Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have just read the smaller print on their signs. It says that you can pay at the end of your parking session. given that you have ten minutes grace period the 35 seconds could easily have been taken up with walking back to your car, switching on the engine and then driving out. Even in my younger days when I used to regularly exceed speed limits, I doubt I could have done that in 35 seconds even when I  had a TR5.
    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
  • 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

Fare-dodging banker banned from City


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3425 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

A London banker who regularly avoided buying a train ticket on his commute to the City has been banned from working in the financial services industry.

 

BlackRock director Jonathan Paul Burrows was caught by inspectors at Cannon Street station last year and admitted to avoiding the £21.50 fare from Stonegate in East Sussex.

 

In total, Mr Burrows is believed to have dodged £42,550 in fares.

 

The City watchdog said he "demonstrated a lack of honesty and integrity".

 

"Mr Burrows has admitted that, on a number of occasions, he deliberately and knowingly failed to purchase a valid ticket to cover his entire journey," the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) said.

 

"As Mr Burrows held a senior position within the financial services industry and was an approved person, he should have been a role model for others and his conduct has fallen short of the standard expected for someone in his position," the organisation added.

 

_79740118_de24-1.jpg Mr Burrows boarded trains at Stonegate in East Sussex, where there are no ticket barriers

 

Mr Burrows avoided paying the full fare by boarding the London-bound train at Stonegate - a rural station with no barriers - without purchasing a ticket.

 

On arriving in London, he went through the barriers at Cannon Street Station using an Oyster travel card, incurring a maximum fare of £7.20.

'I was foolish'

Mr Burrows, who is now banned for life from working in any regulated financial industries, has since paid back the £42,550, plus £450 in legal costs.

 

Reacting to the FCA's decision, he said: "I have always recognised that what I did was foolish. I have apologised to all concerned and reiterate that apology publicly."

 

However he added that "the size of the settlement [with Southeastern] could be said to have led to a distorted perception of the scale of my wrongdoing".

 

"While I respect the FCA's decision today, I also regret it, coming as it did after a 20-year career in the City that was without blemish.

 

"I recognise that the FCA has on its plate more profound wrongdoing than mine in the financial services sector, and I am sorry that my case has taken up its time at this critical juncture for the future of the City and its reputation."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Story sounds familiar, wonder if he was a poster on cag at some point

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 remember that.

Maybe he would have given the same 'attitude' to the magistrates if the ToC had taken him to court?

 

It seemed very much to me as 'I've paid them what I owe them now finally they've caught me so that's ok then.....fair game'.

 

No, it isn't ok, I don't blame the TOC (who are, after all is said and done, a commercial company) for accepting a huge 'offer out of court' as £40k + isn't small beans to anyone- let's be honest!

However it doesn't serve 'justice' for someone who can easily, (really, really easily) afford to pay £20 a journey to then be allowed to simply recompense the TOC he was stealing from for 4 years for their 'losses' without actually acknowledging or paying a penalty for the outright arrogant theft he was committing.

 

I can understand when someone who simply can't afford to pay for a journey tries to fare dodge, but this is like me stealing a car regularly to get to work, despite the fact I can easily afford to buy a new one every few years, it's insulting to normal punters and staff and his attitude seems to be 'oh well I made a mistake and lost at the 'game of fare dodging'.

 

Pathetic -if that's now cost you any chance of a career in a role that demands (and should do) absolute trust from client and employer then you bloody well deserve it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gawd blimey!!

 

has since paid back the £42,550, plus £450 in legal costs.

 

So he had the £42.500 in funds, to pay back in full, yet he wouldn't pay the £20 fare due each time?

 

Pathetic arrogance indeed!

 

if that's now cost you any chance of a career in a role that demands (and should do) absolute trust from client and employer then you bloody well deserve it.

 

Hear Hear! Just desserts, I say!!

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every single minute of it!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...