeal. will the appeal be considered?

No if you pay, it will be deemed that you accept the contravention occurred and forgo your right to appeal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should defintely fight this - you will win. What I would do is this:

 

Get copies of the council's images. If you can find one with the car in view, and something concrete to prove the location, then perfect. It could be someone's garden gate, a shop front, even the positioning of a couple of manhole covers - anything like that hich pins down the location. Then go to Google Maps and grab an image from there showing the same detail, then a long-shot so it can be established that both - all - photos were taken in Northolt Road.

 

It's just a case of proving it so the adjudicator can't logically disagree with you.

 

In addition to applying for a hearing with the adjudicator, I would also submit the images to the council, along with a polite letter stating that you can categorically prove that the PCN is incorrect, and have no choice but to go through adjudication. Show them the images and suggest that they cannot possibly win, and that you would rather save their time and the taxpayer's money, by them agreeing to cancel the case now, since your evidence is conclusive.

 

You'll win either way, in my view - but you just might get a quicker result if you do both.

 

By the way, you can claim expenses if the adjudicator thinks the council has acted vexatiously. I think that if you have shown the council conclusive proof, and they still make you go to the hearing, you may well be awarded costs. Moreover they didn't consider your representation fully, which they should have done by examining their own images and determining whether your appeal carried any weight. They failed to investigate, so costs are cetrainly worth looking into.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...