Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • 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.
  • 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

HCE Visit Today - unknown autoglass CCJ **Resolved**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3194 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

hi Folks,

looking for some advice on what to to...possibly quite an urgent one :(

 

I've had a visit today from "High Court Enforcement" (HCEO?), I wasn't in and they have left a letter,

saying that I owe £2300 from an uppaid CCJ.

 

 

Here's the problem.....I didn't know I had a CCJ!

 

 

I know what the money is for, although it's more than doubled from the original ~£950 bill from Autoglass.

 

 

Ultimately my insurance should be paying this, but I suspect this may be a side issue.

 

I moved house about 6 months ago which may well be the reason why I was never informed about the CCJ, but I'm not really wanting to pay such an extortionate amount - yes, Autoglass should be paid, but the right amount.

 

What's my best course of action here? The letter is threatening to remove goods (not letting anyone in the house would seem to prevent this), but I can't lock the house forever.

 

Any help or advice?

Link to post
Share on other sites

GrumpyToSayTheLeast, ploddertom

 

The discussions I had been having with the creditor were all over email

- this has been rumbling on for about 2 years,

though I had had letters from debt collection agencies they were ignored in preference of dealing directly with Autoglass.

 

No, I did not have my mail forwarded.

I said I'd moved, but actually in the last 2 years I've moved 3 times as I've been splitting up with the ex.....which brings me onto how this arose......

 

The car she was driving was insured on a policy under my name.

The windscreen needed replacing hence she called the insurance who sent her onto Autoglass.

 

 

A good while later Autoglass are contacting me asking for payment as they don't have insurance details.

By this point, the insurance won;t pay since it's been too long since the windscreen was changed.

Autoglass say that I owe the money since the contract is with them, not my insurance.

 

 

It does beg a question as to whether or not I owe the money since I never had anything to do with the windscreen change though......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Autoglass not make a record of who the Ins Co were at the time of the incident? Any time it has happened with me this has been the case even to the extent of them checking themselves if I couldn't provide the proof at the time.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

plodderton,

Honestly, I don't know. I never had any of the original dealings with Autoglass, and the question is not something which has come up in any of the email comms I've had with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Usual thing with this type of thing is that the Ins Co pick up the tab but for some reason this has not happened in your case.

 

 

The Ins Co are correct if they say it was too late in them becoming aware -

unless you can find out why then I have to be honest & say it looks as if you may have to pay this.

 

 

It may be suggested that as you knew nothing of the original case then you could apply for Set Aside,

whilst there is some truth in this you also have to have a reasonable defence as well,

 

 

I would say you would only be swapping one CCJ for another

+ you could be saddles with the costs of the day adding to what you owe.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The most important thing at present is to try & deal with the attending Enforcement Agent. There are a variety of ways to be able to do this.

 

1 - if you are able to pay in full then this brings everything to an end - possibly expensive to do.

 

2 - ask if an instalment plan can be arranged. This would probably only be allowed over a short period of time. The Agent would want to attend to take Control of your goods in case you default meaning the goods can be removed and sold at auction.

 

3 - you could try to apply for a Stay of execution which if granted halts all further enforcement action & charges. You need grounds on which to do this and unusally for me I think this would not be granted.

 

4 - you could apply for a Variation Order if your finances show you only have a little bit of disposable income left each month.

 

5 - do nothing. There is nothing that says you must allow the attending Agent into your home, however anything of value outside must be put away and the easiest target is a motor vehicle. Most Agents will call some 3 or 4 times before handing it back to your Claimant who can then take other forms of enforcement.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't the original contract for windscreen to be replaced be between the ex and Autoglass as it is the ex that requested the work to be done and not yourself and the ex probably signed off the work?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought I'd give an update on this.,...

 

I applied for a stay the writ yesterday, which has been passed onto the courts.

 

Surfer01: That's my thinking, too. However for this I need Autoglass to provide the evidence, which they may not be too willing to do. I suspect that I may end up making an offer that if they provide the evidence (e.g. phone call transcript) to allow me to have the judgement set aside, then I'll make a payment to them to cover the windscreen cost, without any admission of liability.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, yes.

I informed them about the application yesterday but am pretty much powerless until the case goes through court. Any ideas how long it normally takes for the case to be heard? I'm guessing it will be next week at this point......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Depend on the case load of the Court concerned, but can be 6 weeks or more or could be as short as just a few days. Did you inform them of the urgency? I assume you submitted to a County Court that also acts as District Registry of the High Court?

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The application was submitted by email to a Northampton Court email address. They then confirmed, a couple of hours later, that they'd passed it to Boston County Court. That was their choice of court.....I can only assume that it should be heard there! The application did say that HCEO had already visited. While that doesn't state urgency, hopefully it will be implied. Probably should have been more clear on that on the application.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boston does hear High Court matters but suspect they don't see that many. May have been better taking it in person but maybe to a larger Court = Peterboro perhaps. You will have to wait & see but it certainly wouldn't harm to ring them 01205 366080 or 313566, possibly give them till Monday.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Thought I'd close this thread - matter is now resolved.

 

I applied for the stay, which was issued and received through the post about 4 days later.

 

This was followed by an application for a Set Aside (had to be made within a week, as laid out on the Stay issue)

 

The hearing for the Set Aside was set for about 3 weeks ago. During this time the Autoglass legal team / solicitors served their (flawed!!) case. On the day of the hearing, and after some quick discussion with their solicitor, agreed a deal with no admission of liability, that I pay the initial invoice amount plus some costs on the condition that they didn't object to the Set Aside being issued.

So, the money is paid and the Set Aside is issued (CCJ is completely removed, not just marked as satisfied). Autoglass have confirmed in writing that the matter is closed.

 

 

So, although I could have saved on the costs, the end solution was a 'safe' option. If the judge had decided that I had a reasonable chance at defending my case then it could just as easily gone back to a CCJ hearing that I could have lost, incurring most of the same costs again.

 

If I had successfully defended a CCJ hearing then my ex had ended up with the bill to pay then it would have used money that would have otherwise been used on the kids....money which I would end up supplying.

 

Its been an expensive few weeks, but at least my credit record is clean and clear which is worth far more over the next few years than its cost to put things straight.

 

 

Thanks to everyone who has helped.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...