Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello dx100uk, After months of waiting for a response I finally got a reply and I must say it was the worst 4 months of my life the - fear of the unknown. So, they wrote back and said I was in the wrong BUT on this occasion they  would not take action but keep me on file for the next 12 months. It. was the biggest relief of my life a massive weight lifted -  I would like to thank you and the team for all your support
    • I have contacted the sofa shop who are sending someone out tomorrow to inspect the furniture. I suspect if anything a replacement will be offered although I would prefer a refund. Few photos of the wear in the material, this is how it was delivered.  
    • Yup, for goodness sake she needs to stop paying right now, DCA's are powerless, as .  Is it showing on their credit file? Best to use Check my file. All of the above advice is excellent, definitely SAR the loan company as soon as possible.
    • Hi all, I am wandering if this is appealable. It has already been through a challenge on the Islington website and the it was rejected. Basically there was a suspended bay sign on a post on Gee st which was obscured by a Pizza van. The suspension was for 3 bays outside 47 Gee st. I parked outside/between 47 & 55 Gee st. I paid via the phone system using a sign a few meters away from my car. When I got back to the car there was a PCN stuck to the windscreen which I had to dry out before I could read it due to rain getting into the plastic sticky holder.  I then appealed using the Islington website which was then rejected the next day. I have attached a pdf of images that I took and also which the parking officer took. There are two spaces in front of the van, one of which had a generator on it the other was a disabled space. I would count those as 3 bays? In the first image circled in red is the parking sign I read. In the 2nd image is the suspension notice obscured by the van. I would have had to stand in the middle of the road to read this, in fact that's where I was standing when I took the photo. I have pasted the appeal and rejection below. Many thanks for looking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is my appeal statement: As you can see from the image attached (image 1) I actually paid £18.50 to park my car in Gee st. I parked the car at what I thought was outside 55 Gee st as seen in image 2 attached. When I read the PCN issued it stated there was a parking suspension. There was no suspension notice on the sign that I used to call the payment service outside number 55 Gee st. I looked for a suspension notice and eventually found one which was obscured by a large van and generator parked outside 47 Gee st. As seen in images 3 and 4 attached. I am guessing the parking suspension was to allow the Van to park and sell Pizza during the Clerkenwell design week. I was not obstructing the use or parking of the van, in fact the van was obstructing the suspension notice which meant I could not read or see it without prior knowledge it was there. I would have had to stand in the road to see it endangering myself as I had to to take images to illustrate the hidden notice. As there was no intention to avoid a parking charge and the fact the sign was not easily visible I would hope this challenge can be accepted. Many thanks.   This is the text from the rejection: Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a suspended bay or space. I note from your correspondence that there was no suspension notice on the sign that you used to call the payment serve outside number 55 Gee Street. I acknowledge your comments, however, your vehicle was parked in a bay which had been suspended. The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief. The signs relating to this suspension were sited in accordance with the regulations. Upon reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO's) images and notes, I am satisfied that sufficient signage was in place and that it meets statutory requirements. Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted. I acknowledge that your vehicle possessed a RingGo session at the time, however, this does not authorize parking within a suspended bay. Suspension restrictions are established to facilitate specific activities like filming or construction, therefore, we anticipate the vehicle owner to relocate the vehicle from the suspended area until the specified date and time when the suspension concludes. Leaving a vehicle unattended for any period of time within a suspended bay, effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN. Finally, the vehicle was left parked approximately 5 metres away from the closest time plate notice. It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they park in a suitable parking place and check all signs and road markings prior to leaving their vehicle parked in contravention. It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times. With that being said, I would have to inform you, your appeal has been rejected at this stage. Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN: You should now choose one of the following options: Pay the penalty charge. We will accept the discounted amount of £65.00 in settlement of this matter, provided it is received by 10 June 2024. After that date, the full penalty charge of £130.00 will be payable. Or Wait for a Notice to Owner (NtO) to be issued to the registered keeper of the vehicle, who is legally responsible for paying the penalty charge. Any further correspondence received prior to the NtO being issued may not be responded to. The NtO gives the recipient the right to make formal representations against the penalty charge. If we reject those representations, there will be the right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.   Gee st pdf.pdf
    • Nationwide Building Society has launched an 18 month fixed-rate account paying 5.5%.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

Care parking - disabled bay


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3513 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 all,

 

the gym I go shares it's car park with some local shops and a play school.

 

Upon arriving today the car park was jam packed as you would expect on a Saturday afternoon.

 

As usual the 10 disabled parking bays outside the gym were empty

and I wasn't prepared to go and find parking elsewhere in the rain then walk back up the ramp

as car park is on the top of the building.

 

I've parked in a private space designated for disabled badge holders only without displaying a valid blue badge.

 

As far as I'm aware disabled bays in private car parks are not enforceable under the blue badge scheme?

 

All help will be appreciated!

 

Kind regards

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

correct

 

all marking and bays are purely graffiti.

 

however you should appeal & go through POPLA etc

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

do exactly the same as your GF's last ticket

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi, thanks for the quick replys.

 

i dont know if waiting out for a notice to keeper will be the right thing do, my car is a lease car so im not sure if it will come to me or go to the leasing company. anyone had any experience with this?

