Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • @BankFodder the police officer has contacted aviva her response below she has asked  them to hold on the money front      AVIVA have replied and i have requested to put the request for money on hold so fingers crossed this request is accepted.
    • damn!!   start another thread it's war i have an idea what has caused this then   can you copy and paste this text as your 1st post please (was post 1 from the old thread)   ....................................   I am a regular (many years)  P2G user and selected them to use Parcelforce 48 service to send a gazebo I sold on eBay.  Parcelforce 48 have an automatic max £100 compensation for lost items.   Parcelforce lost the item. P2G state the £100 compensation Parcelforce offer within their price, does not get reimbursed to them, so they can't reimburse it to me. However, it would have been reimbursed to me had I used Parcelforce 48 direct, rather than go through P2G.    It seems rather strange that when I pay P2G to buy Parcelforce 48 service on my behalf, they buy a different service which excludes the automatic compensation.   They also lost another £40 parcel (which I did not buy additional insurance for, because it was an excluded item).   They also broke an item prior to delivery (which the addressee rejected as it was clearly a damaged parcel). The thing is, if a parcel is rejected by the addressee, what should they do with the failed delivery?   In this case they threw away the parcel and 'broken' contents rather than return to sender and refuse to compensate me because I (again) did not buy the additional insurance.   I have escalated the rejected claims and they agreed as a gesture of goodwill to reimburse the postage costs for all three items. (I would have expected this as a matter of course) .    Clearly many will consider I should have bought the extra insurance. I often do, but feel the extra costs involved would be greater than the odd loss ( having never had a loss in a couple hundred sendings), I only pay extra on certain items.   I feel a summons coming on, so would be happy to receive any ideas. Even if P2G have a rock solid defence regarding my lack of buying insurance, I still fancy testing their resolve and seeing if they fancy a hearing.      After escalating my claims, they agreed to refund the postage costs only.   I have therefore issue a Notice Before Action for the value of the lost items £180.   Notice Before Action Dear Sir/madam You have lost the following items. 1)      1 2)      2 3)      3   I understand you eventually accepted liability for these lost items and have agreed to reimburse the postage costs but not the values.   You suggest this is due to my failing to take out additional insurance.   I am not prepared to accept your position and shall be issuing a summons on 18th August for £180, should you choose not to reimburse the values allocated to the items you have lost.   In particular: Item 1) This parcel was damaged by your courier and rejected by the addressee. It appears rather than return the parcel and contents to me, your courier decided to throw the item away. Thus the item has become lost, and therefore (due to my not paying extra for insurance against loss), you have chosen not to compensate. Do you seriously expect to ‘lose’ an item on purpose by throwing it away, and then claim it has been lost and therefore not covered?   Item 2) This parcel was lost and I made a claim. During the period of claim, the parcel was found and began to track. Ultimately being delivered (according to an email to the addressee, at 1.41 am 19 July 2020). Clearly the parcel was not delivered at such a time.   You have subsequently suggested delivery was at a different time. Despite these suggestions of proper delivery, you have been unable to prove delivery at all, the addressee has confirmed he has not received the item and you have accepted the item is lost.  I do not accept you can be so careless as to lose an item twice.   When I purchased this sending through P2G, I selected Parcelforce 48 as the courier. This service has a compensation value of up to £100 for loss. This is why I selected them.   It appears however, you chose not to purchase this service from Parcelforce, but an alternative service purporting to be Parcelforce 48, but excluding the standard compensation.  This is not what I had purchased. I do not accept your claim that I should have paid extra for insurance for you to insure, when I had already purchased a service which carried automatic insurance.   Further, the service was supposed to be a 48 hour service. The parcel was not collected within the 48 hour period, let alone delivered within it.  I consider the delays in ensuring delivery within the expected timeframe would have contributed to the loss of this item. I hold you responsible for the loss.   Item 3) This item was also subject to a claim for loss. During your investigations, this item was also found and started to track. Messages advising  "Enquiry resolved", "INT Hold" and "Out for delivery”, suggest the item had eventually been found.   I do not accept you can be so careless as to find a lost item and subsequently lose it again, regardless of whether I had purchased additional insured.   Indeed, the option to purchase such insurance was not available as the item appears to have been excluded from such insurance.   Yours faithfully      
    • Lowell? Payday Loans? Byekkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk - Thats not been seen before...
    • posts copied over  try posting here now it's war.   dx  
    • Well they have the formal phone complaint logged which is good. I have tried couple different apps, but it seems that apple is blocking the recordings and I am unable to make recordings.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2000 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

