Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi all! I've now had a "final notification letter" through from ECP. I assume I should continue to ignore this, but is there likely any action I need to take? Do you need to see a copy of the letter? Thanks
    • Please will you upload the defence in a PDF format document
    • Afternoon All - after 3 weeks of silence, this morning I received an email from HMCTS advising that P2G have rejected my claim. Decide whether to proceed Parcel2Go.com has rejected your claim. You need to decide whether to proceed with the claim. You need to respond before 4pm on 25 June 2024. Your claim won’t continue if you don’t respond by then. This is their ‘defence’ Their defence Why they disagree with the claim When choosing a service on the Defendants website, the Claimant chose to book their order with Evri and selected to take out £20 parcel protection which comes with the service. On the first page of the booking process, the Claimant entered the value of £265 for the contents and was offered parcel protection for loss or damages against their goods for £13.99 + VAT. The Claimant selected no, which then produced a pop up which explained 'We strongly recommend that you protect the full value of your item(s).' however, the Claimant still did not take this protection out and instead continued with the booking process. At the end of the booking process, the Claimant was offered this again which was refused and the Claimant continued with the booking by accepting the terms and conditions which re-iterates the information provided in the booking process. The parcel was sent, however, seems to be delayed in transit. The parcel finally started to track again, however, when delivered the parcel was empty with no contents. As such, the claim was re-opened and attempted to be settled for the £20 protection taken out in the booking process. This was refused by the Claimant as they felt they should be paid the full amount of the value entered when booking. Unfortunately, due to the refusal of the parcel protection in the booking process the Defendant is not liable to settle the claim to the value and only to the parcel protection taken out. The Defendant shall rely on the Terms and Conditions of carriage in particular section 9. The Defendant understands that the contents have not be handled with due care and attention, which is not being disputed, however, they are disputing the amount they are liable to. They have requested mediation, I’m sure not least to drag the case out even longer, but I can see no benefit to me in this and so shall reject it. As ever, I’d welcome your thoughts guys. g59   
    • I doubt HMCTS holds any data on whether arrests by AEAs required police assistance.  They couldn't or wouldn't provide data on how many of warrants issued were successfully executed - just the number issued!  In my experience, arrest warrants whether with or without bail are [surprisingly] carried out with little or no fuss.  I think it's about how you treat people - a little respect and courtesy goes a long way. If you treat people badly they will react the same way. Occasions when police are called to assist are not common and, having undertaken or managed many thousands of these over the years, I can only recall a handful of occasions when police assistance was necessary. On one occasion, many years ago, I arrested and transported a man from Hampshire to Bristol prison on a committal warrant. It was just me and he was no problem. I didn't know the Bristol area (pre Sat Nav) and he was kind enough to provide directions - seems he knew the prison.  One young chap on another committal warrant jumped out of his back window and I had to chase him across several garden fences.  When he gave up (we were both knackered) I agreed to drive by his girlfriend's house to say farewell for a while.  I gave them a few moments and he was fine. The most difficult are breach warrants but mainly in locating the defendant as they don't want to go back to prison - can't blame them.  These were always dealt with by the police until the Access to Justice Act transferred responsibility from them to the magistrates' courts. The fact was the police did not actively pursue them and generally only executed them when they arrested someone for something else and found they had a breach warrant outstanding.  Hence the transfer of responsibility.
    • thats down to mcol making that option available for you to select, you cant force it. typically if there are known processing delays at northants bulk it will be atleast 14 days later if not more.
  • 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

Met Parking Services and McDonalds car park


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3434 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,

 

In the past when ive had these i have filed them in the bin and ignored the reminders and nothing has ever come of them,

but, i am reading more about them going to court these days so want people opinions on if i should appeal or ignore ( or pay ? )

 

A sunday afternoon, spent 112 minutes in mcdonalds having lunch,

drinking a couple of coffees and utilising Maccy D's free wifi to watch Lewis Hamilton

win the grand prix championship and Liverpool play on sky go on ipad.

 

I did notice the parking signs as i drove in but assumed they were 2 hours stay like most other places.

 

just recieved a Parking Charge Notice from Met parking services

 

so what to do next ? owt or nowt ?

