Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • 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.
  • 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

Problems with a Conservatory


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3941 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 husband and I purchased our house 2 years ago.

 

There is a large conservatory on the back on the property which we fell for.

 

We we moved in, there appeared to be a lot of damp and mould, particularly in the corners.

 

We treated this with mould killer.

 

There is also one part of the garden which is always damp; we dont know if there any problems during the construction of the conservatory as the vendor failed to state anything.

 

We are concerned upon re-reading our survey, that it states that our solicitors should question about the construction of the conservatory as it appears to have been built over the drain.

 

There is also no access point to the drain, and nor is there any access to the soil pipe going from the drain into the bathroom, so i.e. if the toilet gets blocked or the kitchen sink gets blocked there is no way of unblocking!!

 

Surely, our solicitors should have picked this up; they didnt write to the company or ask the vendor about the construction of the conservatory.

 

Does this mean our solicitor was negligent and if so, what can we do?

 

Also the vendor failed to declare there was a mobile mechanic who lives 3 doors away, he is forever doing up cars and vehicles on the side of the road causing chaos; we do we stand on this issue.

 

Any help, please thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Did you specifically ask the solicitor to read through the survey?

 

I'm not certain about the vendor having to let you know about the mobile mechanic. I would think this is a situation for the local council to sort out if he is essentially running a business from a residential street. Have you complained to them about this yet?

 

DD

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is very large it may have required planning permission, and you'll be able to find out about this from the local council. It should also give the name of the architect (if there was one) who designed it. There are questions about extensions and buildings on the Questions to Seller or Vendor. Is there anything there at all?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently all they got was retrospective consent from the Council, it was built with no planning and its about 13 foot longby around 8 foot wide.

 

I will certainly get someone out to see if there is any underground pipe damage; that might certainly count for a certain part of the garden always being damp.

 

I am seeking legal advice about the vendor not disclosing the mobile mechanic, the council were informed of this and they wrote to him, but they have failed to spot check him because he is still using the street as his garage. Apparently he is breaking Clean Neighbourhood Act 2005 section 4.

 

I will ask my local councillor to get involved. Yesterday he was doing work on a taxi right on the road, and he's got a further 2 vehicles waiting to be having work done to them.

 

The vendor failed to mention regarding any problems with construction of the conservatory; there was nothing said on the Buyer's and Seller's form.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a nightmare.

 

As well as calling the Councillor I would ring the Council every day the mobile mechanic is working. If it's the Clean Neighbourhood Act I would think that would the Environmental Health team, and they can send an Enforcement Officer. Why should you live next to a garage?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

At the begining of this year, an incident occurred by a drunk driver smashing my husband's car into the front bay window.

 

We had to ask our building's insurance to cover the damage, which was agreed.

 

It has since come to light that the builder purchased a window without a FENSA certificate.

 

We are now in the process of selling the house, and we dont know what to do about this.

 

Do we have to apply for retrospective planning for the new bay window!!??

 

Very confused and hope this does not loose us a sale.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You dont need planning permission for something that already existed. The FENSA cert is basically an insurance contract taken out by the installer and is only good as long as they are in business so that is a matter of pot luck at best. the same applies to your builders who dont use the system. It will not affect your house sale unless your purchasers are particularly anally retentive characters and in that case they would be concerned about the length of the grass in the lawn, next doors fence, the cooker and light switches etc etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In a similar situation I managed to contact the supplier of the windows and they provided a certificate, but my builders had replaced all the windows and doors in the whole house.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You wont lose the sale, what you need to do is for your solicitor to offer to the purchaser's solicitors insurance against a lack of a FENSA certificate which your solicitor will obtain for you. It is most likely they will accept this. It is not too much, but obviously depends on how much you are selling for. If your sale price is not too high it could be in the region of £50/£60 but again it could be less or more. This is something which you will have to fork out. Your solicitor will be able to advise you on this

Link to post
Share on other sites

All window replacement comes under building control and have to comply with heat and power regs to save heating lose.

Normally installers are suitably qualified and can self certify that they comply with the regs, with a cert for the replacement window.

If not you need to apply to building reg dept of council to get it checked and they will issue a certificate of compliance.

However in the op case, if the purchaser does not ask for certs you should be ok.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why didnt you claim against the driver of the vehicle's insurance? I would also take the matter of indemnity up with your own insurer as well since they are party to this-dis they arrange the builders visit or just refund what you paid out without question?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why didnt you claim against the driver of the vehicle's insurance? I would also take the matter of indemnity up with your own insurer as well since they are party to this-dis they arrange the builders visit or just refund what you paid out without question?

 

 

The police claim it was a drunk driver who did the damage to the front bay window; they claim they dont know who did it yet we are havigb problems with a mobile mechanic who lives 3 doors away!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was your car shunted into the window by another vehicle or was it taken or driven without consent? If the former then there would have been evidence as to what the offending vehicle was and probably who owned it.

 

Well, my husband woke up and saw the car and saw it being used to ram our car through the window.

 

He gave a description of the car to the police, and we gave a piece of the rear light from the other car to the police who did f**k all to trace the vehicle concerned.

 

Police are now claiming it was a drunk driver because they cant be bothered for a full investigation, considering it was nearly £10K worth of criminal damage!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...