Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • Hi everyone, Apologies for bringing up the same topic regarding these individuals. I wish I had found this forum earlier, as I've seen very similar cases. However, I need your help in figuring out what to do next because we've involved our partners/resellers. I work as an IT Manager in a company outside of the UK. We acquired a license from a certified reseller (along with a support agreement) and also obtained training sessions from them. The issue arose when we needed to register two people for the training sessions, so we used an external laptop for the second user to keep up with the sessions for only a month. During this period, the laptop was solely used for the training sessions. After two weeks, my boss forwarded an email to me from Ms Vinces, stating that we are using illicit software from SolidWorks. Since this has never happened to me or anyone we know, I went into panic mode and had a meeting with her. During the meeting, we explained that we were using an external laptop solely for the training sessions and that the laptop had not been used within the company since her email. She informed us that for such cases, there are demos and special licenses (though our reseller did not mention these types of licenses when we made our initial purchase). She then mentioned that we had utilized products worth approximately €25k and presented us with two options: either pay the agreed value or acquire SolidWorks products. We expressed that the cost was too high, and our business couldn't support such expenses. I assured her that we would discuss the matter with the company board and get back to her. After the meeting, we contacted the company reseller from whom we purchased the license, explained the situation, and mentioned the use of an external laptop. They said they would speak to Maria and help mediate the situation. We hoped to significantly reduce the cost, perhaps to that of a 1-year professional license. Unfortunately, we were mistaken. The reseller mediated a value €2k less than what Maria had suggested (essentially, we would need to acquire two professional lifetime licenses and two years of support for a total of €23k). This amount is still beyond our means, but they insisted that the price was non-negotiable and wouldn't be reduced any further. The entire situation feels odd because she never provided us with addresses or other evidence (which I should have requested), and she's pressuring us to resolve the matter by the end of the month, with payment to be made through the reseller. This makes me feel as though the reseller is taking advantage of the situation to profit from it. Currently, we're trying to buy some time. We plan to meet with the reseller next week but are uncertain about how to proceed with them or whether we should respond to the mediator.
    • Thanks London  if I’ve read correctly the questionaire wants me to post his actual name on a public forum… is that correct.  I’ve only had a quick read so far
    • Plenty of success stories, also bear in mind not everyone updates the forum.  Overdale's want you to roll over and pay, without using your enshrined legal right to defend. make you wet yourself in fear that a solicitor will Take you to court, so you will pay up without question. Most people do just that,  but you are lucky that you have found this place and can help you put together a good defence. You should get reading on some other Capital One and Overdale's cases on the forum to get an idea of how it works.  
    • In both versions the three references to "your clients" near the end need to be changed to "you" or "your" as Alliance are not using solicitors, they have sent the LoC themselves. Personally I'd change "Dear ALLIANCE PARKING Litigation Dept" to "Dear Kev".  It would show you'd done your homework, looked up the company, and seen it's a pathetic one-man band rather than having any departments.  The PPCs love to pretend they have some official power and so you should be scared of them - showing you've sussed their sordid games and you're confident about fighting them undermines all this.  In fact that's the whole point of a snotty letter - to show you'd be big trouble for them if they did do court so better to drop you like a hot potato and go and pursue mugs who just give in instead. In the very, very, very, very unlikely case of Kev doing court, it'd be better that he didn't know in advance all the legal arguments you'd be using, so I'd heavily reduce the number of cards being played.
  • 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

SIP Parking Issued Court Papers - Help **Discontinued**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3798 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 have had a Notice of Proposed allocation to small claims and direction questionnaire, which I am about to send back, it says on it to file it with the court office and serve copies on all other parties, does that mean I have to send sip parking a copy of proposed allocation??? or is this meant for them?

