Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

Wages overpayment - ignored everything - now bill is X2 & HCEO's at my door - help


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1513 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

They work on fear & intimidation hoping that you know nothing and will succumb to their demands. Really they have no powers unless of course they have seized goods which then does give them the upper hand. All the while you deny them this leaves you in control and if they want to get something out of it they would do well to listen to what you have to say or offer. If you can then you should try & record any calls and/or visits - you do not have to tell them what you are doing.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct me if im wrong here.

 

 

After reading replies to this comment and researching on other forums,

unless they gain access to your home in the correct way

or any outbuilding such as a garage,

they cant take anything?

 

 

But if its left outside eg.your car they can then take that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive just listened back to the recording of my call with the HCEO and he says I have 24-48 hours to sort it out before they come back and start seizing my assets

 

As Plodder said, if they cannot get in, they cannot seize anything. Beware of vehicles as these would be a prime target.

 

They can't force entry without first having gained peaceful entry, so it really is a case of keep everything locked, vehicles out of the way and ignore them entirely, even if they are hammering at the door shouting they know you're inside. That does not mean you are under any obligation whatsoever to allow them in - don't!

 

Yes, items outside, especially vehicles are, as stated, a prime target.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct me if im wrong here. After reading replies to this comment and researching on other forums, unless they gain access to your home in the correct way or any outbuilding such as a garage, they cant take anything? But if its left outside eg.your car they can then take that?

Correct, but if the car is worthless they would be silly to Take Control of it, but make sure sheds are secured and nothing of value is in them. A patio heater and high quality garden furniture would be a target for example.

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

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct me if im wrong here. After reading replies to this comment and researching on other forums, unless they gain access to your home in the correct way or any outbuilding such as a garage, they cant take anything? But if its left outside eg.your car they can then take that?

 

For a residential property they must gain entry by peaceful means only

but if you have any detached buildings on site then forced entry may be made to these

if it is believed there are goods inside that may help satisfy the debt.

 

 

If the garage is attached to the main residence then it is protected

- but make sure it is locked correctly.

Any goods lying loose are at risk of seizure - car, bike, bbq equipment & good garden furniture etc.

In the past Bailiffs have even seized doormats but that is all in the past now.

 

 

One word of caution though is that there is provision within the Regulations that allow an Agent

to apply to the Court for forced entry

- but this mainly for those that show trappings of wealth who have chosen to ignore demands for payment

- so if you have a Rolex on each wrist & have left the Bentley outside j

ust make sure you watch what happens from one of your 10 bedroom mansion windows.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ploddertom nailed it.

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

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are they likely to apply for forced entry in my case?

 

 

Just for the record i dont own 1 let alone 2 rolexes.

 

 

Sometimes my neighbour comes home in a Bentley but only because he works there,

and my 3 bed house sadly isnt anything that screams wealth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are they likely to apply for forced entry in my case? Just for the record i dont own 1 let alone 2 rolexes. Sometimes my neighbour comes home in a Bentley but only because he works there, and my 3 bed house sadly isnt anything that screams wealth.

 

If the Bentley is there and the HCEO tries to seize it he might well run away when the Third Party claim goes in.

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

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are they likely to apply for forced entry in my case? No - although they may threaten to do so.

 

 

Just for the record i dont own 1 let alone 2 rolexes. Just tell them you are dyslexic and cannot even spell it. (Apologies to those that suffer from this condition but just trying to bring a little light hearted humour to the problem)

 

 

Sometimes my neighbour comes home in a Bentley but only because he works there, - must be nice for him to have a choice -

and my 3 bed house sadly isnt anything that screams wealth.

 

Just so you are aware - Enforcement Co's often read these forums to glean any further info, in your case I wouldn't worry as they are obviously on to a loser. If they were not so greedy in the first place then more folks might engage with them.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Wages overpayment - ignored everything - now bill is X2 & HCEO's at my door - help

so what happened

you never updated up and I see you are back on CAG ..

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, dx100uk said:

so what happened

you never updated up and I see you are back on CAG ..

Bloomin heck, wondered what was going on then. I was just looking back through my previous posts as couldn't remember what I had posted. In the end I paid it much to my dismay and never ever received timesheets from the employer unfortunately 

Link to post
Share on other sites

aw that's a shame 

you should have set it aside if they had no evidence..£255 would have been cheaper than £1600...

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

nice firm..

thanks for the update.

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...