Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • doesn't matter you've admitted about the DN and anyway where have you done that and to whom?   by assignment arrows are the creditor regardless to your acking of that fact or not.      
    • Just ignore the letter.   Block/bounce their emails or let them come through so you know what they're up to, and keep us posted.............   😎
    • Thanks DX,   I've already admitted that a default notice was served in 2010 by MBNA, so it seems I might be left hoping that they're unable to produce the original CCA.   I've never acknowledged Arrrow as the creditor and continue to pay MBNA.  Is that in my favour?   Cheers,   Richard.
    • For PCN's received through the post [ANPR camera capture]       please answer the following questions.       1 Date of the infringement  10/07/2019       2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date]  12/07/19      3 Date received  13/07/19      4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?/    Yes      5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event?  yes      6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal]  yes  Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up  yes      7 Who is the parking company?  Civil enforcement      8. Where exactly [carpark name and town]    10B QUEENS ROAD, CONSETT, DH8 0BH       For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. Yes    …………………..     This is what I sent to CE appeal in my own words   Reason For Appeal: Firstly I had an appointment at that time with the dentist. My last visit 2 years ago the car park was free and was not aware of the new parking system.   The sign at the front is very obscure especially turning right into the car park. Where I did park, the sign opposite was turned 90 degrees making it hard to see.   The door at the surgery was wedged open when I entered not realizing there was a sign relating to the new system . I cannot remember if there was any signs inside the surgery but once in I always pick up a magazine to read until the dentist is ready to see me.      My statement and evidence to POPLA. in response to CE evidence highlighting main arguments.   Par 18 . The image submitted from the Appellant of a sign slightly turned is still readable and is not obscured...….. Me Not from where I was parked. A photo from the bay shows a pole with the sign facing away.  Par 18 . Furthermore, it highlights that the Appellant was aware of the signage on the site and failed to comply with the terms and conditions regardless.......  Me I treat this paragraph with contempt. There is nothing to "highlight" here as I maintain I did not see any signage; Regardless ? I could have legally parked right outside the Surgery as there were spaces at the time but having "regard" for disabled and elderly, parked further away having to cross a busy road to the Surgery. Par 20....,. Furthermore, the Appellant failed to utilise the operator’s helpline phone number,,, (displayed at the bottom of signage) to report the occurrence, or to request advice on what further action could be taken.... Me How could I have done this ? I only realized there were signs there when the PCN arrived. Summary. I stand by statements and maintain that I did not see any signage entering or leaving the car park. The main sign at the entrance is too small and easily missed when you have to turn right though busy traffic and once through carefully avoid pedestrians, some walking their dogs. The main sign is blank at the back. When you leave the car park I would have noticed the private parking rules if the writing was on both sides. Roadworks signs close to the parking sign at the time did not help either. [see photo] CE evidence is flawed, illegal and contemptuous. Photos submitted are from months ago, Today I have driven into the car park and noticed the same signs turned 90 degrees including the one opposite my bay. CE have done nothing to rectify this disregarding my evidence and the maintenance of the car park. Showing number plates is a total disregard to patients privacy and I object to these photos being allowed as evidence on the grounds that they may be illegal.    POPLAS assessment and decision....unsuccessful   Assessor summary of operator case   The operator states that the appellant’s vehicle was parked on site without a permit. It has issued a parking charge notice (PCN) for £100 as a result. Assessor summary of your case   The appellant states that he parked on site to attend a dental appointment. He states that the terms of the site had changed since the last time he parked two years ago. He states that signage at the entrance to and throughout the site did not make the terms clear. The appellant has provided various photographs taken on and around the site. Assessor supporting rational for decision   The appellant accepts that he was the driver of the vehicle on the date in question. I will therefore consider his liability for the charge as the driver.   The operator has provided photographs of the appellant’s vehicle taken by its automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras. These photographs show the vehicle entering the site at 14:17 and leaving the site at 15:13. It is clear that the vehicle remained on site for a period of 56 minutes.   Both the appellant and operator have provided photographs of the signs installed on the site. The operator has also provided a site map showing where on site each sign is located.   Having reviewed all of the evidence, I am satisfied that signage at the entrance to the site clearly states: “Permit Holders Only … See car park signs for terms and conditions”.   Signs within the site itself clearly state: “DENTAL PRACTICE PERMIT HOLDERS ONLY … ALL PATIENTS AND VISITORS MUST REGISTER FOR A PERMIT AT THE PRACTICE RECEPTION ... IF YOU BREACH ANY OF THESE TERMS YOU WILL BE CHARGED £100.”   The signs make the terms of parking on the site clear, are placed in such a way that a motorist would see the signs when parking and are in line with the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice.   The operator has provided evidence to show that a search for the appellant’s vehicle has been carried out against the list of vehicles for which a valid permit was held on the date in question. The appellant’s vehicle does not appear on this list.   The appellant states that he parked on site to attend a dental appointment . I accept that this may have been the case, however I do not accept that this entitled the appellant to park on site outside of the terms.   The appellant states that the terms of the site had changed since the last time he parked two years ago. The operator’s photographs of the signage on site are dated 27 March 2019.   It is clear based on these photographs that the terms had been in place for at least three months by the time the appellant parked, which I am satisfied was a reasonable period for any regular user of the site to adapt to any change to the terms.   The appellant states that signage at the entrance to and throughout the site did not make the terms clear. He has provided various photographs taken on and around the site.   As detailed above, I am satisfied based on the evidence as a whole that signage made the terms sufficiently clear. I am satisfied from the evidence that the terms of the site were made clear and that the appellant breached the terms by parking without registering for a permit.   I am therefore satisfied that the PCN was issued correctly and I must refuse this appeal.   docs1.pdf
  • Our picks

StarFlake

Sheepskin jacket is ruined by the dry cleaner, who refuses to compensate - Please HELP!

