Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Come and engage with homelessness   Museum of Homelessness MUSEUMOFHOMELESSNESS.ORG The award-winning Museum of Homelessness (MoH) was founded in 2015 and is run by people with direct experience of homelessness. A very different approach. If you're in London you should go and see them
    • You have of course checked the car is now taxed and the £68 is stated against  the same reg?  If the tax for the same car did over lap, then I can't see you having an issue pleading not guilty Dx
    • The boundary wiill not be the yellow line.  Dx  
    • Afternoon all Looking for advice before I defend claim for car tax payment that the DVLA claim I owe £68 from an idemity claimback from my bank and unpaid tax  brief outline. Purchased car Jan 30th ,garage paid the tax for me after I gave them my card details  first payment £68 out in Feb 24  followed by payment of £31 from March due to end Jan 24 Checked one of my vehicle apps and about 7-10 days later car showing as untaxed? No reason why but it looks like DVLA cancelled it , this could be because I did not have the V5 and the gargae paid on my behalf but not sure did not receive a letter to say car was untaxed.  Fair enough I set up the tax again staight away in Feb 24  and first payment out Mar 31st , and each payment since has come out each month for £31 , this will end Feb/Mar 2025, slightly longer than the original tax set up, all good. I then claimed the £68 back from my bank as an indemity refund as obviously I had paid but DVLA had cancelled therefore it was a payment for nothing?  Last week recieved a SJP form dated 29th May stating that DVLA were claiming for unpaid tax and a false indemity claimback which of course is the £68. It also stated that I had received two previous letters offering me the oppotunity to pay that £68 but as I had not responded it was now a court claim that I must admit guilt for or defend. My post is held for weeks at a time from Royal Mail ( keepsafe) due to me receiving hospital tretament at weeks at a time that said I did not receive any previous letters from DVLA. I am happy to defend this and go to court but wondering what CAG members think? In summary I paid an initial amount of £68 and then a DD of £31 , tax cancelled  I set up a new DD at £31 a month all in the month of Feb 2024, I claimed the £68 back from my bank. DD has been coming out each month without issue and I have paperwork to show the breakdown for both DD setup's plus bank statements showing the payments coming out . The second DD set up has extended payments up to Feb/Mar 2025. DVLA claiming the £68 was ilegally claimed back despite the fact they cancelled the original DD for reasons unknown. Is this defendable ? I will post up documents including the original DD conformations 
    • That doesn't look like clacton ... Former Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage buys coastal home in Lydd-on-Sea WWW.KENTONLINE.CO.UK Former Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage bought a coastal home in the county, it has been reported.  
  • 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

Leave your bag


tiger265
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2811 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

I went into a store in Birmingham today.

They are a relatively small store, two or three branches at most.

I won't name them at this stage.

I've been there many times and spent much money.

They are really good value.

 

 

When I entered today the security officer told me that they have a new policy whereby they take your bag (or in my case rucksack) from you and keep it until you leave.

I said "No thank you, I will keep it with me."

Their response was "Well, you'll have to let me look inside it then." I refused,

 

 

I continued to browse the store and make my purchases.

I expected to be followed but I don't think I was.

I saw other customers carrying their own bags (mainly women with large handbags).

I wondered, had they refused like me, or were they not questioned?

I completed my shopping trip and left.

 

 

My reason for posting is to ask:

Are they allowed to do this?

They had a branch in Walsall a few years ago and they did this there.

The fact that I simply refused and still went round suggests that they have no basis in law.

Please share your opinions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only a warranted individual such as a copper etc has that authority

 

And even then, they need reasonable grounds to conduct a search. Just because they don't like the look of your bag, dress, hair style, or whatever is insufficient reason.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that was the case. Do they have to give you any reason?

 

No reason needs to be given to refuse entry or service, although politeness suggests that a reason should be given. For example, a restaurant may have a dress code that requires patrons to wear a shirt & tie or long dress/skirt.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My nearest Toysrus have a notice which says 'we reserve the right to search all bags'. Never been too sure what 'right' they're referring to. It's only visible as you're leaving, after you've paid so they can't claim you've had the option not to shop there if you don't like their policy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a few shops around me that have lockers where you leave your bag and keep the key.

I suppose that they've had a large loss in the past due to shoplifting if they invested in something like that.

Don't really feel like blaming them, I would be pretty upset if I had to charge customers more to cover "disappearing" stock.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My nearest Toysrus have a notice which says 'we reserve the right to search all bags'. Never been too sure what 'right' they're referring to. It's only visible as you're leaving, after you've paid so they can't claim you've had the option not to shop there if you don't like their policy.

 

Seen this in other countries. In one store overseas, if you went into the store with bags from other stores, they used to staple the top of bags, i guess to stop people putting items in bags.

 

Tends to happen in stores where they don't have security tags on all items.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

In one store overseas, if you went into the store with bags from other stores, they used to staple the top of bags, i guess to stop people putting items in bags.

I wouldn't object to that. I do object to the Toysrus notice and there's no way I'd let them conduct a search.

Link to post
Share on other sites

presume they shout in equal sized print that they reserve the right to be sued for false imprisonment when they try and assert their other "right".

My nearest Toysrus have a notice which says 'we reserve the right to search all bags'. Never been too sure what 'right' they're referring to. It's only visible as you're leaving, after you've paid so they can't claim you've had the option not to shop there if you don't like their policy.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest roaringmouse

Shops do have the right to refuse anyone entry, but must have a basis. For example you are drunk, disorderly, they have previously seen you stealing etc. They cannot refuse you entry based on your colour for example. They can ask to look in your bag and you can refuse as you quite rightly did - even upon leaving. If they think you have stolen anything whilst in the store they can again ask you to show the contents of your bag and even pockets, and again you can (and should) refuse. They then have the right to detain you using reasonable measures and await the police arrival, HOWEVER when the police find you took nothing you then have the right to sue them for wrongful imprisonment.

 

My policy? I never give my hard earned money to someone who treats me like a thief! Shop with your feet and don't go there again. The most important person in ANY business is ME. Without me (and all the other me's) they have no business at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you dont have to give a reason to refuse admission or service in a shop but you cannot discriminate on grounds of race, disability etc. I used to help out a friend who owned a shop in Brixton and we had to ask a few people to leave over the yearsbut generally they were known to us beforehand and this just prevented an escalation of problems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say is, it's just as well you didn't grow up in Belfast in the 1970's or 80's.

You've just made me realise why I have such a strong objection to it when there's no good reason :) Never did have a problem with it in Belfast, probably because everybody was searched.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...