Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Is the letter headed Letter of Claim/before Claim or similar? If not, it sounds like more of the threatogram chain. If you're not sure, post up an anonymised copy of the letter and we'll check. HB
    • So guess what, we have received a final demand letter for £100. It states if payment is not made by 11/06 they will have no option but to forward the case to their litigation dept with a view to commence County Court Proceedings. So just wondering if anyone has any advice. Do we ignore this? or do we need to take action? Thanks 
    • hi dx, thanks for helping just re-reading everything this morning and I must have missed this one from uncle in his thread "What you should not do, is not contact the Banks and simply default on payments. "  are you in disagreement with this based on your last sentence?
    • Thanks for the reply and clarification, that might just explain why in my case contact has pretty much ceased. Though with such companies it doesn't mean they won't ever threaten to return to court as a tool to force one's hand if they feel they are not self informed on their chances etc.  But concerning how last year they tried to use the CCJ to get a charging order and the court granted an intirum order on our mortgage using the CCJ that would have been a good 2-3 months beyond the 6 years, should the court not have checked the age of the CCJ in the first case or would they always grant an interim order simply off the back of a CCJ being produced without even checking the age of it?.  Had I not defended that action at the time they may well have got a default using a CCJ older than 6 years which could be a concern going forwards. At the time when I contacted the court to question the paperwork for a final order application the clerk suggested people don't get informed when companies apply for interim charging orders, they are automatic if a claimant has a CCJ and people only get contacted once a date for a final order application goes through. kind of begs the question if such companies can continue a seemingly backdoor method to attempt default action if un-defended if the initial application doesn't need to check the age of a CCJ?.
    • Hello!  Wondering if someone can help with this.  I suspect not but worth a go.  I appreciate the "contract is with the seller" line, which is what Evri has fed me but wanted to see if someone with experience in these things could suggest anything else I could do here.  I appreciate there are many topics about lost parcels - My parcels weren't lost, until the driver walked up to my door with them and then decided to make them lost/stolen... I'll summarise what has happened.  Wednesday of last week - Evri delivery driver stole / walked off with 3 of my parcels.  -  Arrived outside my properly, took photos (3 separate photos as its 3 separate deliveries) of the tops of the parcels (pointlessly zoomed in on just the labels, couldn't see anything else, other than a small piece of the pavement and a little weed, which doubly confirms it was outside my door as I can see the same plant), marked the order as delivered and walked off with them.  He's marked on the Evri GPS marked that he was outside.   -  3 different deliveries, from the same company (same boxes etc.), but 3 separate tracking numbers. -  Went through the Evri bot which opened a case on each tracking number.  I then phoned them and left a voicemail explaining what had happened. -  24 hours later had a canned response asking me if the packages had turned up and to check around etc..  I responded explaining again what happened and that they've definitely been taken. -  4 days later,  this morning, I get a response telling me to ask the merchant to refund me. I've responded to this message with a long email, repeating what I said, that I believe the driver has stolen these packages and that he took those suspicious top down shots of the packages, marked them as delivered without ringing or knocking etc.  I've said that I expect them to investigate further, but I gather they won't. In my several messages to them initially and later, I told them I don't care about a refund and wanted the parcels.  They contain some sentimental stuff, nothing of high monetary value, hence me going to this trouble.  I only paid £25 for the contents. I did contact the merchant when this first happened and they asked me to wait a few days.  They ended up refunding me despite me asking them not to and that I wanted them to escalate it with Evri because this appears to be a case of theft.  They didn't seem bothered - Refunded me and told me to go back to Evri and escalate it with them? So - Is there any way to compel Evri to conduct a proper investigation with this driver?  Search for my parcels? I have quite a lot of deliveries handled by Evri (not out of choice) - They used to have a fantastic chap and I rarely had any issues.  He has been replaced by a new guy and I believe the route is handled by this same guy who I believe has taken my packages.  Naturally, I fear this is going to happen again in the future if no investigation occurs. Appreciate any assistance - Thanks for reading. Al.  
  • 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

Yellow Box Junction PCN - Video proof is here


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3951 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

Hi everyone,

 

Its been a while since I had PCN, but I think July month is not so good for me, I had a Fixed penalty from police on sunday for stoping on a laybay near heathrow and today in post from westminister council for yellow box junction.

 

I won't say alot about yellow box ticket bcoz its my first and I have no clue how to deal with it.

 

So I am just posting the video.

 

 

 

 

Do you pros think I have any chance to challange this?

 

Berkely Street is a side street and I was emerging onto picadilly which is a main street.

 

Please ADMIN let me know if its not right to post video here.

Edited by innocent_man
Link to post
Share on other sites

Video is fine if you don't mind your reg plate being seen.

 

I believe box junctions say 'do not enter box unless exit is clear' so on that basis, you have no challenge.

 

If something further up had stopped them moving, you would have been blocking any further movement of traffic.

 

Mind you, going by the speed with which the camera zoomed in on your plate, they were sitting there waiting for this.

 

Also, as you didn't impede anything and were only stopped for seconds, I think you should appeal anyway.

 

See, this says to me that this just for making money, did you see these threads ?

 

http://consumeractiongroup.co.uk

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2373711/Barnet-Council-parking-permits-price-hike-ruled-illegal-stealth-tax.html

 

The second one especially shows (and the courts says so) that it is just for profit.

