Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • to note: the claimant has given a 'reference' number. It is 11 digits long. Regarding 2 - do I even say I have had dealings with Barclays Bank UK PLC ?   Also the 'particulars of claim' are not in paragraphs on the claim form. It is just one chunk of text. With sentences. Do I refer to these as paragraphs ? As I have in the above defence.
    • 1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The claimant even fails to refer to an agreement number. Therefore 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.   2. Paragraph 2 is noted. Whilst I have had dealings with Barclays Bank UK PLC given that claimant fails to refer to an account number I am unaware what agreement the claimant wishes to rely upon.   3.Paragraph 3 is noted although without knowledge of which account the claimant refers to I can neither admit or deny the receipt of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87(1) CCA1974 being received.   4. Paragraph 4 is noted but again as above I am not aware of what agreement the assignment refers to.   5. On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim from PRA group (UK) Limited by way of a CPR 31:14 request sent via 1st class recorded post on 06/06/2024 and further to the above I sent PRA group UK Portfolios Ltd a section 78 request via 1st class recorded post on 06/06/2024.   To date, PRA Group Uk Portfolios Ltd or PRA group (UK) Limited are yet to furnish me with the requested information  and therefore prevented from enforcing the alleged agreement.   6.Therefore with the court’s permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to evidence and :   a) show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; b) show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for; c) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice pursuant to Sec 87 (1) CCA1974. d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   8. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Not really as long as its relatively new and similar and post Pre Action Protocol changes. 
    • Obviously they have a problem in their system.   .
    • Scan redact and upload copies...they will be required to check as the claim progresses.
  • 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

Strange PCN: contravention code 21


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3783 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

Hello all,

 

 

I can do with some good advice about the above mentioned PCN.

It was on Lymington Avenue N22.

 

 

I parked (with legitimate Visitors Permit) well away from the immediate vicinity of a displayed suspension notice attached to a pole...about 25 metres away, only to return and be faced with a PCN on my car. I accosted the CEO and asked him why. He said the suspension affected the whole length of the street.

 

 

Upon reading the notice I realised he wrote the MAKE of my car to be a Ford. Though he got the reg number, colour, and excise date right, my car is a Kia and not a Ford.

 

 

My aim is to challenge and request cancellation, in that the notice was deceitful and set as trap for motorists who assume the notice only affects the immediate vicinity, and the fact he was not wholly referring to my car.

 

 

Sincere and quality advice would be appreciated

 

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not the case that every bay needs a sign, although the signs which are there will need to state exactly what bays are suspended. The positioning of the signs has to be reasonable, and of course relies on there being suitable places to put one, such as lampposts. If the council considers that the sign was put in a reasonable place (likely), and it says the bay you used was suspended, they will probably not be willing to cancel the PCN on those grounds.

 

The make of car issue is also unlikely to go anywhere. There is no requirement for that info on a PCN, and so if it is erroneous it doesn't invalidate the PCN.

 

You can try an appeal of course - nothing to lose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Procedural improperty because the make of your car is wrong.

One little plastic sign for the whole street is not sufficient.

This might be relevant:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21339117

 

Also you need to dig in the TSGD to see if there's any requirement to suspended bay signs.

In any case any reasonable person would think that a little temporary suspension sign for the whole street is a little cheeky.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An error in the data input by a CEO is not impropriety. Would be nice if it were, but it isn't, and won't get the PCN cancelled.

 

Whether the signs are sufficient is a matter of judgement. Generally speaking there are no rules, just a principle of common sense. If there are spare lamp posts and room for clearer signage, then yes there might be a case on inadequate signage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...