Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I can only speak from personal experience. But a similar thing happened to me. Seriously dented door.  I made the other insurance pay. They regarded it as a write off. Took the money, replaced the door. Never heard anything more about it.    Except clearly someone sold my details to claims company, because I got loads of calls in bad English for a few month's 
    • The incident was 03rd March 2024 - and that was the only letter that I have received from MET 15th April 2024 The charge I paid was at the Stansted Airport exit gate (No real relevance now - I thought this charge was for that!!).   Here is the content of email to them (Yes I know I said I was the driver !!!!) as said above -  I thought this charge was for that!! "Stansted Airport" Dear “To whom it may concern” My name is ??  PCN:  ?? Veh Reg: Date of Incident: 03rd March 2024 I have just received a parking charge final reminder letter, dated 10th April 2024 - for an overstay.  This is the first to my knowledge of any overstay. I am aware that I am out of the 28 days, I don’t mean to be rude, this feels like it is a scam My movements on this day in question are, I pulled into what looked like a service station on my way to pick my daughter and family up from Stansted airport. The reason for me pulling into this area was to use a toilet, so I found Starbucks, and when into there, after the above, I then purchased a coffee. After which I then continued with my journey to pick my daughter up. (however after I sent this email I remember that Starbucks was closed so I then I walked over to Macdonalds) There was no signs about parking or any tickets machines to explains about the parking rules. Once at Stansted, I entered and then paid on exit.  So Im not show where I overstayed my welcome.. With gratitude    
    • Just to enlarge on Dave's great rundown of your case under Penalty. In the oft quoted case often seen on PCNs,  viz PE v Beavis while to Judges said there was a case for claiming that £100 was a penalty, this was overruled in this case because PE had a legitimate interest in keeping the car park free for other motorists which outweighed the penalty. Here there is no legitimate interest since the premises were closed. Therefore the charge is a penalty and the case should be thrown out for that reason alone.   The Appeals dept need informing about what and what isn't a valid PCN. Dummies. You should also mention that you were unable to pay by Iphone as there was no internet connection and there was a long  queue to pay on a very busy day . There was no facility for us to pay from the time of our arrival only the time from when we paid at the machine so we felt that was a bit of a scam since we were not parked until we paid. On top of that we had two children to load and unload in the car which should be taken into account since Consideration periods and Grace periods are minimum time. If you weren't the driver and PoFA isn't compliant you are off scot free since only the driver is liable and they are saying it was you. 
    • Thank you dx. I consider myself well and truly told :) x Thank you dx. I consider myself well and truly told :) x
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3627 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

TT, OH has a motability vehicle, he is just hunting out the paperwork now. Will let you know what we find :)

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

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Citizen B

 

In answer to your question about Motability, about two years ago a lady contacted the debt charity (where I work one day a week) as her Motability vehicle had been taken back by Motability as she had a LOT of unpaid parking tickets (which from memory was about 20 tickets).

 

At that time I was involved in a lot of discussion with the Motability legal team and it was then that I was made aware that there is indeed a clause in the Agreements. However, the clause (at that time) stated that the driver could be in default if they failed to pay motoring FINES ( which are not parking tickets).

 

In light of last night's programme I will be contacting Motability Finance for further details.

 

If anyone viewing this post has a Motability vehicle I would be pleased to know what clauses are in the Agreement.

 

 

I already have all those details TT as you know to assist you I can scan up and send via PDF.

 

 

As far as the comments that were made this is significant proof for ANY member of the public to make an official complaint as to the conduct of the EA, this was a definite defamatory remark to the disabled person which is contrary to the DDA/Equality Act. The discrimination was the words used, "well you can afford to run a nice car" I will be doing as such because I am very offended because the person IS disabled.

 

The more complaints against this Company should be sent to peoples local MP and so on.

 

 

Also a complaint to the MoJ because the EA breached rules in regards to the fact that he went through someone's rubbish without just cause. One is already in the email system from me asking why they are allowed to do so.

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here you go.. I scanned it in as pdf.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]50806[/ATTACH]

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

All I can see regarding to parking tickets is at

 

Clause 3.5 - Where you will be responsible for all parking charges and fines (along with a few other items)

 

and

 

Clause 14.1.5 - Where the vehicle or any goods are siezed or threatened to be seized to be made subject of a Court order whether or not it later becomes proved to be unlawful. (This one appears to be more in respect of Bankruptcy proceedings from what I can see).

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

citizenB

 

 

Clause 14.1.5 - Where the vehicle or any goods are siezed or threatened to be seized to be made subject of a Court order whether or not it later becomes proved to be unlawful. (This one appears to be more in respect of Bankruptcy proceedings from what I can see).

