Jump to content

You can now change your notification sounds by going to this link https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/index.php?/&app=soundboard&module=soundboard&controller=managesounds

 

You can find a library of free notification sounds in several places on the Internet. Here's one which has a very large selection https://notificationsounds.com/notification-sounds

 

 

BankFodder BankFodder

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi.   SJP = Single Justice Procedure. Here's some reading for you https://www.gov.uk/single-justice-procedure-notices   If you want to ask for an out of court settlement, you need to deal with TfL. You could write to them if you have a contact name, there are examples of letters in threads here.   HB
    • Hi,  I have sent email requesting information as to why my original email was not actioned. I did have the case number in the subject line on my email.  I only got a letter from registry trust, nothing else from courts or Shoosmiths thanks 
    • @dx100uk  I have received only the charge for this journey.  Sorry for my ignorance but what is a SJP?  the charge has been made at 21 june  2020 but I received this only yesterday. Now they ask me to make my plea and I have 21 days to do so, but I want to try an out of court settlement. There is not any court date on the papers they sent me now though. 
    • Licensing is only required for quite serious breeders who keep multiple breeding dogs, some perfectly good breeders don’t need a license and some dreadful ones are licensed so it’s something of a red herring.   What breed is the pup?  You don’t say and this ‘breeder’ doesn’t sound like a breeder at all from your post.  That said, they seem to have been quite responsible in that the pup was vet checked and vaccinated before you took it.   Has your insurance company confirmed this was a pre-existing condition they won’t cover?
    • Your puppy is certainly subject to the consumer rights act because it is classed as "goods". You don't say when you bought it – you simply say "recently". I'm not too certain what the law is relating to commercial breeders. You say that this person is a home breeder. Is there any distinction? Should they have had a licence? There are two issues here. First of all – and probably most important – you are talking about the health of the puppy. You may not have the resources but it seems to me that it's important to get this addressed as quickly as possible – both for the sake the puppy and also for your own sake because if you end up having to pay out of your own pocket, according to you is going to get a lot more expensive. If the tooth is causing the puppy any pain or discomfort or any difficulties then it seems to me that you have a clear duty to get it sorted out as quickly as possible. You made the decision to purchase a puppy rather than go to a rescue home – where these kinds of things would have been sorted out – and you obviously made your own decision to go to a breeder who you knew was unlicensed – and am afraid that all of the baggage your filing now probably comes with those decisions. On the consumer rights issue, it seems to me that you have a clear case – regardless of the consumer rights act – because whether the breeder was a home breeder or not, licensed or not, it is clear that the money they were charging – it was done as a matter of trade. You say that this person is a home breeder – and I understand that the rules are that if you read a certain number of letters per year and sell a number of pups then you do need a licence. I suppose you will have to make your own discreet enquiries to discover whether in fact this person is actually operating as a commercial unlicensed breeder. It's not terribly relevant to your case – but on the other hand it would add leverage to your position. I think the way forward for you is to get two independent quotations for the veterinary work which needs doing and then write to the breeder giving them both independent quotations and telling them that because you have the interests of the puppy in mind you are going directly to have the work done by the cheapest quote. Because of the breeder's attitude so far I would include this in a letter of claim. I don't think that there is any room for mucking around with the welfare of animals – especially when they are being used to make profits. That means that you would send the breeder the two quotes, tell them the date on which the work is going to be done, point out to them that has so far they have been completely uncooperative and refused to get involved that you are now sending them a letter of claim and that you will issue a claim within 14 days unless they pay in full for all the treatment and any ancillary treatment. In other words you make it clear to them that the sum you are claiming for the media work may not be the end of the matter and that you hold them responsible as a dog breeder – commercial or not, licensed or not, for the welfare in good health of their animals. Frankly I think you should tell them that you are going to report the matter to the RSPCA – and if you care about your animals – and the others that are being produced by this breeder – then I think that this is exactly what you should do. I think you should also ask the breeder if you can have any tax receipts for the £1200 which you paid. It wouldn't at all surprised me if this breeder has received the money – effectively cash in hand. You should ask them for a VAT invoice or else an undertaking that they are exempt. We will help you all the way here – but I'm going to say once again, that I think your first priority is to get the work done. I'm sorry that you decided to buy a puppy – when there are so many in rescue centres – although maybe not as pretty looking is the one that you have. I'm afraid that this is the kind of thing which encourages "home breeders" and breeders generally – and particularly with unlicensed breeders – it means that they more likely to be sloppy and uncaring about the welfare of the animals they produce. I think you should tell us more about "Vets4Pets".  It seems to me that they haven't done a very good job either – and I would be writing to them and asking them how come they have managed to carry out this assessment of your animal and yet they have missed this important defect. I think it's important that pressure is put on them as well to smarten up their act. Please will you tell us the name of the home breeder.   I hope this advice has been helpful to you. I'm sure that some of my comments have made uncomfortable reading – but as I say, we will help you all the way and I think you should start acting straightaway in the interests of your puppy – which doesn't deserve any of this  
  • Our picks

    • Currys Refuse Refund F/Freezer 5day old. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422656-currys-refuse-refund-ffreezer-5day-old/
      • 5 replies
    • Hi,  
      I was in Sainsbury’s today and did scan and shop.
      I arrived in after a busy day at work and immediately got distracted by the clothes.
       
      I put a few things in my trolley and then did a shop.
      I paid and was about to get into my car when the security guard stopped me and asked me to come back in.
       
      I did and they took me upstairs.
      I was mortified and said I forgot to scan the clothes and a conditioner, 5 items.
      I know its unacceptable but I was distracted and Initially hadn’t really planned to use scan and shop.
       
