Jump to content
  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi all, just to close this one, please see the photos below....before and after    Thank you, all, for some great advice (as per usual!)
    • Thanks BankFodder.   I wasn't intending on making bones about it with them but I was irked at being dismissed with the phrase 'it's store policy'.  I returned it because I was returning an air hockey game which wasn't functioning properly.  I would have assumed that if it were designed as a toy for an audience that may be prone to dropping it, it would be made to be suitably durable.  I was expecting that a year would have been reasonable and by it not lasting it was, as you mentioned, not of satisfactory quality. Alas, it's not something I wish to pursue to find out for sure.   I do appreciate your feedback, as always on here, I like to know where I stand with these things.  Thanks also for the heads-up on the Youtube video, I had not thought of that.
    • I've also being doing some reading over the weekend. It appears the law of properties act 1925 does not apply in Scotland (only England and Wales).   "In Scotland an assignation need not be in writing, and intimation is all that is needed to give the assignee a right effective against all parties. Apart from the terminology, the principal differences in England are as follows. Under the Law of Property Act 1925 the assignment must be in writing, the entire benefit must be assigned, and notice must be given to the other contracting party. If any of these elements are missing there may still be an equitable assignment – under which an assignee would typically need to join the assignor as a party to any action under the contract."   So I think the NOA defence is not going to hold up, as Nolans are probably right in what they are saying that their letter (intimation) is sufficient.   So my sole defence is going to be lack of default notice under section 87/88.   Any advice at this stage? I assume costs are still capped at £150 if lose?
    • Hi bankfodder. I do have the invoice in my email, so would it be the cost of the turbo and labour for fitting
    • as i said unsure of what this 15% is about.   the FOS/FCA clearly describe how refund calcs show have been made the their relevant sites.   p'haps at this juncture it might be better to scan up to ONE multipage PDF their refund letters  another set of eyes is always belter.   please read our upload guide carefully      
  • Our picks

    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies
    • Oven repair. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/427690-oven-repair/&do=findComment&comment=5073391
      • 49 replies
    • I came across this discussion recently and just wanted to give my experience of A Shade Greener that may help others regarding their boiler finance agreement.
       
      We had a 10yr  finance contract for a boiler fitted July 2015.
       
      After a summer of discontent with ASG I discovered that if you have paid HALF the agreement or more you can legally return the boiler to them at no cost to yourself. I've just returned mine the feeling is liberating.
       
      It all started mid summer during lockdown when they refused to service our boiler because we didn't have a loft ladder or flooring installed despite the fact AS installed the boiler. and had previosuly serviced it without issue for 4yrs. After consulting with an independent installer I was informed that if this was the case then ASG had breached building regulations,  this was duly reported to Gas Safe to investigate and even then ASG refused to accept blame and repeatedly said it was my problem. Anyway Gas Safe found them in breach of building regs and a compromise was reached.
       
      A month later and ASG attended to service our boiler but in the process left the boiler unusuable as it kept losing pressure not to mention they had damaged the filling loop in the process which they said was my responsibilty not theres and would charge me to repair, so generous of them! Soon after reporting the fault I got a letter stating it was time we arranged a powerflush on our heating system which they make you do after 5 years even though there's nothing in the contract that states this. Coincidence?
       
      After a few heated exchanges with ASG (pardon the pun) I decided to pull the plug and cancel our agreement.
       
      The boiler was removed and replaced by a reputable installer,  and the old boiler was returned to ASG thus ending our contract with them. What's mad is I saved in excess of £1000 in the long run and got a new boiler with a brand new 12yr warranty. 
       
      You only have to look at TrustPilot to get an idea of what this company is like.
       
        • Thanks
      • 3 replies
    • Dazza a few months ago I discovered a good friend of mine who had ten debts with cards and catalogues which he was slavishly paying off at detriment to his own family quality of life, and I mean hardship, not just absence of second holidays or flat screen TV's.
       
      I wrote to all his creditors asking for supporting documents and not one could provide any material that would allow them to enforce the debt.
       
      As a result he stopped paying and they have been unable to do anything, one even admitted it was unenforceable.
       
      If circumstances have got to the point where you are finding it unmanageable you must ask yourself why you feel the need to pay.  I guarantee you that these companies have built bad debt into their business model and no one over there is losing any sleep over your debt to them!  They will see you as a victim and cash cow and they will be reluctant to discuss final offers, only ways to keep you paying with threats of court action or seizing your assets if you have any.
       
      They are not your friends and you owe them no loyalty or moral duty, that must remain only for yourself and your family.
       
