Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the xx/xx/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the xx/xx/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, xx/xx/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

ethical parking management - Contractual breach charge in my flats' car park


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2634 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

(Sorry if this has been answered before but I am not great on the laptop and couldn't find any answer on the site.)

 

I have had a contractual breach charge left on my car in the car park of the flats I live in and wanted to get some advice.

 

I was displaying a valid permit but they claim I was parked obstructively( I guess because the only place free I could park was in front of the steps) but I had left plenty of room for people to walk behind my car.

 

Also, as the part of the car park where I parked does not have marked bays, isn't it up to the person parking to decide if they can park in a certain spot ( within reason of course)

 

I haven't contacted the company who issued the CBC someone called, ethical parking management and I would appreciate some advice as what I should do because I don't feel I have done anything wrong so I am reluctant to pay them. Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

too right.....

 

 

you have supremacy over their supposed charge under your tenancy

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

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

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

As it is a ticket on the car the parking co has to follow the rules of the POFA and that menas that they allow 29 days for the driver to contact them and then they can send out a notice to the keeper of the vehicle and under certain circumstances make the keeper liable for the driver's actions.

 

You do nothing for the moment, wait for the NTK but in the meanwhile you need to do a bit of homework .

 

Firstly, is parking mentioned in the lease for the flats (assuming private development) and secondly what do the signs there say about parking conditions

 

. For the former it is unlikley that the lease says anything about paying a bunch of muppets for parking badly and for teh second point, if parking is restricted within the lease then I bet the signage they have to rely on doesnt specifically say that you agree to pay the same muppets for parking obstructively.

 

None of this is about parking or how and where you park, it is all about the right to form contracts and whetehr they are then breached, so if the signs doent specifically say anything about obstructive parking then they cant claim you have breached that contractual condition.

 

Supremacy of contract via the lease will normally defeat any such claim even if the signs mention everything under the sun as they dont apply to people who live there as their rights trump the muppets sign.

 

Let us know about the above 2 things and we will be able to compose something suitable for when the letter drops through your door.

Link to post
Share on other sites

what is in your tenancy agreement doesnt matter, it is what is in the lease that counts.

 

That can be found via the Land Registry for £3 if your LL wont help you.

 

breaches of the tenancy or lease conditions are nothing to do with parking co.

 

Also, the parking co wont have a legal contract it can enforce as it will have signed up with managing agents in return for some consideration.

 

That is with a disinterested third party so not binding on anyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the land owner is?

 

 

dx

 

no T&C's on that sign and it says they are below...

so you are expected to trawl the car park and find them......:lol:

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

If there is anything in your tenancy agreement about parking, for example, you are entitled to park within the area, this would overrule Ethical (cough!!!) You will need to read it fully.

 

While I was looking at the Pranksters website, a court claim piqued my interest.

 

http://nebula.wsimg.com/c269da31b314e7cc17e383a625b5ae23?AccessKeyId=4CB8F2392A09CF228A46&disposition=0&alloworigin=1

 

This was a case where the parking signage could not overrule the tenancy agreement.

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

the problem with their signis that it refers to a contractual charge and then says that it is a breach of contract.

It cant be both otherwise everyone and no-one has to pay.

 

The reality is that this is undoubtedly a matter for supremacy of contract and I still bet that the agreement to let these imbeciles loose on your estate was signed by someone who doesnt have the right to.

 

 

I have never seen a lease agreement that allows coboy parking co's any rights, even those that mention bad parking or parking conditions in the lease. So, supremacy of contract reighns supreme.

 

So, show us one of the NTK,s and we will tell you if you should let them know no keeper liability or whetehr they should get lost as no right to create contracts.

 

Their signs wont have planning permission either......bunch of criminals and you cannot enter a contract with people breaking the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the other elephant in the room for them is that there is no such condition as "obstructive parking" just gumf about permits being in the front window. Therefore there cannot be a breach of this condition as there isnt such a condition.

They really are more stupid than they look.

Wait for the NTKa nd then let them have it with both barrels.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Hello,

I haven't posted before as nothing further happened.

 

 

today when I got home from work the ntk was waiting for me.

 

 

I will post it on here and hopefully someone can tell me what I should do next.

 

Many thanks,

 

Hope you can see ok

IMG_0046.jpg

IMG_0047.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Title Deed to the property will probably not mention anything about a parking contract (as they never exist), but the plan of the property may well include a red line around a parking space as well as the dwelling itself.

 

 

That's what you need to be looking for.

 

 

Also type up here (word for word) the Register of Charges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

attachments hidden

you need to redact the ref number out

and also upload

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

OK date on the letter and date on the postmark on the envelope.

 

 

Also can we see the NTK as the wording must be absolutely correct to create a keeper liability.

 

 

In your case this may not be especialy relevant because you are arguing about your right to park in your space but you may wish to make them look even more incompetent than they are so far .

Link to post
Share on other sites

The signs say bay/space. Space means anywhere (IMO)

There is nothing in the signs that state you cannot park elsewhere in the parking area.

 

Have you checked your lease/tenancy agreement with regard to parking spaces. Some leases state you can only park in a numbered space whereas others will state that you can park in the car park.

 

Have you contacted the landowner/agent. You need to find out who the Ethical made the agreement with. If it was the agent and that agent is not the landowner then Ethical have a problem.

 

I suspect that if an agent is managing the area, no specific clause was entered into the contract with the landowner.

 

Edit: What date was the original parking event?

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

Hello, the original parking event was on the 26 October

The tenancy agreement just says that all residents must display a valid permit ( which I do) there are no actual marked out spaces.

The agents are not at all helpful.

Edited by Kentsi1
Link to post
Share on other sites

please note that the tenancy agreement is between you and the leasholder of your flat so not applicable to the matter in hand.

 

The agents will be unhelpful for several reasons,

primarily they dont want to get involved as it will just be grief for them and no money earnt and there may be a clash of interests anyway.

 

Minor point about the NTK,

they use a PO box number rather than a service address.

 

If the signage has the same then they cant claim keeper liability as they havent given the address of the creditor.

 

If one is being picky this is enough to beat a claim but anyone taking a pragmatic approach would say that a PO Box number is an address when it isnt but may decide that the rest of the letter si good enough so it is a proper NTK.

 

I would be using this non-existent address as support to other arguments should things need a bit of pushing in a general direction of whose evidence is the more believeable.

 

The real point here is that there can be no breach of contract because therie is no clause in the contract that says you can only park in a certain way and no contractual obligation to park in a prescribed manner.

 

In short they dont know the difference between monies owed under a contract or monies owed for breach of contract.

the 2 are not the same and they still fail to mention this supposed transgression in the signage anyway so it doesnt exist.

 

Should you appeal?

As it is POPLA they will have to pay a fee to POPLA for your appeal and it will be binding on them but not on you so yes is the answer to that.

 

when you appeal state that you are the keeper and do not say "I" anything but use the third person so "the driver at the time" and "the keeper".

 

Your appeal is that there was no breach of contract because no mention in the contract regarding obstructive parking.

 

Send copy of the signage.

 

Keep the other points to yourself regarding the difference between contractual obligation and breach of contract and the duff service address.

 

You may need to use these at some point in the future so dont give them the chance to change their time in the meanwhile.

Edited by dx100uk
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...