Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi welcome to the Forum.  If a PCN is sent out late ie after the 12th day of the alleged offence, the charge cannot then be transferred from the driver to the keeper.T he PCN is deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch so in your case, unless you can prove that Nexus sent the PCN several days after they claim you have very little chance of winning that argument. All is not lost since the majority of PCNs sent out are very poorly worded so that yet again the keeper is not liable to pay the charge, only the driver is now liable. If you post up the PCN, front and back we will be able to confirm whether it is compliant or not. Even if it is ok, there are lots of other reasons why it is not necessary to pay those rogues. 
    • Hi 1 Date of the infringement  arr 28/03/24 21:00, dep 29/03/24 01.27 2 Date on the NTK  08/04/2024 (Date of Issue) 3 Date received Monday 15/04/24 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012?  Yes 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No  7 Who is the parking company? GroupNexus 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Petrol Station Roadchef Tibshelf South DE55 5T 'operating in accordance with the BPA's Code of Practice' I received a Parking Charge letter to keeper on Monday 15/04/24, the 17th day after the alleged incident. My understanding is that this is outside the window for notifying. The issue date was 08/04/2024 which should have been in good time for it to have arrived within the notice period but in fact it actually arrived at lunchtime on the 15th. Do I have to prove when it arrived  (and if so how can I do that?) or is the onus on them to prove it was delivered in time? All I can find is that delivery is assumed to be on the second working day after issue which would have been Weds 10//04/24 but it was actually delivered 5 days later than that (thank you Royal Mail!). My husband was present when it arrived - is a family member witness considered sufficient proof?
    • lookinforinfo - many thanks for your reply. It would be very interesting to get the letter of discontinuance. The court receptionist said that the county court was in Gloucester 'today' so that makes me think that some days it is in Gloucester and some days its in Cheltenham, it was maybe changed by the courts and i was never informed, who knows if DCBL were or not. My costs were a gallon of petrol and £3.40 for parking. I certainly don't want to end up in court again that's for sure but never say never lol. Its utterly disgusting the way these crooks can legally treat motorists but that's the uk for you. I'm originally from Scotland so it's good that they are not enforceable there but they certainly still try to get money out of you. I have to admit i have lost count of the pcn's i have received in the last 2 yr and 4 months since coming to England for work, most of them stop bothering you on their own eventually, it was just this one that they took it all the way. Like i mentioned in my WS the the likes of Aldi and other companies can get them cancelled but Mcdonalds refused to help me despite me being a very good customer.   brassednecked - many thanks   honeybee - many thanks   nicky boy - many thanks    
    • Huh? This is nothing about paying just for what I use - I currently prefer the averaged monthly payment - else i wouldn't be in credit month after month - which I am comfortable with - else I wold simply request a part refund - which I  would have done if they hadn't reduced my monthly dd after the complaint I raised (handled slowly and rather badly) highlighted the errors in their systems (one of which they do seem to have fixed) Are you not aware DD is always potentially variable? ah well, look it up - but my deal is a supposed to average the payments over a year, and i dont expect them to change payments (up or down) without my informed agreement ESPECIALLY when I'm in credit over winter.   You are happy with your smart meter - jolly for you I dont want one, dont have to have one  - so wont   I have a box that tells me my electricity usage - was free donkeys years ago and shows me everything I need to know just like a smart meter but doesnt need a smart meter,  and i can manually set my charges - so as a side effect - would show me if the charges from the supplier were mismatched. Doesn't tell me if the meters actually calibrated correctly - but neither does your smart meter. That all relies on a label and the competence of the testers - and the competence of any remote fiddling with the settings. You seem happy with that - thats fine. I'm not.    
  • 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

marstons Bailiff has licence revoked for 6 Months after terrifying 12 year old girl.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3587 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

Ms Carson said: “Most striking in this case is how difficult it is to take a complaint against a bailiff and how weighted it is in favour of the bailiff.”

Shows what this solicitor knew before this case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shows what this solicitor knew before this case.

The new system is still no better, One of Marstons, how strange, aren't they supposed to be so squeaky clean?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

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

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The solicitor (Ms Carson) is absolutely correct when she stated that it is difficult taking a complaint against a bailiff to court and that the decision is very much weighted in favour of the bailiff. There is actually more to this case as further details were found on another forum.

