Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So you had until 18th October to pay it.  You didn't.  So you're stuck with a CCJ and a knackered credit file for six years. There is no way out of this.  As far as the court is concerned you were given a chance to defend the case with the court papers and a clear deadline for doing so, but chose not to - lost case.  You were then given a clear deadline to pay the money by, but chose to defy the court - CCJ.  Even if you pay it's too late to get rid of the CCJ Silver lining!  I've been on this forum for eight years and I've never seen a parking company enforce judgement for a single ticket.  It's just not worth their while.  So simply don't pay.  Not paying = CCJ, paying = CCJ, so you might as well not pay.  
    • 1 Date of the infringement 17/11/23   2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 24/11/23   [scan up BOTH SIDES as ONE PDF- follow the upload guide] please LEAVE IN LOCATION AND ALL DATES/TIMES/£'s   3 Date received 26/11/23   4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] No   5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes - in and out of the barrier   6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No   Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up No   7 Who is the parking company? Britannia   8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Waitrose, Berkhamsted, Herts   For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. no, dont think so   There are two official bodies, the BPA and the IAS. If you are unsure, please check HERE   front_compressed.pdf
    • Please damp eyed for a reply later on. We will draft a letter to the hire purchase company and threatened legal action
    • Let's try again –   when did you first have sight of this policy containing this exclusion? **Enter date here** what is the value of the damage your caravan has sustained  **enter figure in pounds sterling here or approximate figure here**
    • ive had my report done...... So the summary say's that the car has not been adequately maintained according to manufacturer standards. It has no evidence of a cambelt which he said should be every 60 months. The car is a 2017. It only has 2 recorded services in its life. He said both front shocks are leaking, MOT failure. Rear shock has bump stop perished.  The front tyres are worn on the inner edges. He said there is a considerable gearbox oil leak which is noticeable.  He has said there is a cylinder 4 misfire which is evident and has resulted in engine management light on. Cannot be road tested due to the way it is running.  He said it has been caused by incorrect or lack of proper maintenance. So now what do i do?   
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • 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
    • Post in Some advice on buying a used car
    • People are still buying used cars unseen, paying by cash or by bank transfer, relying on brand-new MOT's by the dealer's favourite MOT station….
      It always leads to tears!
      used car.mp4

       

       
    • Pizza delivery insurance.mp4


       

       

       

      Parcel delivery insurance 1.mp4
        • Haha
      • 2 replies
  • Recommended Topics

Monumental Lloyds Cockup


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3498 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've just discovered something that I believe is huge and many of you could be in a similar position.

 

Last year we were taken to court by Lowell and I tried everything to defend against their SD.

The judge wasn't interested and gave them the order they wanted ie bankruptcy.

 

I wrote to Lowell warning them that we could prove they had no actual standing (another story).

So far they have taken no action.

Not even responded to my letters (I used the three step process as detailed elsewhere on the web).

 

Here's the kicker

 

We did a subject access on Lloyds and got a tone of data.

 

Going through our statements I found a substantial balance transfer from one of our cards (non Lloyds) to another card (the Lloyds one).

 

The amount transferred was well in excess of the outstanding balance on the Lloyds card by several thousand pounds.

So you would expect the card balance to revert to zero and the extra credit to show right?

 

Okay on the statement for the month of the actual transfer it does indeed show the several thousand pounds as a refund from Southend bla bla bla.

 

Now at this point our balance on the card for spending is zero and we spend 2K that month.

 

The following month the balance is the 2k we spent but our credit has vanished.

 

The credit was more than double what we spent.

 

Not only that but when I added up the sum of our spend plus the available balance it was 2k short of the cards credit limit!! Huhhh?

 

Am I going to have fun with this or what.

After what Lloyds and Lowell put us through both financially and emotionally I'm out for justice!!!

 

if you ever did a balance transfer, especially if you transferred more that the debt on the receiving card, go back and check the numbers.

 

In our case not only did they lose our cash, we then paid a very high interest plus ppi every month for 18 months on money we never borrowed!!

 

I will let you know what the cowboys say once I hear from them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...