Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • it is NOT A FINE.....this is an extremely important point to understand no-one bar a magistrate in a magistrates criminal court can ever fine anyone for anything. Private Parking Tickets (speculative invoices) are NOT a criminal matter, merely a speculative contractual Civil matter hence they can only try a speculative monetary claim via the civil county court system (which is no more a legal powers matter than what any member of Joe Public can do). Until/unless they do raise a county court claim a CCJ and win, there are not ANY enforcement powers they can undertake other than using a DCA, whom are legally powerless and are not BAILIFFS. Penalty Charge Notices issued by local authorities etc were decriminalised years ago - meaning they no longer can progress a claim to the magistrates court to enforce, but go directly to legal enforcement via a real BAILIFF themselves. 10'000 of people waste £m's paying private parking companies because they think they are FINES...and the media do not help either. the more people read the above the less income this shark industry get. where your post said fine it now says charge .............. please fill out the Q&A ASAP. dx  
    • Well done on reading the other threads. If ECP haven't got the guts to do court then there is no reason to pay them. From other threads there is a 35-minute free stay after which you need to pay, with the signs hidden where no-one will read them.  Which probably explains why ECP threaten this & threaten that, but in the end daren't do court. As for your employer - well you can out yourself as the driver to ECP so the hamster bedding will arrive at yours.  Get your employer to do that using the e-mail address under Appeals and Transfer Of Liability.  
    • good you are getting there. Lloyds/TSb...i certainly would not be risking possible off-setting going on if a choice were there, but in all honestly thats obv too late now..., however..you might not never be in that situation so dont worry too much. regardless to being defaulted or not, if any debt that is not paid/used in 6yrs it becomes statute barred. you need to understand a couple of things like 'default' and 'default notice' a default is simply a recorded D in the calendar section/history of a debt, it does not really mean anything. might slightly hit your rating. the important thing here is a default notice , these are issued by the original creditor (OC) under the consumer credit act, it gives you 14 days to settle whatever they are asking, if you don't then they have the option to register a defaulted date on your credit file. that can make getting other credit more difficult. and hits your rating. once that happens, not matter what you do after that, paying it or not or not paid off or not, the whole account vanishes from your credit file on the DN's 6th b'day. though that might not necessarily mean the debt is not still owed - thats down to the SB date above. an OC very rarely does court and only the OWNER of a debt can instigate any court action (Attempted a CCJ) DCA's debt collection agencies - DCA's are NOT BAILIFFS they have ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter what it's TYPE. an OC make pass a debt to a dca as their client to try and spoof people into paying through legal ignorance of the above statement. an OC may SELL on an old debt to a DCA/debt buyer (approx 10p=£1) and then claim their losses through tax write off and their business insurance, wiping their hands of the debt. the DCA then becomes the debt OWNER. since the late 70's dca's pull all kinds of 'stunts' through threat-o-grams to spoof a debtor into paying them the full value of the debt, when they bought if for a discounted sum (typically 10p=£1). you never pay a dca a penny! if read carefully, NONE of their letters nor those of any other 'trading names' they spoof themselves under making it seem it's going up some kind of legitimate legal 'chain' say WILL anything....just carefully worded letters with all kinds of threats of what could/might/poss happen with other such words as instruct forward pass... well my dog does not sit when instructed too...so... DCA's SOMETIMES will issue a court claim, but in all honesty its simply a speculative claim hoping mugs wet themselves and cough up...oh im going to court... BIG DEAL DCA - show me the enforceable paperwork signed by me...9/10 they dont have it and if your defence is conducted properly, most run away from you . however before they do all that they now have to send a letter of claim, cause the courts got fed up with them issuing +750'000PA speculative claims and jamming up the legal system. so bottom line is two conclusions.... if you cant pay a debt, get a DN issued ASAP (stop paying it!) make sure it gets registered on your file then it stops hurting your file/future credit in 6yrs regardless to what happens (bar of course a later DCA CCJ - fat chance mind!)  once you've a registered DN , then look into restarting payments if the debt is still owed by the OC, if SOLD to a DCA, don't pay - see if they issue a letter of claim (then comeback here!).        
    • Any update here?  I ask as we have someone new being hassled for parking at this site.
    • Any update here?  I ask as we have someone new being hassled for parking at this site.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

chesterfield Council security staff attack shoppers


lonestardavid
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3024 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

Since 8-8-2013 I have been in a constant battle with chesterfield borough council over the actions of council employed security guards in the council run shopping centre on this day.

