Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

PCN with wrong road name

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4043 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



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.



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.





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...