 

The certificate has been revoked but the Judge gave permission to Mr Scott that he may re-apply for his certificate to be returned after a period of 6 months. The person making the complaint specifically requested that the bailiff should NOT have his licence revoked. There are a lot of other issues with this case that are very worrying indeed and should be taken into consideration for the future (details below).

 

In the first instance, the entire Form 4 Complaint was addressed by the court as litigation (as opposed to it's purpose (being that of a Complaint).

 

Secondly, the most striking area of concern was that the Judge did NOT know how a Form 4 Complaint was supposed to be addressed and stated the same in court. It would seem that the Judge had rarely come across 'Form 4 Complaints before).

 

Thirdly, the lack of knowledge was further demonstrated in the way in which the amount of £500 was awarded. It is a well known principle that any award is supposed to be deducted from the bailiffs 'bond' (of £10,000). This did NOT happen. Instead the Judge ordered the BAILIFF to personally paid the amount of £500. The effect of this wrong decision being that his bailiff bond would have been intact.

 

Lastly.....(and this point is vitally important), it would seem that in bringing the Form 4 Complaint to court the family spend a staggering sum of nearly £2,000. As I understand it they were able to demonstrate to the court where every penny had been spent. Despite this, the court awarded the complainant just £500 which represented approx just 25% of what he had paid out in order to bring the complaint to court and left him £1,300 out of pocket. In other words...... he has lost a lot of work which the family can ill afford in bringing this Form 4 to court. It is my understanding that it is this area where the family are considering appealing .

 

Under the new regulations that took effect on Sunday Complaints (the terminology 'Form 4' has now been abolished) there is to be a complete overhaul regarding Complaints and the new regulations specifically provide that the complainant may indeed be ordered to pay costs. Also, the cases will in future be held at only 20 locations and the Judge's hearing the complaints will have knowledge of the new regulations. Strikingly, the complaints will be heard by the same Judges that grant the certificates. As with everything, it is a learning curve.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is to be hoped that the new system will not seriously disadvantage debtors as happened in the case above, it is wrong that a complaint is perverted into litigation as the judge didn't know how to properly conduct a Form 4, and the debtor's costs awarded were a fraction of their actual costs in bringing the complaint

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

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

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brassnecked.

 

You are spot on with your above comment. Sadly however, the way in which the level of 'costs' (or compensation/damages as in this case) are calculated are simply dreadful.

 

I was in court myself about two weeks ago (as part of training) and by the end of the day I had witnessed 5 cases where the claimant has won. I was stunned however at the way in which the courts awarded 'costs'. In one case the claimant won his case against a local garage and he had prepared in advance a carefully drafted schedule of his costs to demonstrate how many hours he had spent on bringing the case to court and this included parking, taking time of work etc. He used the Litigant in Person rate of around £17-18 per hour). His claim (for cost) was just over £300. The Judge struck out most of this and awarded him just £26 !! Each case was more or less the same with the winning party not even being awarded the costs that they had incurred.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TT you do not surprise me, a fellow Board Member is a JP, and he is clueless about law per se, and actualities, he says they tend to follow the Court Clerk's advice. How can there be justice if someone wins their case, and is seriously worse off than if they sucked the loss down and never complained in the first place.

 

I have zero confidence in the new enforcement systen, it seems that it will be tested by hapless debtors to iron out issues.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

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

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

People on this forum have to get real. The system is stacked in favour of the state/legal system/bailiffs. The state needs its bailiffs to collect its taxes and penalties and other considerations are secondary. Anyone who thinks we live as free people in a democracy is sadly deluded.

 

As for costs. Solicitors and barristers regularly can and do charge way in excess of what they're entitled which is a lot anyway, and get away with it. When it comes to the general public, they don't want us getting anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Six months isn't long enough

 

 

"Harbottle & Lewis LLP, on behalf of Marston, told MK News that this was an isolated incident, and that Marston ‘has a very good track record in its industry.’ They said Mr Scott had no intention to upset anyone, and had been advised that there are grounds for him to appeal. MK NEWS also spoke to Mr Scott, who declined to comment and referred us to Marston."

