Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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

Electronic Signing - you don't need to use it.


jasta11
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3101 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

Seems to me there are bigger battles to fight for a person on benefits

Why does it matter HOW you sign as long as you get your money?

Can you explain to me why it matters, except to be petty?

 

It's not a hill I'd choose to die on myself, but here's the thing: if you have a right to do (or not do) something then you do not need to explain yourself when exercising that right.

 

My worry about it would be that I know how DWP computer systems work, or rather, don't work. So while, as I said, I'd not necessarily choose to fight this particular battle, I can see why people would prefer to have a paper signature and watch the signing clerk enter the evidence.

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

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Seems to me there are bigger battles to fight for a person on benefits

Why does it matter HOW you sign as long as you get your money?

Can you explain to me why it matters, except to be petty?

 

I think there is enough evidence already that the systems used by the DWP are unreliable, not secure and also have nasty backdoors built into them. Just look at UJM and the many [problem] jobs available on there.

 

I can see why some people may not trust them with any more biometric data than needed

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

Add in the fact that advisers have used dwps own failings as excuses for sanctions in the past, this is another reason to insist on paper copies of everything.

 

For one of the short times I was on JSA, They told me they were going paperless and had to record everything on UJM

 

My responce was to ask the adviser to go and see their manager and to produce the legislation that required me to go paperless. After 10 mins she returned and said that the legislation was viewable from the gove website.

 

My reply was I know it was and I had read it and quoted back the appropriate statement. No more was said

 

The adviser also saw that I had a copy of the universal Toolkit training pack with me.

 

Needless to say it took 2 appointments to set up my claimant commitment. The following week I signed off as I found close to full time employment :D

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

found this if it's any help to someone who wishes to sign by paper only

 

- "Article 3(2) of this Order amends the Jobseekers Allowance Regulations to allow the capture of

signatures electronically. It enables the Department to use alternative methods to pen and

paper to capture signatures from Claimants wherever it is required in its business. It does not,

however, make the use of electronic signatures compulsory as a condition of receiving benefit

and was never intended to do so. "

Link to post
Share on other sites

i just want to add even thou the dwp never helped me in anyway either the times i've been working or the times claiming jsa. it's not about being petty it's about not letting them dictate to you and lie about system and practices which aren't mandatory. also i once reported a4e for a fraudulent signature.......and you can guess the dwp did nothing about it .

Link to post
Share on other sites

[...] I once reported a4e for a fraudulent signature.......and you can guess the dwp did nothing about it .

 

I also lodged a number of complaints about A4e, including one where client confidentiality had been breached (even mentioned the names of the clients). Judging by the hostility at subsequent meetings, I can only assume butts got kicked :lol:

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

I was stilll getting advisers assuming I'll sign electronically - even though there's a clear note on my claim that I don't use it. Apparently the hard-working(!) clerks 'haven't time' to read any notes on customers claims.

 

I sorted it - hopefully once and for all - by telling the last adviser I saw that any further mention of me using the electronic pads would result in that adviser being reported for a breach of the Data Protection act.

 

Got a new miserable adviser who wants me to bring in a copy of my CV for her to keep...is she in for a disappointment! As we all know, they can mandate you to create one and show them you have one but they cannot make you provide a copy for them to keep. Same goes for email and phone numbers. Got all the relevant FOI responses ready.

 

I'm sure she'll tell me it's mandatory and a sanction referral will follow, etc so I'm going to lead her into a lovely trap and get her on audio record saying this. Then she gets reported to her Manager and District Manager for lying and making threats, followed by 'the biggie'..reported to the ICO for attempted Data Protection act breach. Will give me the excuse to demand a new advisor, preferably one of the more decent ones who understands the guidance. :)

 

I'm through with showing these people any sort of tolerance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was stilll getting advisers assuming I'll sign electronically - even though there's a clear note on my claim that I don't use it. Apparently the hard-working(!) clerks 'haven't time' to read any notes on customers claims.

 

I sorted it - hopefully once and for all - by telling the last adviser I saw that any further mention of me using the electronic pads would result in that adviser being reported for a breach of the Data Protection act.

 

Got a new miserable adviser who wants me to bring in a copy of my CV for her to keep...is she in for a disappointment! As we all know, they can mandate you to create one and show them you have one but they cannot make you provide a copy for them to keep. Same goes for email and phone numbers. Got all the relevant FOI responses ready.

 

I'm sure she'll tell me it's mandatory and a sanction referral will follow, etc so I'm going to lead her into a lovely trap and get her on audio record saying this. Then she gets reported to her Manager and District Manager for lying and making threats, followed by 'the biggie'..reported to the ICO for attempted Data Protection act breach. Will give me the excuse to demand a new advisor, preferably one of the more decent ones who understands the guidance. :)

 

I'm through with showing these people any sort of tolerance.

 

Jasta, pardon my ignorance but where does the DPA come into it? Thanks.

 

Edit

 

Sorry - just re-read the ICO response... Cheers.

My views are my own and are not representative of any organisation. if you've found my post helpful please click on the star below.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...