Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I hope Lord Frost is OK. Islamists and the woke Left are uniting to topple the West ARCHIVE.PH archived 18 Apr 2024 19:12:37 UTC  
    • Ok you are in the clear. The PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 for two reasons. The first is that in Section 9 [2][e]  says the PCN must "state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper— (i)to pay the unpaid parking charges ". It does not say that even though it continues correctly with blurb about the driver. The other fault is that there is no parking period mentioned. Their ANPR cameras do show your arrival and departure times but as that at the very least includes driving from the entrance to the parking space then later leaving the parking space and driving to the exit. It also doesn't allow for finding a parking spot: manoeuvering into it avoiding parking on the lines: possibly having to stop to allow pedestrians/other cars to pass in front of you; returning the trolley after finishing shopping; loading children disabled people in and out of the car, etc etc.  All of that could easily add five, ten or even 15 minutes to your time which the ANPR cameras cannot take into account. So even if it was only two hours free time you could  still have been within the  time since there is a MINIMUM of 15 minutes Grace period when you leave the car park. However as they cannot even manage to get their PCN to comply with the Act you as keeper cannot be pursued. Only the driver is now liable and they do not know who was driving as you have not appealed and perhaps unwittingly given away who was driving. So you do not owe them a penny. No need to appeal. Let them waste their money pursuing you . 
    • If Labour are elected I hope they go after everyone who made huge amounts of money out of this, by loading the company with debt. The sad thing is that some pension schemes, including the universities one, USS, will lose money along with customers.
    • What's the reason for not wanting a smart meter? Personally I'm saving a pile on a tariff only available with one. Today electricity is 17.17p/kWh. If the meter is truly past its certification date the supplier is obliged to replace it. If you refuse to allow this then eventually they'll get warrant and do so by force. Certified life varies between models and generations, some only 10 or 15 years, some older types as long as 40 years or maybe even more. Your meter should have its certified start date marked somewhere so if you doubt the supplier you can look up the certified life and cross check.
    • No I'm not. Even if I was then comments on this forum wouldn't constitute legal advice in the formal sense. Now you've engaged a lawyer directly can I just make couple of final suggestions? Firstly make sure he is fully aware of the facts. And don't mix and match by taking his advice on one aspect while ploughing your own furrow on others.  Let us know how you get on now you have a solicitor acting for you.
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Phil and Alison v The Co-op ***WON***


phatram
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5857 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

I agree phatram, but if the contractual interest was part of your claim and they've paid a lesser amount, then you just continue your claim for the balance still outstanding, you wouldn't need to start a new claim for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 214
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Thats what we are doing.

We have though been sent more statements from before oct2000 and yet more info on manual intervention, all of which they denied having on numerous occasions.Because of this we will be making a 2nd claim using this info.

We believe we can use Sect 32(b) concealment to do this and if need be will claim back even further by estimate,(if only to test the waters) as they have ripped us off for thousands since 1984.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This has just arrived.

 

The defendant filed an acknowledgement of service on 31 jan 2007

they have 28 days from date etc etc .

Why don't they just pay up and stop wasting more money ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

hi again phatram, ive got business statements going back to 1996 from the coopperative bank, they charged me £30 for an unpaid item,also £15 for the letter they sent to me informing me they were not paying the item so £45 charge. They also charged me £10 to £15 overdraft advice which is when I called them and spoke to someone complaining about the charges. They charged me n total £1907 until they closed my account in 2000. Ive written to them requesting they refund me these charges and they refused statin that they are only required to go back 6 years. I then wrote again quoting s(32) of the limitation act and again requested a full refund, that was about a month ago and they just ignored my letter, so im in the process of sending them a schedule of the charges with another LBA but after that Im not sure how to calculate the interest, wether its to date or just to 2000 when the account was closed so will have to have a good read through the FAQs:???:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree with 'Groovycaz' - the Latent Damages Act, 1986, inserted sections 14(A) & 14(B) into the Limitations Act, 1980. But, more importantly, inserted Section 32 - the normal section here would be to quote Sec 32(1)(b) - there's load of stuff to be found on this section!!

 

I've just written to Co-op going back to 1999. The reason - 1999 to 2005 was the last 6 year period that I held my account. I could go back further, but this is MY 'gesture of goodwill' (basically, banks etc always use this tactic before going to court to be seen to be 'fair' - I've played them at their own game). It's important to be fair as well and not greedy - in my opinion.

The OFT and Financial Ombudsman are always releasing new guidelines - and the banks do not want to be the first test case at court to have a judgement ordered against them.

 

Stick by your guns and keep it fair.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

great news

well done

 

co-op are beginning to roll over.

 

how far back did the claim go in the end

past 6 yrs limit?

 

dx100uk;)

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

god this group is bzy today

i'll try a quick reply then!

 

ok well i'm doing mine going back to mar 82

im up to 1993 & already over £1500 charges

 

lets keep going

 

well done again

 

dx100uk

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not sure how to calculate the interest, wether its to date or just to 2000 when the account was closed so will have to have a good read through the FAQs:???:

 

it will be to the date your claim goes in, you still did not have the money!

 

 

dx100uk:smile:

  • Haha 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

HIya again ,well im ready for the unco-operative bank, just in the process of doing my spreadsheet going back 10 years and the interest is scary, they are now ignoring all the letters ive sent them and im sure they will fight me all the way on this one but giving it a go, Soooo were off, hope ive got my smiley face showing soon, I,l be posting my progress on this forum and on the co-operative business forum:p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone been "sold" a loan by the Coop to cover unlawful charges (overdraft) and then been successful in getting their money back?

If so, would you please post links to threads.

Many thanks

Mr P

Link to post
Share on other sites

phatram,

 

pm'd you earlier after your reply to mine but I just wanted to check you got it.

 

My reason for doing so is just to check that you have read Glenn vs Co-Op as if you're having trouble with them it is THE post to read.

 

Not sure how to post links but if you haven't seen it let me know and I can somehow direct you!!

 

I spoke to Jackie at Co-Op today chasing up my pre 6 year statements and she said she had from Feb 2000 (have from April 01) but not from March 99 when the account started. My original SAR was dated Dec 2006 so will prob accept this as even I'd be surprised if I'd used up their available credit limit within 9 months and was incurring OD fees - late payment though may be a poss knowing me!!

 

Let me know if you've seen Glenns thread or not.

 

richwhit

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hello was just following this thread about the 6 year rule,, not sure about the CO OP but i dont think the banks really know what there doing. I claimed from the Halifax and bearing in mind its 2007 now, i claimed from January 1998 and they paid up... So i personally dont think there is no harm in trying, they can only say to you that you can only have info on the 6 years of cough up like halifax did..

Link to post
Share on other sites

sent my spreadsheet off to the uncooperative last week stating that if they dont repay me within 48 hrs im starting proceedings against them ..again, of course they ignored that letter also, just found some excellent info from ..bong v HSBC and won, will be borrowing some of her POC, she went back to 1993,so spending tomorrow going over her full claim and their defence, want to file no later than tues so the decoratings going to have to wait till next weekend...GC:cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...