Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • that was a good saving on an £8k debt dx
    • Find out how the UK general elections works, how to register to vote, and what to do on voting day.View the full article
    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
    • Seeking further advice now. The 33 days in which the defendant has to submit a defence expires at 16:00 tomorrow. The defendant has submitted an acknowledgement of service but looking to get the claim awarded by default in failure to submit the defence. This is MoneyClaim Online and can see an option to request a default judgement but believe that is for failure to acknowledge the claim within 14 days??  So being MoneyClaim Online, how do I request the claim be awarded in my favour?
    • Have to agree with the above Health and safety legislation is specific in that the service provider in so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees and those not in the employ of the business. You claim is like saying you slipped in the swimming pool area while taking a dip. As rightly stated by by the leisure centre, a sports hall has dedicated equipment and you yourself personally have a legal obligation in mitigating danger or injury to yourself by taking account of your immediate surroundings. Where your claim will fail is if it is reasonable and proportionate to impose liability of the Leisure Centre? The answer has to be no.
  • 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

PCN from Euro Car parks - I don't think I have a defence...HELP!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3788 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

Hi,

 

I have recently received a PCN from Euro Car Parks.

 

It all looks very official and states the date of issue and the letter date (5 days difference).

 

there are photos of my licence plate.

 

It says I was parked too long (101 mins too long) in the car park of a retail park.

 

I had been in Mothercare, Toys R Us, B and M, Poundland, Aldi, Wicks and PC World/Currys, as well as stopping off for some lunch.

 

All this, with my 5 year old in tow.

So yes, as you can see, it is possible to spend a whopping 5 odd hours in this hellhole!

 

I am supposed to pay up 90 quid, or 40 is I pay within 14 days.

 

I didn't see the signs saying max stay was 3 hours, although they are reasonably well displayed.

 

As far as I can see, I don't have a leg to stand on, yet if I am reading the posts right about this company,

i should ignore this fine and any subsequent threats or letters.

 

CAN YOU PLEASE CONFIRM THAT THIS IS THE ACTION TO TAKE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the prompt reply!

 

should I write to them?

 

Should I say that I was not the driver?

 

seen this as a successful defence,

 

although my partner is the only other driver on the insurance

 

so I don't want it coming back to him!

 

I don't have receipts for the purchases I made, and in some shops I didn't buy anything-

it was an opportunity to see what my son would like for Christmas.

 

I really don't know what to say - I don't like lying, but not seeing the signs (which are reasonably well displayed) is my truthful answer

- and it sounds rubbish!

Link to post
Share on other sites

NO!

 

There is no need to lie!!!

 

Not seeing the signs is perfect, and say you were a shopper, it doesnt matter that its rubbish as it will be rejected.

 

So when you get your rejection there will be a code for an independent appeal on the letter (or should be), we can help you win on legal terms

Get that letter in the post and let us know when you get a reply

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is the parking co that dont really have a case, Euro car parks often get things wrong with their own procedures so they are not really that scary if you dont panic.

It would help to know whether there is an indication of who acvtually owns the car park, it it part of a single store or one of these multi-retail developments? If the latter it is usually a little more complicated but the stores themselves can be helpful as they often hate these parking restrictions as it costs them business.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt if you spent 5 hours you will have spent some money and have receipts? If so enclose copies of them with your appeal you then have a better chance of them cancelling, however if they don't see sense you can then win at POPLA.

 

Euro are one of the tamer PPC's relying on the percentage they get paid rather then chase people through county courts. (at a loss even if successful)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi, I have now received a POPLA reference number. I can't find evidence anywhere of spending money that day in the form of bank statements or receipts. What should I do now? Please help, I am really worried that I took the wrong advice and should just have paid up in the first place!:|

Edited by aquamarina71
Link to post
Share on other sites

The appeal to the parking company will always get rejected because they want to panic you. your now thinking, "have I done the right thing", "wish I had paid" . This is the reaction they want. You were parked in a free car park loss to them nothing.

Your reply to POPLA will receive the attention of very experienced CAGGERS who will help. Try not to panic it will be OK.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I have now received a POPLA reference number which is ##########. I can't find evidence anywhere of spending money that day in the form of bank statements or receipts. What should I do now? Please help, I am really worried that I took the wrong advice and should just have paid up in the first place!:|

 

I'd delete thePOPLA code....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, standard defence to POPLA is that ECP have not shown right to enter into contracts and issue demands for payment in their own name.

ECP have not shown a true estimate of their loss so claim is an unlawful penalty.

any commercial justification for claim relates to bilateral contracts and you havent entered into one with them

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, POPLA ref number deleted. So I appeal online saying what exactly? Thanks for the link but it was way above my head...

The code you posted up is out of date. Check the parking pranksters website yourself to confirm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...