Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.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

Yet another letter off Buchanan Clark & Wells


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3691 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 there my partner has been receiving numerous letter from Buchanan Clark & Wells but this letter that came today has got her worrying.

 

 

Here is the letter or some of it.

 

 

 

 

Dear XXX

 

 

Despite repeated requests for payment etc. etc. in the sum of £435.00 remains outstanding. Accordingly ,we now consider the possibility of further action on your account.

 

 

options open to us would be to consider:

 

I)Application to court to obtain a county court judgement/decree. If successful the balance could then be subject to further fees and costs being applied.

 

 

II)if a county court judgement/decree was granted and if it remained unpaid then they could apply to the court for further enforcement action, such as attachment of earning/earnings arrestment or a warrant of execution.

 

 

You can still prevent the above action being taken by contacting us immediately, to discuss a solution to this which will take account of your current financial circumstances.

We are prepared to help you in clearing the debt by offering you the exceptional opportunity to settle on highly favourable terms. We are willing to accept £217.50 in full and final settlement of the outstanding balance, and you may even be able to spread the payment over several instalments.

 

 

etc. etc. to take advantage of this unique opportunity.

 

 

 

 

any help would be gratefully appreciated as my girlfriend is flapping and due to being 29 weeks pregnant could really do without the added stress.

 

 

Thanks in advance Brian

Link to post
Share on other sites

Standard threatograms! :)

 

Example MMF claim to come round and "Assess your living standards"

Another Ive heard is someone attempting to check your actual bank balance etc...

 

Anyhow to send the worry off... Theyve offered a discount...

 

But we need more info, which creditor is it for? Being pregnant means she a little emotional... Dont worry :), Last thing she needs is this.

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi thanks for the response:)

Its for a provident loan.

I've asked her about it ad she cant remember how long ago it is actually from but we've been together coming on 4 and half years so its quite old.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has she checked her CRA file? Check using Noddle and see if it shows up on there.

 

Does she also know when the last payment was made on it, if over 6 years ago it is unenforceable through the courts (Statute Barred).

 

If there's a discount on it they are usually peeing into the wind and know there's something wrong with it (eg charges, stat barred etc). Really no need for her to worry at this point, it will be sorted :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

She's checked her credit file and nothing has showed not even the actual provident loan shows up.

she's almost certain its June/July 2008 when she got the initial loan..to take her and her ex to cream fields which is in august every year.

But she's not 100% sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is very odd. Is there nothing on there from BCW?

 

It not being on the credit file would suggest that the date of default has passed which is 6 years, but this isn't possible if she actually took the loan out in June/July 2008.

 

My initial inkling would be to SAR the original creditor, this allows you to get all of the information they hold on your partner (she needs to sign it obviously!). It costs £10 and will give you information we need on when the loan was taken out, date of last payment, and when the account was defaulted and eventually sold on to BCW. Send this to the Data Controller of Provident and they have 40 days in which to comply. The template is in the Library.

 

At this point I would not engage the DCA. All they are sending is standard crap-o-grams trying to illicit you into paying. There is something fishy about this loan, the SAR will tell you what it is.

 

That would be my advice, someone else will be along to offer opinion shortly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi thanks for the response, I'm almost certain she's mixed up the dates as we've just checked on Experian & noodle and it doesn't show up so maybe that's why there offering her 50% off it as they know they have no chance of getting the lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, there are some lenders that DONT report the CRAs

 

Provident can be one of them.

Supposedly i have 4 debts who MMF have hold off and none appear on my credit profile. (these are fraudulent etc)

Back to the point.

 

BCW can occasionally deal with unenforcable debts... SAR to the original lender... When you get it, come back and we can assist.

 

Finally, challenge BCW with a CCA request... See what happens... £1 well spent in my view

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no entry for BCW to update, which is what would normally happen.

 

 

Are payment books available for the debt?

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

Amended as a per required... Problem is, Provident don't always report...

 

Maybe mine shows because either (a) they have sold it to some one or (b) I am no longer resident in UK or Europe however I accept that they may not always report

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Sep keep all pertinent details on your thread otherwise they make get missed.

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

Looking at post 1 , I have had the same letter now twice from BCW. Once when they were acting as agents in which case they referred to their client and now as owners. Apart from the sums involved it is identical to the letter posted.

 

On the subject of CRAs Provident are rather hit and miss at reporting. Some they do, some they don't

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...