Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
    • Please provide advice on the following situation: I rented out my property to four students for 16 months until March 2024. Initially, the property was in very good condition, but now it needs extensive renovation. This includes redoing the bathroom, replacing the kitchen, removing wallpaper, and redecorating due to significant mould growth. The tenants also left their furniture on the grass, which is owned by the local authority. As a landlord, I've met all legal requirements. It seems the damage was caused by poor ventilation—windows were always closed, and heating wasn't used. There was also a bathroom leak fixed by reapplying silicone. I tried to claim insurance, but it was denied, citing tenant behaviour as the cause by looking at the photos, which isn't covered. The deposit barely covers the repair costs, or else I'll have to pursue money claims, which I've never done before and am unsure about its legal complications or costs. Any thoughts on this?
  • 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
      • 160 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

Neightbour Smashed Tailight - Denies Responsibility


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3770 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

We park on the road outside our house, as we have no driveway. The neighbour across the road has a drive, and has a recently upgraded his car to a giant 4x4 on motability. When we're both parked outside, he has been having some difficulty getting into his drive, but usually manages it after a few minutes.

 

The other morning, we found that my OH's car's tail light has been smashed, at the right height for the bumper of the 4x4 to have hit it, but all debris had been cleared away.

 

Another set of neighbours says that they saw him attempting to enter his drive, and thought that they saw him bump the OH's car.

 

We've asked him if he did it, but he denies all responsibility.

 

We cannot discount the possibility that he didn't cause the damage, but it seems likely that he did. We've had to repair the car at our cost.

 

I'm guessing this comes down to honesty and decency, or lack thereof (i.e. hard luck), but does anyone think we have any recourse to leverage him? A CC Claim would likely be thrown out by a judge for lack of evidence.

 

Chalk it up to experience and leave the issue?

Link to post
Share on other sites

We park on the road outside our house, as we have no driveway. The neighbour across the road has a drive, and has a recently upgraded his car to a giant 4x4 on motability. When we're both parked outside, he has been having some difficulty getting into his drive, but usually manages it after a few minutes.

 

The other morning, we found that my OH's car's tail light has been smashed, at the right height for the bumper of the 4x4 to have hit it, but all debris had been cleared away.

 

Another set of neighbours says that they saw him attempting to enter his drive, and thought that they saw him bump the OH's car.

 

We've asked him if he did it, but he denies all responsibility.

 

We cannot discount the possibility that he didn't cause the damage, but it seems likely that he did. We've had to repair the car at our cost.

 

I'm guessing this comes down to honesty and decency, or lack thereof (i.e. hard luck), but does anyone think we have any recourse to leverage him? A CC Claim would likely be thrown out by a judge for lack of evidence.

 

Chalk it up to experience and leave the issue?

 

All you can do is leave it there is no positive proof the neighbour is responsible.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are not allowed to film the public highway without permission from the ICO. You may film your own property and if the field of view extends as far as the road that is OK but that is locking the stable door after the horse has bolted. in this cas i agree with the Brig, you have no proof so little to be gained from trying to take it further as insurer or police wont want to spend time reaching the same conclusion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the issue of CCTV I have 2 cameras covering my garden, driveway and the road in front of my house. You can have CCTV covering a road if it is for the protection of your property.

 

Here is what the ICO say about it.

 

http://www.ico.org.uk/Global/faqs/cctv

:cool::cool: Blondmusic :cool::cool:
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone can film in a public place.

 

However, when it comes to making any footage public (i.e. putting it out in a public domain or broadcast), any person may not give his/her consent for any footage they are in to be broadcast if their images are identifiable.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you park directly opposite his driveway that's not very neighbourly. My opposite neighbour did that to me the other day - I put a small note n his windscreen saying "I would not recommend parking here as my other car is a 'Y' registration Kia Rio, and is driven by a learner who may have problems getting the car out of the driveway" The offending vehicle was a '13 plate Vauxhall probably worth several times the value of the Kia Rio which was purchase for £1000! I don't think he will park there again, of course if he does I can always get my wife to move the car (she is the learner driver).

Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't have much option but to park opposite. Parking on the road is tight. We've always done it, and it was not problem before he upsized his car. If we were to park elsewhere, we'd have to find another road!

 

Add to this that he's had his son move in, who parks an estate outside his house, it doesn't make for an easy entry.

 

No further issues since, he's been avoiding us....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Parking disputes are common especially when roads are narrow and some people have driveways. My boyfriend can get his big estate car on and off my driveway without a problem even if my Neighbour from hell parks opposite. Ive just upgraded to a bigger car and can easily get on and off my driveway even though I live on a narrow street. I just take my time and keep watching what I am doing to make sure I don't hit anything.

 

Get some CCTV up just in case it happens again.

 

My neighbour once thought it would be nice to report me to the police saying I had wheelspun off my driveway, almost hit his car then raced off, turned my car around and raced out of the street. The local PCSO came round and proceeded to give me an earful until I showed him the CCTV of the day in question where I had no car!!

:cool::cool: Blondmusic :cool::cool:
Link to post
Share on other sites

Parking disputes are common especially when roads are narrow and some people have driveways. My boyfriend can get his big estate car on and off my driveway without a problem even if my Neighbour from hell parks opposite. Ive just upgraded to a bigger car and can easily get on and off my driveway even though I live on a narrow street. I just take my time and keep watching what I am doing to make sure I don't hit anything.

 

Get some CCTV up just in case it happens again.

 

My neighbour once thought it would be nice to report me to the police saying I had wheelspun off my driveway, almost hit his car then raced off, turned my car around and raced out of the street. The local PCSO came round and proceeded to give me an earful until I showed him the CCTV of the day in question where I had no car!!

 

I hope the PCSO then preceded to give your neighbor a earful for wasting police time

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope you reported the PCSO for wasting YOUR time, as they had no proof at all.

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

Which is one of the reasons to have CCTV

 

My neighbour once thought it would be nice to report me to the police saying I had wheelspun off my driveway, almost hit his car then raced off, turned my car around and raced out of the street. The local PCSO came round and proceeded to give me an earful until I showed him the CCTV of the day in question where I had no car!!
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yes i made a complaint in writing but all he got was a telling off and 'retraining'. Bloomin unreal. Neighbour has boxed me in, threatened me and has abused me in the street but police do nothing cos other neighbours stick up for him. He gets on the phone tells them a pack of lies and they are on my doorstep. All this because I parked in 'his' space.

 

To put the icing on the cake someone also called the police saying my 10 year old daughter (who is actually 13) was left in on her own. Police even said they knew it was a hoax but they have to investigate. I was at work that day and my daughters dad picked her up from school and took her back to his!!

Edited by Blondmusic
:cool::cool: Blondmusic :cool::cool:
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...