Yellow Box Junctions are, in general terms, a good thing. They allow traffic from minor roads access to main roads in heavy traffic. The problem that we have had in London for some years, and coming soon to the rest of the country, is where the council uses them as ‘money boxes’ to raise revenue thru CCTV. One west London junction raised £2.7m a year, and there are many others

 

I would like an amendment to the "Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002" requiring councils to put up signs advising drivers of CCTV monitoring of yellow box junctions – if the aim of the yellow box junction is to ensure that drivers from the monor roads can access the main road they should have no objection to this.

Please click on the link below to sign the petition

 

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/p/ycb

 

Edited by etoc2001
Added reason
Link to post
Share on other sites

This campaign asks for donations ? It might not be allowed.

 

Apparently donations are optional, so I will sign, because I think it is a good idea.

 

I would rather people donated to CAG :)

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

Sadly I shall not be supporting this.

 

Yellow Boxes are big enough to see and the way to avoid being caught and (Successfully prosecuted) are easy.

Do not enter them until a gap for your vehicle exists on the other side.

Why should being warned there is a CCTV watching the junction help?

 

This to me is more about helping people avoid enforcement than helping traffic flow and junction safety

 

And no, this is not on par with speed camera warning signs that are designed to make people aware the area has a high casualty rate and also to prevent rear end shunts as cars slow down for the camera.

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

But if you want to increase the legitimacy of the petition, please can you explain what a "monor road" is?

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

I shan’t be signing it for two reasons:

i I think the proposition is ludicrous, and analogous to saying there is no warning of a camera to catch me committing an offence I should be allowed to commit it

ii I am not convinced petitioning the Honourable Luke Donnellan MP, Minister for Roads and Road Safety (an Australian member of the Australian Parliament) would have any effect on the laws of England and Wales.

In England advise is a verb (a doing word) advise/advising/advised, advice is a noun. I might ask for advice or give advice.

 

The same with license (verb) license/licensing/licensed, but one would have a driving licence (noun).

Link to post
Share on other sites
I shan’t be signing it for two reasons:

i I think the proposition is ludicrous, and analogous to saying there is no warning of a camera to catch me committing an offence I should be allowed to commit it

ii I am not convinced petitioning the Honourable Luke Donnellan MP, Minister for Roads and Road Safety (an Australian member of the Australian Parliament) would have any effect on the laws of England and Wales.

 

+1

 

And a bwhahahahahahaha for spotting the Aussie. Love it when people make pathetic petitions like this and just make themselves look stupid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What about no entry signs, can you drive up one way streets provided there are no cctv signs? Booo Hoooo its not fair I would not have done it guvnor if I knew I was gonna get caught......its just not cricket!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I shan’t be signing it for two reasons:

i I think the proposition is ludicrous, and analogous to saying there is no warning of a camera to catch me committing an offence I should be allowed to commit it

ii I am not convinced petitioning the Honourable Luke Donnellan MP, Minister for Roads and Road Safety (an Australian member of the Australian Parliament) would have any effect on the laws of England and Wales.

 

Sadly I think that you are right, in your second point at least :-) Apologies to Robert Goodwill MP who is the UK Minister for Roads

Link to post
Share on other sites
They allow traffic from minor roads access to main roads in heavy traffic.

.......

if the aim of the yellow box junction is to ensure that drivers from the monor roads can access the main road they should have no objection to this.

 

I don't follow this.

 

If there is a sufficient space beyond the box, would not the vehicle with priority be expected to move, or continue moving, forward to occupy it? (Politeness apart!)