 

My disabled partner and special needs son had gone into poundland and on-going to the checkout to pay for their items they were confronted by a security guard who demanded to search their bags.

 

They refused and went on their way, however they had only gone a few yards from poundland when my son was set upon bythe guard who had come up behind him grabbing him by the arm and then by the neck and dragging him backwards down the shopping centre back into poundland where he was held in the front of the shop while all the time being taunted by the guard stating in a loud voice that he was a shoplifter and a thief, my son had asked the guard to identify himself and he refused.

 

During this time my son had tried to get away to go to his mother and he was attacked again and dragged around by his lapels. This abuse went on for around 20 mins until the police arrived.

 

My son was then subjected to a stop search which proved he had done nothing wrong, he reported to the police that he had been assaulted by the guard and they took no action.

 

The police did instruct my son to not to go and wait outside the shop for another guard to come and speak to him, my son

thought this was so the guards could come and explain their actions, however when the guards manager arrived he handed my son a six month ban from the shopping centre, an act which i consider was out of spite and vengeance for being innocent.

 

During this time my partner who had witnessed the attack on her son decided to go into the library which is next to the shopping centre and go downstairs to use the public phone to ring me as she entered the lift she saw a guard go running downstairs, on exiting the lift she was immediately set upon by one of two guards, who forcibly grabbed her and forced her into an alcove (so it would be out of view of the cctv camera pointed down the corridor) and pinned her up against a wall, when my partner was searched by the police she was also found to have done nothing wrong.

 

As a result of the above i placed an appeal for witnesses on a local forum, and one person contacted me stating that his girlfriend who worked in the shopping centre had seen a security guard dragging a long haired young man backwards down the precinct towards poundland however this witness would not come forward i believe out of fear of retribution from this team of abusive guards.

 

At one point a post appeared replying to my appeal which released private information concerning the complaints I had made to the police, council and other bodies about the above attacks the post also included details of complaints i had made to the police two years earlier on an unrelated incident. As a result of the negative post i wrongly assumed that this post was posted by a policeman

 

I contacted the police professional standards and the matter was investigated by the police counter corruption unit, as a result of this investigation it was found that this post had come from a Chesterfield Borough Council computer and the post was made by the very same team of guards who had attacked my son and partner in a blatant attempt to discredit

us, rather tellingly the police did not investigate further,

 

I believe this inaction was prompted by the fact that had they done so they would have found that the guards were

fed this information by a member of the police as certain information they had posted was only available from police files.

 

As a result of the assaults the police became involved and on taking statements from these guards told us that their

statements corroborated my partner and sons account of the attacks, and the two guards who had assaulted my son and

partner were charged,

 

However the guards were by this time claiming that they had been told by the poundland manager that my son and partner had stolen something (a fact refuted by the store manager) as a result they had reasonable grounds though at no point have they stated reasonable grounds for what,

 

the CPS bought the case to the magistrates court in December 2013 were not prepared and did not take the cctv footage to the court they were criticised by the magistrates for being unprepared and the case was adjourned until January, three days before the case was due to be heard we received a letter from the CPS stating that they were discontinuing the case as the guards had reasonable grounds,

 

We appealed this decision under the VRR right to appeal however this is just a rubber stamp exercise and since

then they have flatly refused to relook at this decision.

 

We have complained to the council under the councils three stage complaints procedure and two years and four months later we are at step two and no further forward,

Edited by citizenB
tidied up formatting
Link to post
Share on other sites

By saying that they had reasonable ground to suspect theft and lying about the manager pointing this out to them, the guards got away with it.

They were very lucky because they probably got a tired, lazy cps officer to deal with this case.

 

It is frustrating for you and the police officer who has spent hours preparing a case that it's then cocked up by cps.

that's the past and can't be changed.

 

As the council have been giving you the runaround for so long,

have you tried getting a name of the person in charge of your complaint?

If not you should do so and email them directly.

 

Also, you can write to your local mp; most times they're very good at moving things forward, at least mine is.