 

This has been deliberately left open with the words "Court order" this can be interpreted as ANY Court order, a legal loophole that can be exploited by anyone that has an order. This could be very difficult for a debtor that has a COURT ORDER in any court against them. DAMN that's a big loophole now making those enquiries

 

 

The results are in, Just spoke to a lovely lady at Motability, The EA CANNOT take control of any vehicle under this scheme as the RO is not the debtor and they would if removed get the vehicle back, the words "Court Order" are specifically for the scheme to gain control of the vehicle and no other "seizure" can take place. This includes cars, MPV's scooters or any vehicle issued under this scheme

 

 

They also confirmed due to last night programme that they "Motability" could end the agreement if the debtor failed to arrange a payment plan to clear the debt with the EA

 

 

Courtesy of the Motability Legal Department

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was also disgusted at the way that the bailiffs treated this disabled man. When discussing the issue of the parking ticket, the disabled man does say that he cannot afford to pay in full straight away, but would be happy to set up a payment agreement of £5 per week. He NEVER refuses to pay at any point. The bailiff then says quite clearly that the man is refusing to pay. He is not. There is recorded evidence to prove that he has offered to pay, which I believe that the EA cannot refuse. I was appalled by the way the man was treated, especially when the younger EA appeared to belittle this man by saying "you can afford to run a nice car sir". I felt that the driver had no choice but to defend his reasons for having a mobility vehicle, which was upsetting to see. Please can anybody advise where I can issue a formal complaint about these bailiffs? Would I be able to complain to the BBC? Or is there a contact number for the company these men work for? I have never complained in such a way before. Is this really the way that we should treat disabled people in this country?

Link to post
Share on other sites

tombeck1979

 

 

A site team member can furnish this information for you, but not knowing the Council that was involved could prove difficult but a formal complaint can be enquired about here

https://www.gov.uk/your-rights-bailiffs/how-to-complain-about-a-bailiff

 

 

or here

 

 

http://www.whyte.co.uk/contact.htm

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

tombeck, I am sure that tomtubby would be able to advise where you might make a complaint.

 

I would certainly send something to the Programme makers.

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

Referring to post #31 this again shows how when a debtor identified themselves as vulnerable the EA still didn't retire but continued to harass the debtor, when the "guideline's" state they should seek advise from the creditor, again showing that this company are not fit for purpose.

 

 

What is the point of having guidelines available when companies openly abuse the system, surely the MoJ has more than enough "evidence" how corrupt the EA system really is, I cannot wait to see the next episode on this

 

 

MM

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This episode will show the public and the relevant people just how things have NOT changed since April.

 

 

I bet this episode gets more complaints to the BBC for this very matter the more the merrier

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just come in from filming an environmental improvements project, and caught up with the thread, Formal complaints regarding Whyte & Co should be winging their way to MOJ, they should also be told tht the Direct Discrimination, contrary to the Equalities Act 2010 will be reported, and the evidence against their EA is there for all the world to see. Surely where there is a vulnerability, or a problem with low income the council should allow payment arrangemnents before enforcement action, as I think that all PCN must be paid in full.

 

Whyte & Co disgust me,

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

 

 

The whole issue in regards to vulnerable households is a very hot topic, obviously I will not insult you, but with the documents that have been upped on these forums lately go to show that the LA has a DUTY before they send a case to the EA which is very widely known in the first place.

 

 

So in reality why do LA's send it out in the first place when they already know there is an issue, this just goes to show how they work hand in hand with their enforcement agents

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

MM you are all too correct, they are the LA so regard a duty of care to be something that applies to everyone else but not them and will try to deflect blame to their agents or stonewall and support them, when it goes badly wrong, they fall back on the "Well they owe money" argument, as in" the end justifies the means, so move along now nothing to see"

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

did anybody else notice they said they would seize the roofers van if he didnt pay?? would that no be classed as work/tool of the trade???

 

If it is worth more than £1350, then under the new rules it would be fair game... apparently

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

If it is worth more than £1350, then under the new rules it would be fair game... apparently

They seem to be selecting the bits of the old and new legislation that they like and dismissing the ones they don't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is worth more than £1350, then under the new rules it would be fair game... apparently

 

 

was this not filmed last summer before the new rules come into play?

 

looks very sunny a warm in most of the program! same with the driving instructors car the other week. its all very wrong

Link to post
Share on other sites

was this not filmed last summer before the new rules come into play?

 

looks very sunny a warm in most of the program! same with the driving instructors car the other week. its all very wrong

 

Well yes it would be tool of trade absolutely then, so long as soley for business use with one driver, but the £1350 is now so if they were to film now it would apply, that was my point.

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

Well yes it would be tool of trade absolutely then, so long as soley for business use with one driver, but the £1350 is now so if they were to film now it would apply, that was my point.

 

 

i get your point now i just didnt no when it was filmed and had to google it. still regardless the conduct of the EA and the companys as a whole are disgusting and like has been said complaints need to be made.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i get your point now i just didnt no when it was filmed and had to google it. still regardless the conduct of the EA and the companys as a whole are disgusting and like has been said complaints need to be made.

Absolutely, they were way out of order especially with the disabled Motability driver. Equalities Act 2010 breaches for bailiff comments regarding affording a motor. Wonder if these bailiffs would be facey enough to try to seize a mobility scooter from the back of an adapted Motability car?

 

I have seen a CEO slap a parking ticket on one of the large 8mph ones that had a Q plate on it parked outside a shop on the pavement.

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

I wonder what's going to happen with not being able to remove vehicles worth nil tax when tax discs become no longer used soon from 1st October 2014.

Surely we can not depend on the EA to check if it's nil tax as they don't seem to be able to check the actual owner is the debtor at the moment !! So can't see that changing anytime soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...