      No excuse.
      I offered to pay for the goods but the manager said it was too late.
      He looked at the CCTV and because I didn’t try to scan the items he was phoning the police.
       
      The cost of the items was about £40.
      I was crying at this point and told them I was a nurse, just coming from work and I could get struck off.
       
      They rang the police anyway and they came and issued me with a community resolution notice, which goes off my record in a year.
      I feel terrible. I have to declare this to my employer and NMC.
       
      They kept me in a room on my own with 4 staff and have banned me from all stores.
      The police said if I didn’t do the community order I would go to court and they would refer me to the PPS.
       
      I’m so stressed,
      can u appeal this or should I just accept it?
       
      Thanks for reading 
      • 7 replies
    • The courier industry – some basic points for customers. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421913-the-courier-industry-%E2%80%93-some-basic-points-for-customers/
      • 1 reply
    • The controversial sub-prime lender says the City watchdog is investigating its practices.
      View the full article
      • 0 replies
Liverpool59

A S Parking keep demanding I name driver despite my appeal as the owner.

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1459 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

If they thought they had a case, why did they not try it on earlier. No need to answer that.

 

Now, if it did go to court and they won (unlikely) then so long as the claim is paid before the date stipulated (usually 28 days) then nothing will show. If not paid within the timeframe then you're stuck with a judgement on your credit file for 6 years.

 

I wouldn't worry about it getting that far.

 

It's about time this unscrupulous industry was regulated instead of agreeing to a code of practice then ignoring it.


If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

read post #22

They wont send anyone round to your door, no-one would be brave or daft enough to want that job knowing they arent going to get paid for the grief they will get from the occupier.

They can only add these fees if they win a claim by default. A defended claim will result in them not being able to enforce these silly add ons as it is a contractual sum they are arguing about. When you buy a packet of crisps the shopkeeper doesnt double the price because you didnt have the right change and then add another 50p for the joy of queueing at the till does he?

They know it is a non-starter but they are hoping that the thret of a bill of a couple of hundred quid will persuade you to pay them the unwarranted £100.

If you do lose a court claim and pay up within the time ordered by a judge you dont get a CCJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys.

 

When you say win a claim by default, do you mean that It goes to court and I don't show?

 

I take it if I lost, and I won't, then the judge would decide about costs and not them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks guys.

 

When you say win a claim by default, do you mean that It goes to court and I don't show?

 

I take it if I lost, and I won't, then the judge would decide about costs and not them?

 

Correct. Don't show and they win.

With the small claims court costs are fixed to the amount of the claim (£100) plus court fee and solicitors fixed costs (usually £50) They cannot claim more. As they would be the claimant they would normally employ a solicitor to act for them. This will cost them a damn sight more than £50 (more like £300) which they cannot get back so they would be on a loser from the start which is why these companies pick their cases carefully.


If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lovely.

 

Many thanks for your advice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I have just received a letter before claim from Gladstones Solicitors regarding the above claim. I'm sure you will know the content.

Strangely they don't even appear to have the date of the claim correct. Anyway, they have given me 14 days to respond providing a full account of the circumstances leading to the charge and who the driver was. It states and bless a satisfactory response is received they will start proceedings to recover the money. I assume court proceedings.

 

They state that the amount that is claimed may increase, but you have already rebuffed that in your last post.

 

My plan is to respond to the letter as requested with a bullet point summary of everything that has taken place. But alas, given everything you have said about them in this thread, and their connections, I assume it won't make any difference.

 

Your advice would be gratefully appreciated.

 

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there.

 

Does it say they 'will' start proceedings or that they 'may' please?

 

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

It states, "unless a satisfactory response is provided, we are instructed to start proceedings against you without any further notice in order to recover the amounts due and costs associated with the recovery of them"

 

Thanks for your help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It also states "The amount that is claimed may therefore increase in terms of costs and any interest that is recoverable"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you should respond to Gladstones and tell them that "their client failed to adhere to the protocols of the PoFA to create a keeper liability and that both you, as the proprietors of the IAS and they know any legal action will be vexatious and vigourously defended as such".

 

They are clealry trying to browbeat you into naming the driver so they can bypass the protection in law you currently have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply.

 

I found this paragraph from a page by Thomsons Law about parking and it states:

 

The Claimant (the parking company) will have to prove you are liable. If they cannot prove your liability the claim will be dismissed and you can apply for your costs (travel expenses to court etc) to be paid. However if the parking company are successful, you will not only have to pay the PCN you will also have to pay the court fees and the Claimant’s costs. If you do not pay this within 14 days the Judgment will be registered against you as a County Court Judgment (CCJ) and will affect your credit rating.

 

Is this correct? As I understand it the claimant costs are limited to 150. Would there be court costs?

 

Could you explain please about how they would bypass the protection I have if I was to name myself as the driver?

Out of interest, would the judge be annoyed that I hadn't just named myself as the driver in the first place?

As at the beginning of the thread I had actually replied to them as the owner, without naming the driver, which they ignored. They then wrote again as a NTK which as mentioned was even out of time.

Sorry if this sounds repetitive. I just want to get my facts straight before replying. As mentioned, I am quite happy to defend it in court as I believe they are truly in the wrong.

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the court costs are about £50 and another sum of the same for their hired solicitor.

You have just grabbed a sentence without considering its context. The thing is they will lose because they would be suing the wrong person in the first place. That is why they keep asking for the name of the driver, as they cannot create a keeper liability as the POFA wasnt held to. They know they cannot sue you without coming a cropper so your response to this latest threat should be short but make clear that they are no "honest broker" or unaware of the facts when it comes to this parking matter.

Google is your enemy as well as your friend

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thanks for the reply.

 

All noted.

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...