Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you, that is really helpful advice. He paid Goods and Services. I have all the messages we exchanged. Hopefully it will be fine, I just thought it dodgy that he's already saying he will send back if he's unhappy before he's even got the book. Why not have those conversations first.  I have another book to sell too and already have quite a lot of interest.  So am I best sending extra pictures of the condition to each interested person and making it clear it is sold as shown in the pictures and I won't accept refunds? 
    • Done.   I wont be able to send the SAR until the end of the month for TT as I wont get paid until then and I'm a little out of pocket as its my first month working after a spell of no work. Wil that be an issue?   Also what's to stop people jsut selling ficticious debts off? As far as I know, a telecoms provider can't charge you when you move and they can't supply, meaning that a large proportion of that debt is ficticious?
    • Good evening DX100   Here is a draft of my response to the court order.  I would be obliged if you could review it and avise me if I am on the right track.   Defendant Statement of Position in Response to the Order of the Sheriff   The defendant suffered Severe Depression illness almost 12 months prior to the closer of the Bank account. HBOS was made aware of the defendant illness.  A Medical Certificate dated 15 Sept 2017 was handed over to the bank as a proof. (A copy of the report will be submitted exclusively to the court review) The defendant, with the support of her ex-partner, sought a resolution from the OC regarding the escalation of her OD account, which it was mostly formed of extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account. HBOS agreed to reduce the outstand OD sum to £XXX and closed the account. The defendant is confident that her ex-partner has settled the agreed sum with OC, but not absolutely certain, considering her health state at that time. She has been actively trying to reach for her ex-partner for documented evidence, but the fact that, we believe, he is a currently deployed by the UK military forces abroad and communication has been, to put it politely, very difficult due to the nature of his deployment. As the court is aware, the defendant has been trying to retrieve the data of her dealing with/from OC which it should reflect history of the above.  The defendant has already written twice to HBOS, as well as visiting her bank branch, on 01 March 2021, in person demanding the requested data.  HBOS promised to send the data to her as soon as they can. In addition to the above reasoning and contend, the defendant refute the claimants claim is owed or payable.  Due to punitive and extortionate fees the facility became untenable. Any alleged balance  claimed will consist totally of default penalties, punitive charges levied on the account for alleged late, rejected or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety and any alleged balance was due to punitive and extortionate charges . It is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:-               a.    Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and Conditions at inception, which this claim is based on.               b.    Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.               c.    Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account and justify how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.               d.    Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.               e.    Evidence how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.     10.   By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Same thing. The fact that you declared £4.99 means that is the extent of any reasonable foreseeably consequence. Just go for that small amount. If they cause any problems then you can have a laugh when they spend many times more than what you're claiming in order to resist you. In future, when you contract with somebody – you need to understand that effectively it is an exchange of the reasonable expectations which you create in each other by your agreement.  
    • Current situation: contacted myhermes website's robot talk about the parcel and waiting for their email response. Thanks @BankFodder   I understand that if I were going to pursue under contract law, £4.99 would be the amount that I am entitled for compensate. How about if I were going to pursue this matter under tort - negligence? Would this allow me to pursue them according the true value of the items?
  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 25 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

Taken away HGV license

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2147 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

The DVLA appear to have taken my HGV license away from me. I am a type 2 diabetic and have to take insulin. There is supposed to be three stages, regarding getting your license back. The DVLA have only done two stages and taken my license away, without going to the third stage, where you see an independant consultant who specialises in diabetes. I have emailed the DVLA on several occasions, but just get told it is with a team of people and that it takes a long time to answer. I have been waiting for about 7 months overall and I have also been told that I can go to a Magistrates court. The only problem is that I am not sure what I am supposed to do in a Magistrates court. Has anyone been in this situation and possibly help me?


Thanking you

Link to post
Share on other sites
The DVLA appear to have taken my HGV license away from me. I am a type 2 diabetic and have to take insulin. There is supposed to be three stages, regarding getting your license back. The DVLA have only done two stages and taken my license away, without going to the third stage, where you see an independant consultant who specialises in diabetes. I have emailed the DVLA on several occasions, but just get told it is with a team of people and that it takes a long time to answer. I have been waiting for about 7 months overall and I have also been told that I can go to a Magistrates court. The only problem is that I am not sure what I am supposed to do in a Magistrates court. Has anyone been in this situation and possibly help me?


Thanking you


You may find yourself "between 2 stools".

The DVLA may claim that they haven't (yet) refused you your license back but are still processing your case.


