Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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
        • I agree
      • 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

Severn Bridge "Invoice" for paying wrong toll charge


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3909 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

Today I received an invoice from the company that operates the Severn Bridge. My vehicle, which I was not driving at the time, used the wrong lane paying £6.20 instead of £12.40. The "invoice" is for £119.20, less £80 "debt recovery fee" if paid within 7 days. The "invoice" is made up of:

 

Outstanding toll £6.20

DVLA Search fee £3.00

Admin Fee £30.00

Debt Recovery Fee £80.00

 

The company backs this up with reference to Section 14 of the Severn Bridges Act 1992.

 

Again, I was not the driver, but I know who was. Any advice/help gratefully received.

 

Section 14:

 

14 Payment regulations and offences.

 

(1)The Secretary of State may by regulations—

(a)designate places within the toll plaza areas at which tolls (other than tolls with respect to which a pre-payment has been made) are to be paid,

(b)make provision as to the persons by whom, and the manner in which, such tolls are to be paid,

©make provision for securing that vehicles in respect of which tolls are leviable do not use either of the bridges without payment of the tolls, and

(d)make provision for preventing a vehicle which, having used one of the bridges, has arrived at the place at which a toll is payable in respect of it from proceeding beyond that place without the toll having been paid.

 

(2)Regulations made under this section shall provide for a notice, specifying—

(a)the categories of vehicles in respect of which tolls are leviable,

(b)the amount of the tolls in respect of each category, and

©other provisions in accordance with which tolls are leviable,to be displayed at each place designated in accordance with subsection (1)(a) above.

 

(3)Regulations under this section may include provisions modifying the general provisions of the regulations in the case of vehicles in relation to which a pre-payment of tolls has been made.

 

(4)A person who without reasonable excuse—

(a)refuses or fails to pay a toll for which he is liable, or

(b)attempts to evade payment of such a toll,shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

 

(5)A person who contravenes or fails to comply with a provision of regulations under this section shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell them who the driver was. Or you will be liable for any costs.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect the Severn Bridge Tolls are much more well founded in law than the PPC car park joke invoices. At a cost of £39 currently (which appears to be made up of not unreasonable itemised costs) I think I would pay it at the "within 7 days" price and look to get it back from the driver.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have written telling them who the driver was.

Interesting - I'm not sure that you had / have any legal obligation to tell them who the driver was. It's also not clear (to me) that they have any legal basis on which to pursue the Registered Keeper or vehicle owner for any unpaid charges. The T&Cs that were quoted above appear to relate only to the driver of the vehicle for which the charge was not paid. IMHO this is NOT PPC or PoFA2012 territory, or Road Traffic Act / police enforcement terrirory therefore would appreciate some comments from lawyers on the legal aspects of this situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...