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

    • Just to update on this, received the anticipated reply from Packlink. Still chasing hermes every week.    
    • So I gather that you sent some parcels using DPD. They arrived in an apparently damaged state so that the items can't be used. The items were returned to you and you had to refund your customer. You are now out of pocket to the tune of the entire value of the items or at least the cost of repairs. You used DPD on some kind of account/credit system so that in principle you owe the money – but you are withholding the money because they didn't carry out their contractual obligations correctly and also they caused you loss. They are now threatening to sue you and they have sent you a letter of claim. I understand that you didn't take any photographs of the damaged parcels or of the items – on the basis that you weren't informed that that would be necessary. I understand also that you have had phone calls with them – but you probably have never recorded the courts so you have no evidence of what has been said. Is this all correct? You haven't told us what the items are and whether they are still in your possession. You haven't told us whether the damage to the items makes them a total loss or if they can be repaired. You haven't told us anything about values of the items or of the cost of repairs. We need this information. Also, I hope that you won't mind too much when I say that your failure to take photographs on the basis that nobody had told you to do it – shows a certain level of naïveté and your lack of evidence may become a problem if they do issue proceedings and you have to defend yourself. I suggest that it is axiomatic of any kind of dispute of this nature that you would start acquiring and storing evidence from the outset – and photographs are certainly going to be the minimum kind of evidence that you would require. You also haven't told us the value of the invoice sum which you are withholding. Although your post is pretty long, it seems to be pretty scant on some of the essential information. If you could please respond to these questions and then we will try to give you advice as to your position and the next step.
    • sar vanquis   sar express gifts cards.   too    
    • nothing about how you've bought tickets/ passes or paid for travel since the incident.   far too many repeats of you are a forign student on a visa etc etc    once at the start  once at the end   ......upon how a conviction would impact your visa..   you also need to outline wHY you resorted to it, being of little financial income that day as parents could no longer support you at the time.  
  • 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
terrier82

Parking Eye Dovecot St Stockton - Over stay PCN - claimform received

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1331 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

No, there is abosolutely no point as it is effectively saying that you agree that you owe something but not the full amount.

 

 

you wont be treated any worse by saying no but saying yes can be harmful

(will be a waste of time at least)

 

 

They have been caught out committing a criminal offence and still want money from you.

 

 

They will try and tell the court that they are not covered by the law a

s their signs are "informational" just like signs saying FIRE EXIT or BUS STOP, yeah right...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks I completely agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
doesnt matter, there wasnt the PP at the time of the event so they didnt have a contract.

typical PE though, will probably tell lies to the court and hope no-one notices or challenges them.

 

I am appealing a case on same pp issue. I want to make the council enforce their obligations that these contractual signs are not informational or warning signs. Do you have any court cases references or judgements where it has been ruled that the signs breach pp? Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they exist, look at the parking pranksters blog and you should find at least one involving PE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I received the attached from parking eye enforcement team and also they sent to the county court, what is the view on this?

peye1.pdf

peye2.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You cant counter claim for costs of defending a claim....particularly in Small Claim Track.

 

Andy


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They definitely haven't got planning permission for the signs meter and anpr including advertisement consent for the signs, going to court 11th of next month, retrospective permission was granted about year after the parking incident,this was only enforced by the council after my enquiries, has there been a case won on these grounds?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This gives you a problem, the planning permission is retrospective so they can have their signs there but other english law is not retrospective so no contract at the time.( ie how can you read and agree to something that in essence doesnt exist)

I wouldnt like to have the PP as my only defence under such circumstances so make sure that you have something else as well in your defence papers that you have to send to both PE and the court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should ask someone who is expert in this area of law or find a bit of case law that supports your position rather than the more general contract law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement Consent is a breach of the law ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no, not having it is a criminal offence. I am worried that they will claim that the retrospective consent means that they can claim retrospective contractual matters. At the time of parking they didnt have a contract to offer as it was a criminal compact but I'm worried that they will say that the retrospective permission suddenly kicks into life a dead duck. That is what you should be investigating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there is also the defence of "de minimis". Ie the matter is to trifling to bother the courts with and this would be about the 70p difference of the ticket paid for and the tariff. They didn't offer you the opportunity to make good their loss, they just went straight for the £100

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got a letter from parking eye saying an advocate will be at the court hearing (LPC law) to minimise cost to me when they have to claim back, is this pretty standard?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if its standard but the most effective and cheapest form of counsel on a claim that the claimant is unsure of :-)


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And that also assumes that they will be awarded any costs given it's small claims track.


RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they do this because they are too afraid to turn up themselves. They have already included £50-100 in their original claim for lawyers fees so they are unlikely to impress anyone if they ask for more.

Anyway, you are going to win, LPC wont have any great detail about the claim

So get reading about whether retrospective planning consent can create a contract retrospectively. They will have to prove it does so you need to find examples of cases where it was thrown out and quote them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without the claim for retrospective planning they dont have a leg to stand on, regardless of any other argument so all you have to do is knock this down and you win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lost in court today, said due to the retrospective application making it legal !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did they get their costs terrier ?


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did they get their costs terrier ?

 

Sorry not there true costs, but this was as much as they could claim for, so it cost them more money in the end

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not good news, how and why was this case lost when so many others have been won? What can be learned from this so the same mistakes are not made?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is not good news, how and why was this case lost when so many others have been won? What can be learned from this so the same mistakes are not made?

 

Poster has failed to elaborate and explain in detail for others.

 

Andy


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from the briefest explanation

it looks like the retrospective planning consent allowed the contract to be made.

 

 

The judge should have elaborated on this point as the law is not retrospective.

 

 

For example, if they banned chewing gum and backdated that law then they wouldnt be in a position to prosecute anyone owning chewing gum a year ago, just deem that any transfer of ownership back then didnt create a new ownership for compensation purposes.

 

 

This has been the case since slavery was banned and more recently changes within the Firearms Act and the CITES rules governing the sale of ivory. You may own ivory objects made since 1947 but you cant buy or sell them, you cant even mend them if you are a restorer.

 

The OP could possibly appeal if the judge didnt explain his reasons fully but the cost would be very great if he lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies for the brief info ,

 

 

ericsbrother has more or less summed it up,

 

 

because planning can be retrospective

this means the sign is as legitimate as it would be if prior permission was granted,

 

 

the sticking point for me as ericsbrother quite rightly points out

the law is not retrospective the crime has been committed it can't be undone,

 

 

I think the judge has just thought of it as a planning permission issue without any criminal activity

however I did point out regulation 30 of the town and country plannining regulations, which she googled and said this relates to advertisements, which obviously it is, but she said it in away to discount it ,

 

 

I replied this is what they applied for in retrospect she then seemed to acknowledge it,

I did want to probe further into that but as she said her view she wrapped it up quickly,

 

 

for information as we'll the advocate did not have the evidence pack I sent Parking eye (recorded delivery)

he was totally in the dark

he had no idea that it was about planning permission,

was going off the popla appeal that [pardon the pun] in retrospect was my naivety to that there would be empathy or morals to the corrupt private parking industry,

 

 

please see below link which has got me wondering?

Should I appeal what would be my financial exposure if I lost?

Assuming I would need to appoint a solicitor ?

 

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/08/parkingeye-discontinue-two-cases.html

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...