It's disgraceful that people are treated like this without consequences

and even worse that nobody present during this incident intervened or came forward to give evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i had an appointment arranged for yesterday afternoon with the executive director who is dealing with the complaint

to see the footage of the attack on my son.

 

 

the reason for this being that the cctv footage we have been given is heavily pixilated

and does not show the full extent of the attack

rather tellingly the time stamp is also pixilated

 

 

at one point in the footage we have there is 20 or so mins of the camera looking at poundland

you can only tell it is is poundland by the colours as this is totaly pixilated,

 

 

needless to say on arrival at the council we were told that the executive director was off due to "illness"

needless to say after all the lies we have been told we do not believe this to be the true reason

Link to post
Share on other sites

Words like 'attacked' make this sound as if it has been 'sexed up' (whatever that means).

 

Why not park yourselves outside Poundland and discreetly film all that goes on and then you will have evidence and can take real action against them.

You could even send it to the tv news channels.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i had an appointment arranged for yesterday afternoon with the executive director who is dealing with the complaint to see the footage of the attack on my son. the reason for this being that the cctv footage we have been given is heavily pixilated and does not show the full extent of the attack rather tellingly the time stamp is also pixilated and at one point in the footage we have there is 20 or so mins of the camera looking at poundland you can only tell it is is poundland by the colours as this is totaly pixilated, needless to say on arrival at the council we were told that the executive director was off due to "illness" needless to say after all the lies we have been told we do not believe this to be the true reason

 

And you're not wrong.

Councils tempt to sweep any wrongdoing under the carpet and give complainants the runaround hoping that they get fed up and go away.

Do not desist

Link to post
Share on other sites

As above, 'Do not desist'.
you are aabsolutely right rather tellingly while googling a related item i have found out that chesterfield police safer neighbourhood team are working closely with the team of guards that attacked my son and partner and broke the law by breeching the data protection act surely this is even more absurd than making tony blair middle east peace envoy, oh irony of ironies, i wonder who is in whos pocket it seems police corruption is alive and well in chesterfield Edited by lonestardavid
Link to post
Share on other sites

Words like 'attacked' make this sound as if it has been 'sexed up' (whatever that means).

 

Why not park yourselves outside Poundland and discreetly film all that goes on and then you will have evidence and can take real action against them.

You could even send it to the tv news channels.

i understand your point, and my answer is how else can i descibe an innocent person being grabbed by the arm and being turned around and dragged backwards by the neck for about 20 yards down a shopping precinct
Link to post
Share on other sites

By saying that they had reasonable ground to suspect theft and lying about the manager pointing this out to them, the guards got away with it.

They were very lucky because they probably got a tired, lazy cps officer to deal with this case.

It is frustrating for you and the police officer who has spent hours preparing a case that it's then cocked up by cps.

Anyway, that's the past and can't be changed.

As the council have been giving you the runaround for so long, have you tried getting a name of the person in charge of your complaint?

If not you should do so and email them directly.

Also, you can write to your local mp; most times they're very good at moving things forward, at least mine is.

It's disgraceful that people are treated like this without consequences and even worse that nobody present during this incident intervened or came forward to give evidence.

on talking to a polceman one day about this case he told us of the name that the police use for the CPS it is "couldn't prosecute s**t"
Link to post
Share on other sites

consider suing for flase imprisonment. Long winded but it is a civil case heard by a jury so it will be viewed in the light of ordinary people's experiences of life rather than the CPS's bet on the result

 

yes you are right however

we are not a rich family and we could not bear the cost

also most of the no win no fee lawyers are only interested in injuries,

 

i had a most interesting conversation today with the Labour leader of the council

who stated that these guards had commited no wrong doing as they had not been found guilty in a court of law,

 

now if we follow this to its logical conclusion, anyone who gets a ticket for littering or overstaying parking

should refuse to pay on the same grounds,

 

however as we all know these are Labour polticians and as always it is do as i say not as i do.

 

obviously false imprisonment, (cat sitting on my desk)

 

 

at the time i looked up the law relating to kidnap and it seemed to me applicable in this case,

 

 

however the police were not prepared to investigate,

the police do not appear to want to put their marriage to these guards in je pardy,

 

 

it seems to me that both the police and the cps are prepared to ignore the laws put in place to protect innocent people just to persue their own agendas,

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...