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Mr Scott is very fortunate indeed the judge did not refer the matter of his excessive use of the word "police" which was intended to cause alarm or distress directly to the magistrates court where he could have faced a far harsher punishment and a ban from working in certain occupations and employment sectors. As for Harbottle & Lewis claiming Marstons has "a very good track record in its industry", the question is for what?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr Scott is very fortunate indeed the judge did not refer the matter of his excessive use of the word "police" which was intended to cause alarm or distress directly to the magistrates court where he could have faced a far harsher punishment and a ban from working in certain occupations and employment sectors. As for Harbottle & Lewis claiming Marstons has "a very good track record in its industry", the question is for what?

 

Behaving as if they were Drakes?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

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

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Same link as the first post !!

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

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I would suggest is not to believe everything you read, there is more to this that has not been said.

 

Yes, i think you are right. Are there anymore developments on this ?

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

hello everyone and thanks for letting me join your site

 

it strange when every one gives there view clearly some do not have a clue of what they are going on about

and some spot on for those of you spot on an up date

 

Its My family you are all talking about hear

 

Chelsea has appealed to the high court about this nasty bailiff Mark Scoot and has been awarded legal aid HORAY

 

when the order came trough the judge changed his mind and decided that it was compensation for her LOL

 

after a debate with Chelsea legal adviser in court about expenses the judge awarded 500

but now says it was for Chelsea so we have to have a transcript for the high court to see how this mix up happened

 

so its not over yet

 

any how the comments of all you who think they no what's happening thought I would put you straight

and will keep you all updated and the expenses now are more like 4k and we not got to the appeal courts yet

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello everyone and thanks for letting me join your site it strange when every one gives there view clearly some do not have a clue of what they are going on about and some spot on for those of you spot on an up date

Its My family you are all talking about hear

Chelsea has appealed to the high court about this nasty bailiff Mark Scoot and has been awarded legal aid HORAY when the order came trough the judge changed his mind and decided that it was compensation for her LOL after a debate with Chelsea legal adviser in court about expenses the judge awarded 500 but now says it was for Chelsea so we have to have a transcript for the high court to see how this mix up happened so its not over yet any how the comments of all you who think they no what's happening thought I would put you straight and will keep you all updated and the expenses now are more like 4k and we not got to the appeal courts yet

 

Thanks for the update, are you being assisted in making your application to the high court ?

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes Chelsea has queens council so I might get my expenses after all

and Chelsea to be compensated properly

 

as I say will up date you

 

as yet Marston's have failed to even apologies to Chelsea

 

However we have made a complaint to the police about the criminal element

 

but the police are being shady at the moment saying a complaint should have been made at the time

as they fell its too late being six months gone

 

so had to make a complaint against the police as the complaint was made to the issuing court on the day it happened all very doggie

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes Chelsea has queens council so I might get my expenses after all and Chelsea to be compensated properly as I say will up date you as yet Marston's have failed to even apologies to Chelsea However we have made a complaint to the police about the criminal element but the police are being shady at the moment saying a complaint should have been made at the time as they fell its too late being six months gone so had to make a complaint against the police as the complaint was made to the issuing court on the day it happened all very doggie

 

All sounds very promising, do you have any kind of timescale for the hearing yet ?

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

....However we have made a complaint to the police about the criminal element but the police are being shady at the moment saying a complaint should have been made at the time as they fell its too late being six months gone so had to make a complaint against the police as the complaint was made to the issuing court on the day it happened all very doggie

 

If you made a complaint against the police, watch them very carefully with regards how they categorise it. They may well class the complaint as "Direction and Control", which has no right of appeal when you inevitably disagree with their decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the paperwork he gave proves beaned reasonable doubt he is guilty off a criminal offence so will also up date you with the police findings and the case is waiting to be listed at high but The nasty bailiff has been served with notice of it its turned in to a test case

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst it is welcome to hear from someone connected to this. I think it would be wise to edit some of the posts, if there are any ongoing court actions or Police complaints.

 

I think all that needs to be said is that the matter is ongoing. You don't want to hinder your chances of an outcome that you would be satisfied with.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3587 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...