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1656 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I've taken my 1.5 year old sheepskin jacket to the American Dry Cleaning Company early in February. The lady who served me encouraged me to bring as many items as I could to take advantage of the discount they had in the shop. She also offered to become the member of the dry cleaners so i could get a further discount on dry cleaning service, which I did. She could not find the classification for my jacket leather type in the system and put the normal leather jacket instead of sheepskin in the system and on the receipt. There was a lot of other paper work and she filled in a lot of different forms and asked me to sign lots of them. She said it was just some formality and she needed me to sign it so she can send the items to the specialist for dry-cleaning. When I raised a question about the quality of their service for sheepskin type of leather she said that they send it off to the specialist and he is really good and they never had any issues with him and I should not worry. I've taken her word on that and left my jacket with them.

 

Few weeks later it came back shrunk few sizes, lost color and shine, with disintegrated belt hooks and faded trimming on the button holes and around the edges. It looked horrible! I've refused to accept it and it was sent back to the specialist for investigation and repair. When it was returned few weeks later, it was in not much better condition and I've decided to file for the compensation. The shop assistant filled in the form and sent it to the head office. After not hearing from them for few weeks I called them and was told that it’s being assessed by the specialist and they will come back to me in few days time. I called a week later and was told that it's been repaired again and apparently looks amazing and I should go and collect it from the local shop in the next day. This is not what I was expecting as the jacket was already repaired once and I didn't accept it. Anyway, when I went to the shop to take a look, it turned out they forgot to send it. It's been 2 months since I've left my jacket for cleaning and it's almost April now, the timing it completely unreasonable and the jacket is ruined as far as I am concerned.

 

I had a chat with the customer service person and also with the shop manager who completely refused to compensate me and said that he will only refund the cost of the cleaning, nothing else. He said that I've signed the form where I was warned about the risks and this relieves them of any responsibility for compensation. I've tried to explain that I was not given any copies of such document, and the shop assistant didn't explain in full detail what the forms I was signing were for. I was left under impression it was just to describe what type jacket it was as they had no sheepskin classification in their system and to describe the condition of the item. I feel like complete idiot for being duped like this as the lady who served me seemed so genuine and told me that I have nothing to worry about and the leather specialist they are working with is really good and never had any issues.

 

Today I called the TSA (trading association) for help and they said that this particular company is not their member hence they can't help me. It's very strange as the company's website mentioned that they follow TSA service guidelines, etc...

 

To make things worse, I also don't have a receipt for the jacket as it was bought for cash in a boutique shop abroad almost 1.5 years ago. I paid almost 1500 pounds for it but it never crossed my mind to keep the receipt for such long time.

 

Please help me with some advice; I really don't know what to do now! Shall I go to the small claims court or try to write or talk to any other consumer rights organizations. I don't really know what my rights are in this case. Can I get at least some of the cost of the jacket? My heart bleeds to see that so much money was wasted. I've been saving for a year to buy a jacket like this and didn't get much time to wear it, and now I'll have to buy a new jacket (not as nice and definitely not as expensive) for the next winter.

 

Thank you,

Inna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi Inna,

Sorry, I can't advise in detail! It would be worth waiting for some replies to your thread since there are very knowledgeable people here who can advise you.

 

Going to a small claims court may not be a good idea because you don't have a purchase receipt for the jacket (so unable to prove its value) as well as the paperwork you signed at the dry cleaners may state the risk in cleaning.

 

If you can prove that the dry cleaners were negligent and didn't take care of your jacket, then you should be entitled to some form of compensation.

However, you would not be entitled to compensation if the paperwork you signed absolved the dry cleaners of responsibility if there is any damage.

 

I could very well be wrong in the above and hope that other people will provide you with better advice!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would ask the dry cleaners for a copy of the form you signed. If they say that you have signed something which limits their liability for the cost of the cleaning, they should show you.

 

Even if that is in the T&Cs, the Unfair Contract Terms Act says that any liability for negligently caused damage to property (like a jacket) can only be excluded, if the exclusion is 'reasonable'. I would say that a blanket exclusion is not reasonable and can be challenged.

 

I would be tempted to proceed with a 'letter before action' asking them to pay for the cost of the jacket. Give them 14 days to respond and state that a county court claim will be issued if no response is received. Only do this if you are prepared to follow through (I think you should - small claims action is quite easy and the risk is low).

 

In the meantime it might be good to try and get the jacket. You will want to have some proof as to its condition, to avoid the store trying to argue that it has been repaired and is all fine.


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the discussions you had at the time will form part of the contractual obligations for both parties so the reassurance you received verbally will make a big difference to other conditions that may or may not be published.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...