Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Parking in restricted street PCN


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3251 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 guys, after some advise on a PCN I got about 6 weeks ago, and have finally received the rejection of my unofficial appeal today.

PCN is issued by Lincolnshire county council, code 01 - parking in a restricted street during prescribed hours

[ATTACH=CONFIG]58643[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]58644[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]58645[/ATTACH]

 

Attached are the pictures of my car parked in the exact spot that i got the ticket (same day and I didnt move it)

Basically, our house is to the right out of shot in the picure and we dont have a driveway. The road directly outside our house has 2 hour parking restrictions, so we cant park there. We have an agreement with the family run funeral directors (premises shown behind the black gates to the left) that we can park in their unused permanently gated entrance. This has been the case since we moved in 3 years ago, and I havent ever got a ticket, until 6 weeks ago.

 

I challenged the ticket immediately on the grounds that I was parked on private property with the property owner's permission.

Received a letter rejecting my appeal, but if I provided a statement from the landowner saying I had permission, then they would reconsider.

 

I'm fully aware that double yellow restrictions are valid from the centre of the street to the road edge, across any pavement or verge on public property up to the boundary.

The crux of the argument I can see is what is classed as the boundary, and where does that lie?

I'm of the opinion, and so is the funeral director that their lander ownership is a straight line across the mouth of the gate, from where the wooden fence stops, and then the metal fence starts. All the land behind both fences are owned by them. Surely this is classed as the boundary and therefore the double yellow line restriction stop there?

 

Any advice on what to next would be greatly apprecialted

Link to post
Share on other sites

you'd have to get them to look at their deeds etc

 

 

no good trying to guess

 

 

if they didn't lay the tarmac that your car is on

I suspect its council sadly

else they would never tarmac it?

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They're quite a large funeral directors and have been there for years, with 2 entrances (hence why i can park in the one i'm in). The whole of their yard is tarmacked. The bit I park on is the same stuff that covers the of the yard, as you can physically see it going under the gates.

 

So getting the official deeds in the route to go down?

Link to post
Share on other sites

they should have their plans as its a business est.

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I've put a call in and am due to go round later on to dicsuss this all

 

I am right in thinking that the boundary that dictates where double yellow line restricitons stop doesnt need to be a physical thing, it can literally refer to the ownership line?

Link to post
Share on other sites

afaik the DYL restrictions or whatever will runs to their bounday

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The land ownership issue is a red herring. It doesn't matter who owns the land, or whether it is privately owned. What matters is whether the public has a right of way over it, and if, in the opinion of the council, it is deemed public access, then regardless of who owns it, it's classed as part of the public highway and is therefore enforceable. The question is open to debate of course.

 

If I were you I would not bother pursuing this - what I would do is take advantage of what the council have offered, and ask for a letter from the funeral director. It sounds like they will just cancel it, and if you keep a copy of the letter, you can produce it again, should the issue ever re-arise.

 

That said, if the Council ever did consider that the spot is part of the highway, then you wouldn't have a sure-fire defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...