 

Scort

Link to post
Share on other sites

the general advice is to appeal on any grounds you wish such as signage not visible to driver when entering car park.

 

 

They will reject it but will have to give you a method of appealing to POPLA.

 

 

This will cost them money and you can then defeat the claim because you havent caused them a loss so the amount claimed is an unenforceable penalty.

 

 

Whilst this is happening, find out if the Maccyd's is a franchise or directly owned

and kick up a fuss about the all too small time limit bearing in mind you spent a fortune on lining your arteries with their fat.

- or tasty products, whichever you prefer.

 

 

show them that you are being penalised for spending your money and you will have to go elsewhere

if this is how they treat good customers and you would rather be a bad one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What date was the "offence" ???

 

What date did you get the notice to keeper (NTK) ?????

 

I agree with the above posts.

Signs must be readable from the drivers seat at the entrance to the area or no "contract" is formed.

 

If you can photo the sign and post it up on the thread.

Good Luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are missing the point sligthtly inasmuch as it doesnt matter why you appeal to MET as they are going to reject your appeal anyway. What you want is the POPLA code so you can appeal to the independent adjudicator and this will cost Met money for the appeal and the you can beat them on the demand is not representative of theor losses nor a genuine pre-estimate of loss for a breach of contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Read other threads to put the flesh in your appeal.

 

1) Fine is not a geunine pre estimate of loss which means it is an unenforceable penalty

2) You demand to see sight of their contract with the LANDOWNER (Not the franchise)

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd just appeal using GPEOL and be done with it. POPLA will ignore everything else anyway. And remember, it is NOT a fine.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Merry Christmas all

 

just before santa came the letter of rejection arrived from Met parking giving me the needed POPLA code

 

 

so , in a nut shell, whats next to do ?

 

What was your appeal to MET that they rejected?

 

 

The signage you have posted hopes/pretends to be a contractual charge...

 

But states ' No unauthorised parking '.

 

You cannot enter into a contract for something that you are not allowed to do.

 

It mentions ' failure to comply with the terms and conditions ' , numerous times, so suggests breach of contract.

 

This means the charge must be a genuine pre estimate of loss that the landowner has suffered, due to the driver spending money in maccy ds for longer than the sign lets them.

 

An appeal to POPLA must include;

 

1. Please provide a breakdown of the genuine pre estimate of loss, that this charge must represent, for any alleged breach of the terms and conditions displayed on the signage.

2. Proof, by sight of contact, that MET has lawful authority to issue and pursue parking charge notices through to a court of law.

3. Proof that the charge is not punitive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What was your appeal to MET that they rejected?

 

 

The signage you have posted hopes/pretends to be a contractual charge...

 

But states ' No unauthorised parking '.

 

You cannot enter into a contract for something that you are not allowed to do.

 

It mentions ' failure to comply with the terms and conditions ' , numerous times, so suggests breach of contract.

 

This means the charge must be a genuine pre estimate of loss that the landowner has suffered, due to the driver spending money in maccy ds for longer than the sign lets them.

 

An appeal to POPLA must include;

 

1. Please provide a breakdown of the genuine pre estimate of loss, that this charge must represent, for any alleged breach of the terms and conditions displayed on the signage.

2. Proof, by sight of contact, that MET has lawful authority to issue and pursue parking charge notices through to a court of law.

3. Proof that the charge is not punitive.

 

cheers Armadillo - im putting together the appeal to popla so will pist up for the forums perusal when done

 

thanks for everyones help so far

Link to post
Share on other sites

Appeal however you want to popla. Just make sure your main appeal is using GPEOL and you are guaranteed to win.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The sign says that the parking company are operating the car park on behalf of McDonald's. I would guess that McD's are not the landowner, so as the loss will be their loss and not McD's, you should ask them for a copy of their contract with the landowner to chase you for money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

MCD's are the landowner. They just pretend to ignore it so they dont have to take responsibility

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maccy D's are often franchises and the contract between MET and MCD would then be worthless as they are not the occupier or the owner of the land. The site people are too scared of the corporation to say that they dont want this imposed upon them so you get a generic "sod off" letter

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...