Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • You will probably get a couple more reminders followed by further demands fro unregulated debt collectors with even increasing amounts to pay. They are all designed to scare you into paying.  Don't. It's a scam site and they do not know who was driving and they know the keeper is not liable to pay the PCN. Also the shop was closed so they have no legitimate interest in keeping the car park clear. So to charge £100 is a penalty as there is no legitimate interest which means that the case would be thrown out if it went to Court.  Keep your money in your wallet and be prepared to ignore all their letters and threats. Doubtful they would go to Court since a lot more people would not pay when they heard  MET lost in Court. However they may just send you a Letter of Claim to test your resolve.  If yoy get one of those, come back to us and we will advise a snotty letter to send them.  You probably already have, but take a look through some of our past Met PCNs to see how they are doing.
    • Hello, been a while since I posted on here, really hoping for the same support an advice I received last time :-) Long, long story for us, but basically through bad choices, bad luck and bad advice ended up in an IVA in 2016. The accounts involved all defaulted, to be expected. In 2018, I got contacted by an 'independent advisor' advising me that I shouldn't be in an IVA, that it wasn't the solution for our circumstances and that they would guide us through the process of leaving the IVA and finding a better solution. I feel very stupid for taking this persons advice, and feel they prey on vulnerable people for their own financial gain (it ended with us paying our IVA monthly contribution to them)-long and short of it our IVA failed in 2018. At the same time the IVA failed we also had our shared ownership property voluntarily repossessed (to say this was an incredibly stressful time would be an understatement!) When we moved to our new (rented) property in August 2018, I was aware that creditors would start contacting us from the IVA failure. I got advice from another help website and started sending off SARs and CCAs request letters. I was advised not to bury my head and update our address etc and tackle each company as they came along. Initially there was quite a lot of correspondence, and I still get a daily missed call from PRA group (and the occasional letter from them), but not much else. However, yesterday i had a letter through from Lowell (and one from Capital One) advising that they had bought my debt and would like to speak with me regarding the account. There will be several.of these through our door i suspect, as we did have several accounts with Capital One. Capital One have written to us with regular statements over the last 5 years, and my last communication with them was to advise of of our new address (June 2019), I also note that all of these accounts received a small payment in Jan2019 (i'm assuming the funds from the failed IVA pot). Really sorry for the long long post, but just thought id give (some of) the background for context.... I guess my question at the moment is.....how do I respond to Lowell...do I wait for the inevitable other letters to arrive then deal with them all together or individually...? Do I send them a CCA?  Many thanks
    • hi all just got the reminder letter, I have attached it and also the 2nd side of the original 1st pcn (i just saw the edit above) Look forward to your advice Thanks   PCN final reminder.pdf pcn original side 2.pdf
    • The airline said it was offering to pay $10,000 to those who sustained minor injuries.View the full article
    • The Senate Finance Committee wants answers from BMW over its use of banned Chinese components by 21 June.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
      • 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

Are These Road Signs Illegal ?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3796 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

It was not a case of trying to look clever, it was a case of are there more than one infringements of the regulations occuring ? and then requesting advice about that; but because someone has a bit more knowledge than most on a subject it does not make them infallable, so why make sarky remarks such as "I didn't realise that you had done a survey of cctv cameras in the uk, or is the fact most are automated something else you have just made up?".

I do not just make scurrilous statements I quoted something I had read, although at the moment I am unable to find exactly where that statement come from.

Ref the TheBus Lane Enforcement Camera Handbook, which you state as my use of information being "mentioned in a handbook intended for those manufacturing cameras"

It is also "mentioned" in the Department of Transport's Provisional guidance on bus lane (includingtramway) enforcement in England outside London. November 2005 (revised February 2008).

5.11. Guidance on automatic bus lane enforcement systems is also given by the Home Office Scientific Development Branch (HOSDB) in their publications The Bus Lane Enforcement Camera Handbook – Provisional.

So it is not just some throw away publication as you seem to suggest, as for the Violation record, it is A record containing all the evidence of an offence produced by a bus lane enforcement camera, so maybe it does have some significance.

Anyway I have contacted to Council Parking Services who deal with these PCNs prior to the 14 days reduced "fine" deadline and outlined my concerns about the signage and also the day of the week situation on the PCN and requested that the PCN be revoked and advising them that I am prepoared to continue on to the official appeal hearing and if required onto PATAS, which they have advised me they have received and are now considering the points I have made and will be back in contact with me.

 

The camera used for your PCN was not automatic so none of your points are valid neither is Luton in London so threatening to go to PATAS will probably give them a good laugh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 137
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Just make sure that you know exactly what the legal requirements in your circumstances are, and are able to produce them.

 

 

This may help: www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/2756/contents/made

 

Thank you for that Raykay, I have already used that in my research so far and found it very helpful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Just to let everyone know that I have had my wife's Bus Lane PCN quashed.........Victory !!!

Thank you to all who have positively contributed and advised which all helped and encouraged me to appeal, and to those who gave negative opinions and so called advice "YOU WERE WRONG !!!!!!"

They have stated that "A contravention occured and that had been correctly issued under the Traffic Management Act 2004." However, because I had pointed out that there was not a "No Left Turn" sign in place when exiting the side roads, they were prepared to accept my representation and on "this occasion only" cancel the PCN and they advised me that a "No Left Turn" sign is in the process of being put in place. They then continued that "Although the sign is not currently in place, it has no relevence to the issue of our PCNs as all our signs that advise motorists of the bus lane are in compliance with regulation." and then finished with "To confirm this Notice has been cancelled on this occasion only as a gesture of good will."

 

Yeah Right !! Do they really think I believe that if they were in the right they would be "In the process" of putting a "No Left Turn" sign in place and that if their signs were in compliance with regulations the PCN would have been cancelled ?

I had also questioned some of the other signs with the fact that the signs showing were for "With Flow" Bus Lanes whereas this particular bus lane is registered as a "Contraflow" bus lane and therefore should have different signage..................none of this was addressed in the reply. I think you can draw your own conclussion from this.

 

Anyhow, as I said the PCN has been cancelled and I thank everyone who gave positive advice and opinions for their help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good news BUT strange explanation.

 

If they say that "A contravention occured and that had been correctly issued under the Traffic Management Act 2004." and "To confirm this Notice has been cancelled on this occasion only as a gesture of good willi", why are they going to the expense of putting a "No Left Turn" sign in place?

 

Just didn't want the risk of loosing at the adjudicator!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep has said all a long how many more had this happed to, its a way of making a good income, but now its been challenged they will have to put things rite.

 

Maybe a letter to you local rag would be in order? Maybe others in your position could do the same as you!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No doublt the 2 posters who kept badgering you to pay up will be along shortly to appologise!

 

I won't hold my breathe !

I think I may be sending a letter of thanks for cancelling the PCN and then reciprocating the "Gesture of Goodwill" by advising them to contact the Department for Transport and perhaps even the Home Office to question their belief in having compliant signs for this Bus Lane, because all of the signs and road markings are only compliant for a "With Flow" Bus Lane but NOT for a "Contraflow" Bus Lane which they have registered this Bus Lane as.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...