 

also could someone help me with the wording of my appeal and main points to include?

 

thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

hi everyone.

 

 

just an update on this.

 

 

i appealed to care parking via post and expected that was the end of it as i haven't heard back from them.

 

today I've received a letter from the company i work for with a recharge.

 

Care have posted a charge to TCH leasing who automatically pay charges(they keep calling it a fine) without consulting the lease holder.

 

 

they then direct debit my company who i lease the car through via a salary sacrifice.

Then the company try to deduct it out of my wages.

 

where do i stand on this?

 

 

the way i see it Care have seen that the car is leased through tch and know that they automatically just pay up

so it was best for them to just ignore my letter and contact them directly.

 

thanks everyone!

Link to post
Share on other sites

the guys will know where

but theres a thread [atleast one]

on the ins/outs on this.

 

as there is no direct contract between the lease company and Care

i think there must be a clause stated in your lease agreement

and in your employment contract

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I take it you have no proof that you sent your appeal?

 

You need to look at the detail in your contract with your employer and the leasing of the car.

It is all in how it is worded...

 

You and your girlfriend and parking eh! :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would seem we are a nightmare as a pair haha.

 

I've got the contract I've entered with work here, the part they have referred me to is as follows.

6 Other sums chargeable to you;

6.1 Under the agreement you authorise ----- group to deduct from your net salary any sums paid by us to the leasing company

iv - fines for road traffic offences and any administration charges levied by the leasing company (currently £25 per incident)

Link to post
Share on other sites

a road traffic offence

cant happen on private property

 

 

so that's that one out the window.

 

 

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

a road traffic offence cant happen on private property

road traffic offence would be anything covered by the road traffic act, which excludes car parks.

 

I'm afraid I beg to differ.

 

The Road Traffic Act applies in car parks (private or otherwise), but not in marked parking bays.

 

It's all to do with the actual wording in the RTA. And is covered under the conditions of the public having access. "Roads or public place", a "road" is defined in the RTA 1988 as...

 

in relation to England and Wales, means any highway and any other road to which the public has access, and includes bridges over which a road passes, and

in relation to Scotland, means any road within the meaning of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 and any other way to which the public has access, and includes bridges over which a road passes,

 

The roads do not have to be adopted or maintained at public expense.

 

However, if there is a gate or barrier on the entrance to the car park, even if it's never closed, then it's no longer covered under the RTA.

 

 

In order for it to be proven that somewhere is a "Public Place" for the purposes of Road Traffic Act offences it must be shown by the prosecution that:

 

Those people who are admitted to the place in question are members of the public and are admitted as such, not as members of some special or particular class of the public (eg people belonging to an exclusive club i.e. lane leading to a Rugby Club and used only by them) or as a result of some special characteristic that is not shared by the public at large, and;

 

Those people are so admitted with the permission, express or implied, of the owner of the land in question. (DPP v Vivier [1991]RTR 205)

A car park situated within the business premises of a motor dealer (you could easily substitute a Supermarket here) for use by customers has been held to be a public place as members of the public using the car park did not cease to be members of the public and become a special class of persons merely because they used the car park as customers. [May v DPP [2005] EWHC 1280].

 

 

But I do agree that parking in a marked bay, in a private car park, would not be a Road Traffic Act offence in any circumstances.

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes sri my comment was rather wide.

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very simple, that this claim is not a road traffic offence but a disputed claim as a civil tort and therefore not covered by the employment terms.

 

Just had this reply from them

 

Hi Mike, thanks for your email.

 

 

I’ve discussed the matter with HR who advise that as the fine has been incurred and recharged to the organisation,

 

 

the organisation’s position is that the fine is rechargeable to the staff member the vehicle is leased to.

 

 

Therefore, the recharge will be processed in the next available pay run

– which will be November 2014, in full, unless you wish to elect to pay by instalment of up to 3 months.

 

 

Please advise by Friday 10 October if you wish to take this option.

 

I would also like to reiterate as per original letter, that ------- has no involvement whatsoever in the issuing of charges,

or the merits of individual cases in relation to motoring offences

and purely recovers any amounts recharged to it from the employee concerned.

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

you write back and say WHAT FINE?

 

 

please clarify WHERE on ANY PAPERWORK you have received from the Company that issued this speculative invoice, does it use the word 'FINE;

- it does NOT.

 

 

Therefore you cannot invoke any clause I sign to do with my contract with you.

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Asked the question and had this back.

 

Hi Mike, thanks for your email. The parking company call it a charge, TCH call it a fine. Should you wish to dispute the terminology, you need to take it up directly with them. We cannot get involved in the merits of individual cases.

 

Also, I can't offer any further assistance on the matter, and would request that should you require any further clarification on the organisation's position, please liaise directly with the HR team.

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

if TCH are calling it a fine then they need educating

and reporting

 

because that's where the issue has developed from

 

 

a 'fine' would be put through and deducted from your wages - quite rightly so.

 

 

but this is NOT A FINE.

 

 

if the same person got an invoice against you they would not pay it out your wages.

 

 

so someone is either telling porkies here or lying

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...