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for quick reply. I will read the links now.

 

about the number plate thing, I blv people who come to this site are not to do plate scaming or cloning. they are also people like me who have been biten by the local authorities. So i guess its ok.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Link dosn't work for me.

 

Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Link dosn't work for me.

 

Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

have a look now

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Conniff I'm afraid. They will say you didn't leave sufficient space between you and the silver car in front which appears to be slowing down before you entered the box.

 

Please Note

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree there looks little room for appeal against that PCN as it seems clear that you could not proceed completely through the box before you entered it. The only thing in that video that surprises me is that the operator didn't also zoom in on the silver car who also failed to judge correctly that they could clear the box.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The box looks non compliant its too big and should be to the corners of Berkeley st and not several meters before the corner on the approach up Piccadily.

 

One can argue that, on this junction vehicle turn right also from berkeley street to piccadily. So they cover the whole right hand turning too. As you can see here on street view.

 

Street View Link

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just joined this thread as I too have been given a penalty notice at the same Box Junction, Berkley Street into Piccadilly. I can't believe that the local authority is allowed to get away with this.

 

I happen to work very near to both this junction and the Arlington Street intersection into Piccadilly and both have exactly the same issue. Throughout most of the day, the traffic volume along Piccadilly is so severe that on nearly every change of lights at these junctions it is almost impossible to turn left out of Berkeley Street or right out of Arlington Street without stopping in the box junction.

 

If you follow the letter of the law, you simply wouldn't be able to make the manoeuvre. needless to say, you would also have a line of infuriated motorists backing up behind you. The traffic lights and the flow along Piccadilly mean that just about every change of lights, the cameras will focus in on one or more vehicles and issue penalty notices. They must know that it is impossible for motorists to make the turn into Piccadilly, yet they still issue the fines. There must be some recourse surely???

 

Anyone tried a FOI request to determine how many motorists are fined each day at this junction? I was so annoyed, that I went and photographed 8 changes of lights yesterday just to prove my point. See

 

Box junction nightmare, penalty notice in the post! and Box junction nightmare, penalty notice in the post!

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course they know it's impossible, they obviously studied the junction and decided this was the setup that would make them the most money.

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites

The car in front appears to be a relatuively new Jaguar, so I'm sure they don't just pick on expensive cars. I am not sure about the link to allowed appeals as this seems to focus on the wording of the law, points which i'm sure would be clear and well knownon a forum such as this.

 

The car in front of the jag had stopped as you commenced the manouvre so it should of been clear you wouldn't be able to clear the junction, the jag almost did so may have been let off.

 

I suggest following advice as to checking legality of junction and/or paying

Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, Picadilly does not exist as it is written on the graphics generated name on the footage, it's Piccadilly. There is no Picadilly and Berkeley Street junction in the UK. Check the PCN to see if the primates have made the same error.

 

The junction shown goes from two lanes into three lanes on turning left, and so there should really have been some volume spare for everybody entering to complete. You could have been attempting to exit from lane two and enter lane two or three on Piccadilly, the car in front of you had already committed to lane three, but did not clear the yellow box exit completely, preventing you from turning into lane three, but more importantly lane two, where there appears to - just about - be a clear car's length.

 

You could also appeal on the moving image not showing the full junction at the time you commenced into the yellow box, as anything could have been happening elsewhere in the box (broken manhole, pedestrian losing control of a dog/child, or aliens landing at the start of an invasion). Unless they can give you unedited/raw footage showing everything from all positions (which may involve a different viewing angle) then you should take it further.

 

Dont forget the cameras are put in specific positions that cloud the true dimensions of a junction, the vehicles movement and the intentions of the driver, they are there not to ensure full clarity or enhance traffic flow, but to raise revenue for the council.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
First off, Picadilly does not exist as it is written on the graphics generated name on the footage, it's Piccadilly. There is no Picadilly and Berkeley Street junction in the UK. Check the PCN to see if the primates have made the same error.

 

The junction shown goes from two lanes into three lanes on turning left, and so there should really have been some volume spare for everybody entering to complete. You could have been attempting to exit from lane two and enter lane two or three on Piccadilly, the car in front of you had already committed to lane three, but did not clear the yellow box exit completely, preventing you from turning into lane three, but more importantly lane two, where there appears to - just about - be a clear car's length.

 

You could also appeal on the moving image not showing the full junction at the time you commenced into the yellow box, as anything could have been happening elsewhere in the box (broken manhole, pedestrian losing control of a dog/child, or aliens landing at the start of an invasion). Unless they can give you unedited/raw footage showing everything from all positions (which may involve a different viewing angle) then you should take it further.

 

Dont forget the cameras are put in specific positions that cloud the true dimensions of a junction, the vehicles movement and the intentions of the driver, they are there not to ensure full clarity or enhance traffic flow, but to raise revenue for the council.

 

sorry for late reply, was away for week.

thanks for reply. The word Piccadilly is written on the PCN so we cant argue on that.

 

my grace period of £65 is over anyway, so I will go ahead at least until adjudicator reject my appeal. I have 100% success record with adjudicator until with the help of you guys. So let see.

 

any advice writting a letter might help?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...