Who told you (and when) that you could appeal to the Magistrates? If it was when they first revoked your license then I suspect an appeal based on "incorrect revocation" is doomed to fail, as clearly their guidelines allow them to do so. An appeal must also be made within 6 months of the adverse decision.


If they made a decision to refuse you a license, then again you could appeal. You'd have to show that they weren't following their own guidance, and have the support of a Consultant Diabetologist's evidence.


I helped a friend who had had a Group 1 (so car, not vocational) license. Their license was revoked on medical grounds (a neurological condition, not diabetes), and they didn't apply again / appeal for many years, as the wording of DVLA's standards were "condition completely controlled". Their condition is never likely to be "completely controlled", but they weren't a risk as they would be aware of an episode looming and could pull over and stop...... however, the standards didn't reflect that, until they were changed to read "adequately controlled".

Once the standards changed they re-applied having been seen by a hospital Consultant (who found no reason for them not reaching the required standard), but it took from June until December (and lots of chasing!) as DVLA were "very busy", and "the documents are with the medical advisors" with "no decision yet". The license was sent out 17 weeks and 6 days after DVLA received the final medical report .....


They have an 18 week target time from when they have all the evidence in, but even so that is merely a target .......... and once the 18 weeks is past they could just say "ohh, it is a target, not a limit".


Another issue you'll face if you did go to court is that not only are the standards higher for Group 2 / "vocational", but the Magistrates are likely to be more cautious given the greater risks with PCVs / HGVs. So, you'll need to show that you meet the standards, and aren't a risk.



Group 2 entitlement vocational – lorries, buses


May apply for any Group 2 licence. Must satisfy the following criteria:


  • no episode of hypoglycaemia requiring the assistance of another person has occurred in the preceding 12 months
  • has full awareness of hypoglycaemia
  • regularly monitors blood glucose at least twice daily and at times relevant to driving, (no more than 2 hours before the start of the first journey and every 2 hours while driving), using a glucose meter with a memory function to measure and record blood glucose levels. More frequent testing may be required if for any reason there is a greater risk of hypoglycaemia for example after physical activity or altered meal routineAt the annual examination by an independent Consultant Diabetologist, the last 3 months of blood glucose readings must be available
  • advised to use a modern blood glucose meter which has a memory chip
  • must demonstrate an understanding of the risks of hypoglycaemia

There are no other debarring complications of diabetes such as a visual field defect.

If it meets the medical standards a 1 year licence will be issued.


So, have you seen a hospital consultant Diabetologist?

Have you got 3 months (at least twice daily) of blood glucose readings available on a meter with a memory function?

Have you had your visual fields checked? diabetic retinopathy screening? do you have any peripheral neuropathy? : any report should cover these.


Have you asked to have a 'controlled exposure to hypoglycaemia' in hsopital so that you can demonstrate you would be aware of an impending hypoglycaemic episode? (some diabetics found they had reduced awareness of impending attacks with certain insulins, so if you did have reduced awareness ask to change insulins... but this might 'restart the clock' on the process!)


If the current delay is "being seen by an independant Consultant Diabetologist" : can DVLA or your current hospital Diabetologist advise who it is you should be seeing so that you can arrange it?.


As for my friend : we asked a Magistrate friend of ours for advice. They noted they weren't aware of their Bench ever having heard an appeal against a DVLA refusal, but suggested fully complying with DVLA's process and trying to get DVLA to make a decision, only going to court if there was a refusal or it was well over the 18 weeks limit .... and even then only if the appellant could show DVLA had breached its own guidelines (so an arbitrary or irrational decision rather than 'rule of law')


A concern of mine was that the sole person who can make the decision is the Secretary of State, and through them, their advisors. I was worried that if it went to an appeal they might say "it is our sole decision", which would make an appeal a rubber-stamp. The counter to this is that by Parliament creating the appeals process, it cannot be a mere rubber stamp : the court must have the ability to direct the Secretary of State to (at least) reconsider the decision.


If you did decide to go to court to appeal either a refusal or a "de facto refusal by not reaching a decision", given the appeals process seems so rare, consider finding a solicitor who specializes in Road Traffic law, ideally one who has seen such appeals before.


Sorry I haven't got much more constructive to add : My own experience with DVLA trying to help my friend was like wading through treacle.


See also my posts as part of these 2 threads:






Record your calls for your own notes. Photocopy any documentation you send DVLA for when they claim they have lost it, and send it Special Delivery for when they claim they never received it!.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...