      If it was me I would send them all a CCA request.   I would bet that not one will provide the correct response and you can quite legally stop paying them until such time as they do provide a response.   Even when they do you should check back here as they mostly send dodgy photo copies or generic rubbish that has no connection with your supposed debt.
       
      The money you are paying them should, as far as you are able, be put to a savings account for yourself and as a means of paying of one of these fleecers should they ever manage to get to to the point of a successful court judgement.  After six years they will not be able to start court action and that money will then become yours.
       
      They will of course pursue you for the funds and pass your file around various departments of their business and out to third parties.
       
      Your response is that you should treat it as a hobby.  I have numerous files of correspondence each faithfully organised showing the various letters from different DCA;s , solicitors etc with a mix of threats, inducements and offers.   It is like my stamp collection and I show it to anyone who is interested!
        • Thanks
        • Like

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1816 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

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/protect/2015/06/motorist-takes-parking-charge-challenge-to-highest-uk-court

 

I would now argue that if any PPC try to use the current judgement in their claim that the defendant highlights that an appeal has now been filed and the reference to Bevis be inappropriate until the supreme court make a ruling.

 

 

Let us hope common sense prevails.

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

Well, as far as they can say, its been "ruled" on so they will attempt to use it as a "concrete ruling" although its been appealed against

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, as far as they can say, its been "ruled" on so they will attempt to use it as a "concrete ruling" although its been appealed against

 

It has been ruled upon by a lower court, but as it's now subject to an appeal to a higher court, a PPC attempting to use the judgement without mentioning that it is the subject of an appeal to the Supreme Court may find themselves on a rather sticky wicket wink.png

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Parking Eye do not mention this appeal on their website. They are still gloating on their "win" at the COA. Going on past form, they will probably "forget" to mention the latest appeal in the paperwork they send to motorists and when filing court papers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sooner than we thought...

 

The Supreme Court will now hear Mr Beavis' appeal alongside that of Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi, which also involves the enforceability of penalty clauses in contracts.

 

 

 

https://www.supremecourt.uk/news/beavis-v-parkingeye-ltd.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trouble is the cases are in reality chalk and cheese but the judiciary are making a decision that consumer contracts are to be treated the same as business to business contracts drawn up by lawyers.

This means that you should ensure that you take your solicitor to Sainsburys next time you go by car. The alternative is to buy shares and make sure a nuimber of like-minded people turn up at the AGM and give the chairman a bit of stick under AOB. You wont get any movement but it will have to go in the annual report. Eventually one of the big 4 supermarkets will drop these bandits and then the others will have to follow suit or suffer with the publicity. Supermarket A could run adverts reminding people that you can shop there without being penalised for spending your money with them and at spermarket B you get clobbered with a £90 penalty for being a loyal customer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully the Supreme Court judges are more knowledgeable of consumer protection laws and aims, and give equal treatment to both sides in the case rather than the CoA judges who had the appearance of having made their minds up without proper consideration of the consumer laws, and the aims behind it. If a pcn from a council for £35 is a penalty, then a £80 pcn from a private company is a penalty and the fact that at least £65 of that £80 is profit to the ppcs and not loss shows that this system has no place in contract or consumer law. Come on judges. Hopefully they base theur decision on the law and precedents rather than what is in the best interest of the parking companies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I fear the worst...

 

Crapita have friends in high places and know how to shake hands.

 

PE's revenue would be hindered for at least a year at POPLA and through the court system if Mr Beavis was allowed his appeal to be heard , as it should be , on its own merits.

 

As eb states above, chalk and cheese imo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the judiciary have been making noises for a while about making consumer contract law the same as commercial contract law as it will make their jobs easier. The reason for pushing the square peg in the round hole is mostly down to the areas of law that most judges specialised in before being made judges and that is commercial law. You will not find a single higher tier judge who was previously a defence barrister in criminal law for example.

When the only tool is a hammer then every job becomes a nail.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

The Supreme Court will hear the case only on the same evidence presented in the original case. As the original case was so badly handled by Beavis and his representatives I imagine the Supreme Court will reach the same conclusion.

I have to wonder if Beavis is some kind of stool pigeon for the private parking industry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

th point of the supreme ourt appeal is to show that the judges misdirected themselves rather than to introduce a raft of new evidence. This is easy to do for a couple of points but is that substantive enough to overturn all of the previous decisions?

