Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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 
        • 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

Watch who you vote for


Mr.P
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3366 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

Just stumbled across this little peice: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/21/benefit-claimants-cars-buses-ukip-leafletBan claimants from driving - What a wonderful idea , Surprised the Tories didn't come up with the idea, it would fit in with their ethos...

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/21/benefit-claimants-cars-buses-ukip-leaflet

 

 

A Ukip-branded leaflet has suggested benefit claimants should be banned from driving on UK roads to ease congestion.

 

The document, which appears to have been sent out by the campaign of Lynton Yates, the Ukip candidate for Charnwood in Leicestershire, asks why claimants “have the privilege to spend the taxpayer’s hard-earned money on a car” and suggests they instead “catch a bus”.

 

Edited by citizenB
put quote to give some detail to the post
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is actually a recycled tory policy from the 1980's. When a load of the Broadmoor Wing of the conservatives joined UKIP they took their wonky ideas with them. I cannot support a party that had Niel Hamilton as its deputy leader, I would rather vote for the legalisation of murder party should one come canvassing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They conveniently seem to have overlooked the fact that there are lots of people who where employed as drivers some professional drivers ,LGV/PSV who perhaps are unable to find work. There are lots of lorry drivers who travel over 100miles to the place of work(then work away for 2-3weeks), And this would not be a realistic option if they lost their licences due to some cretin in government thinking it is a good idea, there are many areas of the uk that don't have much industry so little choice of employment type in local areas

And just how is someone on benefits supposed to afford the fares charged by public transport, that's assuming the public transport is reliable enough in the first place

I wouldn't vote for UKIP as their policies are too similar to that of the Tories hammer the poor and vulnerable ,

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not voting for any party that refuses to knowledge the dwp is unfit for purpose and that the current economics are unsustainable and that a different mindset is required to being about social justice.

 

Sadly only 1 party is willing to shake things up. And its NOT UKIP :)

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

Just shows what a bunch of XXXXXXX UKIP are . Anyone who could even consider voting for them deserves deporting to a remote island IMO. Mind you it they may reduce the population by killing the likes of me off with a stroke through anger

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really have a choice of who to vote for - I live in a contested seat and have to vote labour in the hope we can get the Tory MP out. Tactical voting - when one party you're not keen on is better than another party you hate.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

urgh i h8 tactical voting.

Voting out of short term fear vs long term achievement.

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

What a radical idea. I question how on earth do those on means tested benefits manage to run and use a motor car in the first place? I accept that for those that are in receipt of the relevant benefit that entitles them to a Motability car do get preferential help. We don't receive any means tested benefits and manage to live off my husband's state pension only and we couldn't afford to put petrol in a car, never mind keep one on the road.

What I do suggest is that the DWP could well look into how some benefit claimants on means tested benefits do manage to use and run a car. From memory, the latest figures are that the standing costs, excluding capital depreciation and finance, amount to approx. £22 a week before you put a pint of petrol in it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a radical idea. I question how on earth do those on means tested benefits manage to run and use a motor car in the first place? I accept that for those that are in receipt of the relevant benefit that entitles them to a Motability car do get preferential help. We don't receive any means tested benefits and manage to live off my husband's state pension only and we couldn't afford to put petrol in a car, never mind keep one on the road.

What I do suggest is that the DWP could well look into how some benefit claimants on means tested benefits do manage to use and run a car. From memory, the latest figures are that the standing costs, excluding capital depreciation and finance, amount to approx. £22 a week before you put a pint of petrol in it.

 

As the majority of means tested benefit claiments WORK I think the answer is very simple..........

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

For a start it's most likely that those who do have a car and are on benefits have owned the car prior to loosing their job or becoming too ill to work , as for finance not all cars are on finance i have never had a new or second hand car on finance always bought outright,usually in cash in order to get a better deal, the running of a car petrol will depend on how much you use it, insurance can be cheap enough , as can MOT's the road tax used to be the hardest thing to pay for on benefits, and probably the biggest waist of money as you see very little if anything for what they expect you to pay each year

I forgot to add some club together to keep a car on the road , it's like these crappy tv programs that show big flat screen tv's in their houses , as if they have somehow got it whilst on benefits, they may have done, but most probably second hand or from a shop like bright house , or maybe it was bought cheap from the local smack head

Link to post
Share on other sites

And seeing as Redriding does or used to work in dwp i am surprised that they have forgotten that for working people (Majority of means tested benefits are paid to) that there is a certain degree of income disregard)

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

But you can still work and receive IS/ JSA/ESA.

 

If you were in receipt of either of those three benefits, and even if you worked as well, the maximum amount of money that you could have per week to be eligible for those benefits was calculated as being just enough to have a basic standard of living. You can't tell me that it would be right that those on those benefits would have enough spare cash each week to run and keep a motor vehicle on the road? Somebody on IB ESA of say £120 a week would have the available funds to run a car - no way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you were in receipt of either of those three benefits, and even if you worked as well, the maximum amount of money that you could have per week to be eligible for those benefits was calculated as being just enough to have a basic standard of living. You can't tell me that it would be right that those on those benefits would have enough spare cash each week to run and keep a motor vehicle on the road? Somebody on IB ESA of say £120 a week would have the available funds to run a car - no way.

 

It is not a basic standard of living at all. It is subsistence. With all the other restrictions and high heating , public transport costs I do not know how people exist on the basic single persons allowance and keep a roof over their heads. I know poverty is relative but we live in a supposedly advanced western society .

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

So how do people on benefits afford to buy a car when they get a job if it's not in walking distance or accessible by public transport? It could prevent them getting work if they sell it while unemployed.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro 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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not a basic standard of living at all. It is subsistence. With all the other restrictions and high heating , public transport costs I do not know how people exist on the basic single persons allowance and keep a roof over their heads. I know poverty is relative but we live in a supposedly advanced western society .

 

 

I maintained a car when I was unemployed.

 

How did I do it?

I budgeted.while I was working to the point where i pay a years insurance and tax in one hit. Then save up enough to cover other car essentials. While unemployed I restricted use of the car to important use only. Without the car, I would of not been able to get any of the last few jobs I have taken.

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

So how do people on benefits afford to buy a car when they get a job if it's not in walking distance or accessible by public transport? It could prevent them getting work if they sell it while unemployed.

 

This is, pretty much, the key point. If someone becomes unemployed, the absolute last thing they should do is sell their car. Even an old banger would be a huge capital outlay to a newly employed person who's been on JSA or ESA for a while.

 

In any case, why does no-one ask the obvious question: why in the name of all that's holy is it any of the government's business what unemployed people spend their money on? Seriously, do the smug amongst us really think that you can just hand powers willy-nilly to the government whenever you feel like laying the boot into some other group of people, and safely assume that it will never be you that's on the receiving end of the huge stick you just handed to those in power?

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

indeed

If the government were to dictate what we were to spend our money on, lets just go the whole way, abolish currency for us plebs and take what we are given

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...