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.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Hasting only log 9 years max no claims discount


tobyjugg2
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2077 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

Ive been trying to get this done for a month without any success, I simply get mailed back the original... even though the first person that I spoke to said that this is entirely the correct thing to do

 

 

Hi,

 

Thanks for the post,

 

 

you have a valid point and I'd like to clarify a few bits to try and help if I may.

 

 

While it's true that our insurers don't rate over 9 or accept NCB over that, it doesn't mean we will strip you of any additional years.

 

 

We are more than happy to write a bespoke NCB letter showing more should you still be entitled to them when/if you leave us.

All we need is acceptable proof of the amount you came to us with from your previous insurer.

This should generally be written on letterhead and emailed to us.

 

 

If course, we hope you don't need to claim with us but if you do it could reduce your entitlement anyway.

 

 

Also, we do make it clear on our own site we don't take more than 9 but many people place their trust in the comparison site alone to handle the sale

and they deal with many different insurers so don't always have identical questions.

 

 

It's always a really good idea to read through the main site to be sure that the product meets your needs and expectations,

or even call up to buy and ask as much as you want from the team on the phone.

 

 

I hope this helps,

 

 

if you want any further info you can email me at [email protected] as well.

 

Many thanks,

 

Joe

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive been trying to get this done for a month without any success, I simply get mailed back the original... even though the first person that I spoke to said that this is entirely the correct thing to do

 

That is exactly what they said to me, despite them making assurances when I joined them and them receiving my proof of prior no claims entitlement.

 

I assume you provided them with prior proof of your no claims entitlement when you joined - as far as I am aware everyone has too or they simply cancel your insurance. So they have already had proof of your entitlement.

 

Raise a *formal complaint with them, in writing covered with a call -recorded of course - and dont accept any garbage about they will get back to you in 4 weeks or whatever and like me, you should quickly receive a letter confirming your actual entitlement.

 

Churchill are similar in this regard.

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update

Since their response to my request (via complaints process to ensure a record) for proof of actual NC entitlement that they would 'respond' to my complaint more than a month after my renewal date, 2 months after the issue was again raised,

and my reponse to them that I felt they had left me no option but to take it to the ombudsman (which I immediately did), they have sent me a PDF stating my 18 years entitlement, and with it have effectively stated that they find my complaints unfounded.

 

So given that

It should have been got right on initial complaint 11 months ago, particularly given the assurances given to me then,

 

It then should have been got right on renewal, particularly given that I had already raised the issue, but no - they just sent it out with 9 years.

 

It then should certainly have been immediately addressed on again raising the issue when the renewal was received, in which case even at that I would have been 'satisfied',

but NO - they actually stated that it wasn't going to get resolved in any meaningful timeframe

All this despite paying extra for protected no claims.

 

and it seemingly took informing them of escalation to the ombudsman to get what I was entitled to, despite being repeatedly assured by Hastings prior to the bomb dropping that there wouldn't be an issue.

 

HASTINGS DIRECT is definitely one to avoid in my opinion and experience at least for experienced drivers with high no claims who want a simple straightforward experience.

 

Particularly given that insurers are starting to update a national database with your NC entitlements (see Fords links above) so presumably Hastings will be automatically reducing any NC on a National DB.

Try getting that fixed.

 

 

 

just a reminder of what happened after I raised the formal complaint.

 

It seems it is what it takes.

 

- Churchill are similar but do actually note your larger entitlement on their systems (I checked) - you just have to nudge them out of default response.

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Harps, welcome to CAG.

 

 

You need to start a new thread of your own please, this one is three years old.

 

 

Best, HB

 

Hi Honeybee,

Long time no speekey

 

I think the new thread is a bad idea as :

 

1. It means people who have had prior experience wont get the notification of a new post - as I just did here

 

2. The experiences are scattered, rather than together and showing a companies all too common practices

 

 

Hope you are well and the world treating you kindly

 

TJ

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi TJ, nice to see you. :)

 

We usually ask people to start a new thread rather than getting advice for the newbie mixed up with advice for the OP.

 

HB

 

 

yes, I understand thats the practice HB,

Just seems that keeping a topic together seems to have more wins than loses in my experience, and starting afresh loses a lot.

 

regards

TJ

The Tory Legacy

Record high: Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling: Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...