 

 

The other thing is I forgot to say full defence to follow, will I still be able to do this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Usually it is automatically allocated to your local court unless you specify another one. At the moment there is nothing to file but you can send a copy to SIP to remind them that you are defending the summons. You may find that this will be the end of the matter for you as I would put money on them taking a gamble that you would be scared by the summons and pay up. Now they are rumbled they might not pay the allocation fee and drop the matter so save face and money. i hope that this is what happens as it will save you a lot of wasted time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aye, but early days and they are wrong with their procedures there as well. I still bet they are seeing the number of people who cough up when PE issues the summonses and reckon they want slice of that pie. At least PE follows the CoP's even if their claim for money is dubious at best.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you are completely right, received a letter today-

 

 

Please find attached a notice of discontinuance. Please the court have also been made aware of this on 16/12/2013. via post.

 

 

Kind Regards

 

 

SIP Car Parks Ltd

Legal Department

 

 

Very professional, especially the Kind regards, ummmm the notice is signed by Sarwar whose position is now case handler, I will check it online to make sure it is discontinued, they were pretty fast with the discontinuing only just got in my proposed allocation, they must have passed in the post. Thanks for your help ericsbrother.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done, but please do not let the DVLA or the BPA off lightly and follow up your complaints. The more complaints about these BPA members and the misuse of personal data the better. I have just had a pathetic response from the DVLA regarding my complaint and as such have fired off a follow up response to them demanding more information, rather than just accepting the BPAs excuse that the Parking Companys Agent "sent the correspondence in error", how pathetic is that.

If anyone had parked in the wrong place by mistake would the PPCs accept that as an excuse ?

 

Pete.

Link to post
Share on other sites

+1

 

In addition although you haven't been able to pursue your own claim there is no reason why you shouldn't continue to do so. A letter might just elicit a payment - after all the Notice of Discontinuance was pretty smartly sent out - something along these lines:

 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE SAVE AS TO COSTS

 

 

SIP Parking Ltd

Registered Office

 

Dear Sirs

 

Re: Whatever County Court, Yourselves -v- hushpuppy, Case Ref XZXZXZXZX

I refer to the Notice of Discontinuance dated issued by yourselves.

 

I hereby give notice that it is my intention to apply to the court for an order for costs in respect of the above matter and with regard to this draw your attention to the Civil Procedure Rules, specifically Part 44.2 5(a-c).

 

I will be my case that your allegations were ill-founded and that prior to instituting proceedings: you failed to examine or at all your records as to payments received; you failed to apply or at all the provisions of Schedule 4, Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 upon which you sought to rely; that you sought to enforce a debt which was not due and in any event is denied and further sought to enforce a charge which you knew or ought to have known was a penalty and in all events you intended to be regarded as a deterrent neither of which are permissible or enforceable at law. Furthermore, that in seeking to enforce the matter you failed to adhere or at all to the requirements of the pre-action protocols and in so doing prejudiced my ability to defend the matter.

 

Please find the attached schedule of costs I intend to seek to recover by way of an order of the court. My application will necessarily incur additional costs you will also be liable for and the more so if I have to enforce the order. However, you may feel that it is prudent to settle the matter promptly and I will be happy to receive your cheque for the total overleaf within the next 14 days. In the absence of payment within that time-scale I shall look to institute proceedings without further recourse to yourselves.

 

Yours faithfully

 

hushpuppy

Don't take the mickey with regard to your costs - a couple of hours of research and dealing with correspondence and some additionals like photocopying etc
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a great idea and I will do that, just had another letter off the cheeky monkeys -

 

 

This is official confirmation that the above PCN has been cancelled. No further correspondence will be sent regarding this Parking Charge Notice.

 

 

Yours sincerely (this time no more kind regards???)

 

 

SIP Car Parks Limited (thought it was Stop Illegal Parking)

 

 

Appeals Department (can't remember appealing)

 

 

Havn't heard back from DVLA but I'm pretty ticked off that they give out your details willy nilly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just seen an e-mail from BPA it says

 

 

 

 

I have received a response from SIP Parking with reference to your complaint.

 

The Parking charge Notice has been cancelled. They have now amended their process so that they do not pursue these PNCs under POFA unless they are within the 56 day requirement.

 

You should be receiving notification of the above shortly.

 

So basically they are useless and are going to do nothing about them, and it was not cancelled it was discontinued in the court, big difference in my book and I will be telling them this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...