They can decide that the judges have misdirected themselves and sent if all back to stage 1 at county court but I dont think that is going to happen. As I said, I think that a decision has been made to make a determination that all contract law is the same and the outcome will make a mockery of half of the 2 conjoined appeals. This means that the likely outcome is that penalty clauses will be added to a lot of contracts in the future and they wont be dressed up as something else.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...
Both parties counsels will already know the verdict, but are barred from telling anyone. A vigilant observer in Chorley may be able to guess the answer depending on whether the pubs run dry, or whether or not a number of boastful posts appear on parking forums, as happened after the Court of Appeal verdict.

 

Or maybe a sudden rush of 'please pay now we will accept anything' letters...

 

 

 

 

 

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/parkingeye-v-beavis-judgment-date.html?m=1

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just adding the link to the supreme court

 

https://www.supremecourt.uk/live/court-02.html

 

Just over 10 minutes before the live session.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, no further appeals available.

 

Time to get our thinking caps on.

 

Time to lobby our MP's ?

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
Has the motorist gained anything from this ruling ?

 

If not, will this case now be seen as very unhelpful to motorists and should never have been started ?

 

This is such a good statement and something a lot of people on other forums dont dare say

 

Barry was a fool to have started this, he was egged on by certain people to appeal to the court of appeal. I have no issue with the case being made in the county court but the next stage had to many risks for other people.

 

He may have thought he was some kind of parking warrior, but he has put the nail in the coffin for thousands of people who will have no choice but to simply pay up now.

 

What is he going to do for people who will lose at POPLA because of his actions? he had tunnel vision with this and he didn't think about the affects on other people. If hadnt tried to be clever then people could still easily win cases. Now it will be virtually impossible to win court cases (bar ones with signage contract etc), and very difficult to win at POPLA.

 

So whats his advice now and will he shell out because of the effects of his actions (we all know the answer to that one)

 

So that is it, illegal penalty clauses are now legal because they have been used by parking companies for a long time and no-one has challenged them before.

As I have postulated, they have now placed a consumer contract on the same footing as a bilateral contract negotiated between lawyers acting for both parties and because money would be lost by the parking companies if it was otherwise and limited the extent of the Unfair Trading Terms legislation in the same way becasue that would curtail PE's ability to enforce their suspect contract.

Follow the money as they say.

Was the case unhelpful? I dont think so, contract law judgements have been heading in that direction for about the last 15 years. Most judges come from a background of commercial law so they are making decisions that would make their previous jobs in the City much easier if they were in place before they became judges.

I also note that they have fired a warning shot at the politicians with regard to the EU legislation and are basically warning the legislators not to interfere with their decision.

 

But what Barry has done is put the nail in the coffin for argument which worked well at POPLA and often worked at the county court.

 

So what is this site going to advise if a parking site has a proper contract, decent signage, what are people to do......?

 

This is taken from CPS website (perky) and i have to say i couldnt agree more, he is spot on:

 

Following the result in the supreme court of Barry Beavis -v- Parking Eye we hope the position is clear in everyones mind, however on checking the various consumer forums they are STILL trying to convince people the charges are not enforceable.

 

The judges were perfectly clear in their judgement that parking charges issued are 100% enforceable and with the Supreme Court being the highest court in the land this decision is binding on ALL other courts – even though the judge hearing the case may disagree.

 

 

We are unsure why the internet forums are still debating the issue, we can only presume it is because they have been proved wrong and all the people who ignored tickets and letters on their advice will quite rightly be unhappy when they receive county court papers through their letterbox.

 

We also suspect that despite the forum advisors hiding behind aliases they are really highly educated and qualified legal experts who know the law better than the 7 supreme court judges that heard the arguments and made the decision.

 

One thing is for certain, thanks to the internet forums they have done wonders for stenthning the legal position of parking companies who issue charges, ensuring the law is no longer unclear and paving the way for clarification.

 

So where does it go from here?

 

It does not go any where, other then it may be a case of paying up when before you didnt need to, this will depend on the operator !

 

Thanks Barry!!

Edited by citizenB
thread tidy
Link to post
Share on other sites

A new thread has been started with the latest developments . All posts made in respect of the latest judgment have been copied to the thread linked below.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?455047-Barry-Beavis-loses-Appeal-to-the-Supreme-Court-What-next&p=4816020&posted=1#post4816020

Edited by citizenB

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The other therad is closed? With this ruling where does that leave a BB holder when they visit a hospital and there are signs up stating that BB have to also pay for parking although the BB has a letter from the hospital asking them to attend an appointment? What would happen if the BB refused to pay and then cha;llenged the invoice as it is not a ticket? Same applies to parking in a retail park where the parking is limited to 1 or 2 hours?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is open now :)

 

This one has now been closed permanently.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1816 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...