Otherwise it would be a 'free for all' within the box as vehicles having entered from differing directions compete for the limited available space just beyond it, or leaving the vehicle without priority still waiting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the law assumes the prohibition is for when traffic is stopped or stop/go. In legal terms the only way to avoid falling foul of the law, to my understanding, is to wait at the edge of the box until the lane ahead of you is clear plus your car length on the other side. How to be popular in rush hour traffic!

 

One yellow box junction in Redbridge brought in £317,930.30 since November 2013. I asked the council if they had considered traffic lights instead and they replied.....

 

"We have looked at installing signals at this junction however, it was found that it put unacceptable delays along the High Road" which is amusing to anybody who knows how slow traffic is there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that the law assumes the prohibition is for when traffic is stopped or stop/go. In legal terms the only way to avoid falling foul of the law, to my understanding, is to wait at the edge of the box until the lane ahead of you is clear plus your car length on the other side. How to be popular in rush hour traffic!

 

 

What is the difference between waiting at the edge of the box and waiting (unlawfully) in the middle, apart from you are 5 metres nearer your destination? Most motorists seem to have a frontal lobotomy when passing their driving test which removes any common sense or courtesy to others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference is between waiting when traffic is stopped and waiting when traffic is flowing - the law does not descriminate between them so you are obliged to stop until the car ahead has cleared the junction with enough space beyond the line for your car as well..

Link to post
Share on other sites
The difference is between waiting when traffic is stopped and waiting when traffic is flowing - the law does not descriminate between them so you are obliged to stop until the car ahead has cleared the junction with enough space beyond the line for your car as well..

 

The concept is exactly the same as a level crossing I'm sure you wait until there is space the other side rather than risk getting hit by several tons of locomotive at 100 mph whilst sitting in the middle of the crossing! Its a fairly simple concept if you approach a yellow box you do not enter until you are certain you will have enough space to clear the box....how hard is that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Simple says it all. I bet you like zebra crossings, black and white and no other factors to worry about. Me - I prefer pelican crossings

 

Yes if someone is waiting to cross I stop, I don't need a light to force me to stop and I don't like stopping for a red light ten minutes after someone crossed just because they pushed the button.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And no, this is not on par with speed camera warning signs that are designed to make people aware the area has a high casualty rate and also to prevent rear end shunts as cars slow down for the camera.

 

Thanks to who ever deleted my last post. Not sure on your reasoning.

 

The signs are there to tell you there are speed cameras on the road, nothing about casualty rates! Car's don't actually slow down for the signs, they slow down for the cameras.

 

My point is, to make speed cameras completely hidden, so no one can see them, make them look like lamp posts so that no one will ever speed again. Make it the law for every car to have a black box. As soon as they're over, BAM! Ticket. The roads will be safe forever more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes if someone is waiting to cross I stop, I don't need a light to force me to stop and I don't like stopping for a red light ten minutes after someone crossed just because they pushed the button.

 

 

They use Pelican crossings mainly in places of high pedestrian traffic. For example, a road near me pretty much became a car park for an hour in the morning due to the amount of school kids. Cars couldn't move. The idea of pelican crossings is to allow the pedestrians to accumulate before crossing to minimize the length of times cars have to stop.

Link to post
Share on other sites
They use Pelican crossings mainly in places of high pedestrian traffic. For example, a road near me pretty much became a car park for an hour in the morning due to the amount of school kids. Cars couldn't move. The idea of pelican crossings is to allow the pedestrians to accumulate before crossing to minimize the length of times cars have to stop.

 

Puffin crossings are much better

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind them either, gives slower people a chance without being scared by flashing lights or a countdown. And I've heard of Toucan crossings but don't think that I've come accross one yet, but in principle I don't mind them either

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't mind them either, gives slower people a chance without being scared by flashing lights or a countdown. And I've heard of Toucan crossings but don't think that I've come accross one yet, but in principle I don't mind them either

 

toucan is the same as a pelican but used by cyclists and pedestrians, 2 can use it

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...