Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So, why do DVLA (via that leaflet) say 1) that S.88 MAY allow a driver to be treated as if they have a valid licence (after an application that discloses a medical condition) AND   2) before DVLA have reached their licensing decision ? (Since S.88 ceases to apply once they have reached a decision to grant or refuse a licence)
    • Thanks for that, Bazza. It sheds some more light on things but I’m still by no means sure of the OP’s father’s likelihood of successfully defending the charge. This in particular from the guidance stands out me: He does not meet all the s88 criteria. S88 is clear and unambiguous: It makes no provision for either the driver or a medical professional to make a judgement on his fitness to drive under s88. S92(4) and the June 2013 guidance you mention defines in what circumstances the SoS must issue a licence. It does no modify s88 in any way. However, delving further I have noticed that the DVLA provides a service where the driver can enter a relevant medical condition to obtain the correct documentation to apply for a licence: https://www.gov.uk/health-conditions-and-driving/find-condition-online I haven’t followed this through because I don’ have the answers that the OP’s father would give to the questions they will ask and in any case it requires the input of personal information and I don’t want to cause complications with my driving licence. It is possible, however, that the end result (apart from providing the necessary forms) is a “Yes/No” answer to whether the driver can continue to drive (courtesy of s88). With that in mind, I should think at  the very least the OP’s father should have completed that process but there is no mention that he has. The Sleep Apnoea Trust gives some useful guidance on driving and SA: https://sleep-apnoea-trust.org/driving-and-sleep-apnoea/detailed-guidance-to-uk-drivers-with-sleep-apnoea/ I know nothing about SA at all and found It interesting to learn that there are various “grades” of the condition. But the significant thing which struck me is that it is only the least trivial version that does not require a driver to report his condition to the DVLA. But more significant than that is that the SA Trust makes no mention of continuing to drive once the condition has been reported. The danger here is that the court will simply deconstruct s88 and reach the same conclusion that I have. I accept, having looked at the DVLA guidance, that there may be (as far as they are concerned) scope for s88 to apply contrary to the conditions stated in the legislation. Firstly, we don’ know whether there is and secondly we don’t know whether the OP’s father would qualify to take advantage of it. Of course he could argue that he need no have reported his condition. The SA trust certainly emphasises that the condition should not be reported until a formal detailed diagnosis is obtained. But the fact is he did report it. As soon as he does that, as far as I can see,  s88 is no longer available to him. Certainly as it stands I maintain my opinion that he was not allowed to continue driving under s88. The only way I would change this is to see the end result of the DVLA exercise I mentioned above. If that said he could continue driving he would have a defence to the charge. Without it I am not confident.  
    • Americans are already keen on UK-made coins, and the Mint said it has seen a 118 per cent increase in sales to the US since 2022.View the full article
    • Right, my friend has just called me. He has indeed had to cancel bookings in the past from his end. There is a specific number for Booking.com that he calls.   After that Booking.com jump into action and contact you re refund and/or alternative accommodation. I suppose it's all logical - the party cancelling the booking has to inform Booking.com. So the gite owner needs to contact Booking.com on the cancellation number.
  • 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

Typical Ryanair - Serious update


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2992 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

A British man who flew to Germany using his girlfriend's passport only realised the mistake when he had arrived at his destination - having gone through security.

 

Josh Reed, who is 6 ft 3 and has a beard, travelled from London Stansted to Dortmund on a Ryanair flight with petite brunette Sophie's ID, reports The Sun .

 

According to the 21-year-old, security at the gate only checked his boarding pass, meaning he only spotted that he had the wrong travel documents when he landed in Germany.

 

But at no point did anyone else notice that he wasn't girlfriend Sophie Watkins.

 

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/travel/news/bearded-british-man-flies-to-germany-using-his-girlfriends-passport-and-nobody-notices/ar-BBqh7He?li=BBoPOOl&ocid=iehp

Link to post
Share on other sites

And of course Ryanair try to pass the buck. yes, he should have checked he had the correct passport but it should have been spotted at the airport.

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

I know everyone likes to bash Ryanair, but he would have gone through border controls, wouldn't he? It's a bit scary that they didn't pick up the mistake with the passport.

 

Yes, my understanding is that the airline should check the boarding pass and passport, but if border control had done what they're meant to, he shouldn't have got to the boarding gate.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't go through border control on the way out. Only the airline checks your passport.

Border control is only on entry

 

Thank you for that, I haven't flown for a while, clearly. :)

 

But the last time I took the Eurostar, my passport was checked by UK and French border control. I'm surprised it's so different.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant remember ever having my passport checked on an outbound flight since online check in was brought in, it was checked every time when we used to use the good old check in desks.

The main reason fir not checking them is passengers check in online and have to enter passenger information prior to printing off a boarding pass gor the aircraft

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't go through border control on the way out. Only the airline checks your passport.

Border control is only on entry

 

Or in the case of Ryanair 'don't check the passport on the way out'.

 

If there are no checks made when leaving, that is stupid and the government has the cheek to whinge because someone has turned up in Syria or a wanted or dangerous convicted criminal has disappeared by taking a leasurely flight to Spain.

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of the low cost airlines use ground agents to do that rather than airline staff as it saves paying wages to staff doing nothing while there are no flights, not sure about Ryanair.

 

I did ask before, as was said you need to give your passport details before flying, so they are checked based on what is entered. I suspect they don't really care who leaves the country.

 

Other European countries do have security checks to get into airside, which includes a passport check. In the UK all you need is a ticket.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Visual passport checks only seem to be done on entering a country these days, or if your checking in hold luggage.

Its not just ryannair either, its all the low cost airlines and possibly the rest aswell but as i only ever seem to fly with likes of ryannair

, easy jet etc i wouldnt be 100% about that

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

And another one

 

Dad who had both legs amputated claims Ryanair staff told him to CRAWL to plane on way home from holiday

 

A dad who had both legs amputated claims he was told to CRAWL to a plane by staff working for Ryanair.

 

Matthew Parkes, 38, says he was instructed by gate staff to drag himself down two ramps, a set of stairs, across tarmac and up the steps of the Manchester-bound plane.

 

But Mr Parkes’ wife Pamela, who works in marketing, said she complained to ground staff and cabin crew on the day and now plans to submit an official formal complaint.

 

Matthew, who lost both legs and part of a hand last November after suffering deadly sepsis on holiday , told the M.E.N: “Ryanair made me feel humiliated and like I didn’t matter.

 

But after a smooth flight out with Monarch and four days away, he claims that on the return journey, a staff member advised he crawl despite having informed Ryanair in advance of his needs and arriving an hour early at the gate.

 

When he refused and asked to be boarded first on a stretcher seat - as Monarch had done - he says they made him wait for all the other passengers.

 

On arrival at Manchester, Matthew says he waited 30 minutes to be taken off the plane - where a 10-year-old boy in a wheelchair was waiting outside in the rain in a queue of passengers ready to board.

 

Flick Harris of Manchester Disabled People’s Access Group said: “Ryanair has a history of discriminating against disabled people.

 

Full Story

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...