Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • i think theres been MORE than amble evidence of that and am astonished that criminal proceedings haven't begun.
    • Yep, those 'requirements' not met to shareholders satisfaction seem to me to be: 1. Not being allowed to increase customer bills by 40% (of which well over 50% of the new total would NOT be investment) 2. 1 plus regulators not agreeing to letting them do 'things in their own time (ie carry on regardless)
    • As already mentioned freely available "credit scores" are fairly useless. All lenders have their own "credit scoring" system, that for obvious reasons they don't divulge. And they're "scored" differently to the freely available ones. As soon as they could, we've always encouraged our two children to use credit cards responsibly... Pay off in full, etc, to generate good history. It's paid off. At quite young ages, they have both obtained loans for cars, mortgage and their credit card limits are through the roof. Personally, I have shifted debt around a lot on credit cards (even financed a house purchase once at 0% 😉) and I've only ever been refused a credit card once, sorry twice by the same company, over many years. They must have something very different in their lending criteria. You're a tight one, Mr Branson.
    • Hi DX - quick question, what is the bank likely to do when they get my letter of change of address ? also what is the worst they can do? thanks J1L
  • 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
      • 160 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

Thurrock council PCN for parking with faded/non visible bay lines


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2660 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 have been given a PCN for parking in council run car park, outside of a parking bay.

 

 

I wanted to know if I had a leg to stand on if I wanted to fight my case?

 

 

As you can see in the pictures attached

the bay lines are very faded and in most parts are completely invisible.

 

 

I have also taken a couple of shots of the rest of the car park to show how bad the entire car park is and how bad their bay marking are.

 

 

If anyone could offer any advice I would greatly appreciate it.

 

 

I have written to the council already protesting about the PCN and I am waiting to hear back from them.

Many Thanks

20161119_104331.jpg

20161119_104221.jpg

20161119_104354.jpg

20161119_104452.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think for the moment that you have done the right thing. Well done on taking the pictures. Many people don't bother but they look very convincing.

 

Come back here when you know the results of your appeal

Link to post
Share on other sites

your soft appeal should include the photos and proof that you paid to be there (copy of ticket) If you are forced to take it to a formal appeal you will win as there is plenty of case precedent over markings that are far clearer than this. the council is having a laugh if they think that this will stick

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hello everyone, I just thought I would keep you updated with what is happening. So after sending off the email with pictures, I got an automated response stating that they would get back to me within 10 working days. 10 working days has now passed so I called them up saying I have not heard back from them yet. Their response was: Them - A letter was sent to you on at the beginning of the week. Me - I have never received a letter? Them - Oh yes, you are correct, it was never sent as you didn't include your postal address in your email. Firstly, it never stated anywhere that I needed to give them my postal address. Secondly, what would have happened if I never contacted them myself? Would they have let it pass and then charge me.....even though they never sent me a letter out? Anyway, I have sent yet another email and no doubt will have to wait a while longer now to hear what their decision is. Just thought I would keep everyone up to date.

Edited by actionplan36
Link to post
Share on other sites

Challenging a penalty charge notice

 

If you receive a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) that you feel is unfair, you can challenge it. Your PCN number, vehicle registration number and address must be quoted in all contacts. You can challenge using the online form or write to us:

 

https://www.thurrock.gov.uk/parking-enforcement/challenging-penalty-charge-notice

Link to post
Share on other sites

I presume you quoted the PCN ref number so they know exactly who you are but are being bloody minded.

 

They will have no idea 'who you are'. The PCN ref number will identify the PCN and therefore the contravention and VRM, it doesn't identify a person. Nor does an email address. No council will respond to an informal challenge (either email or postal) without a name and address.

 

It's not until they send the NTO having obtained details from the DVLA, that they will have any idea of the identity of the registered keeper, let alone the driver if t was someone other than the RK.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everyone,

 

I wanted to give you an update.

 

I have received a letter telling me that my challenge has been rejected. Most of the text is just a copy and paste job that they send to everyone (I'm guessing). They do have pictures that show my car on a 'T', but when you park....looking out your window.....what do I see both sides....empty space with no other markings? As you could see in my pictures at the start of this thread....most of the lines in the car park have vanished.

 

Do I fight this? 20161206_154317.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have called up the Council's parking department and they have said I should receive another letter soon as I emailed them a question. Every time I ask a question it takes another 10 days to get a response. When I called I was asking to make sure I wouldn't be charged the full amount as the case was ongoing. They reassured me I wouldn't. I said that is good as I am waiting to hear back from my MP who has been notified about the situation. They then said "it has nothing to do with an MP, it's council business". Which I replied "I understand, but the council are not taking responsibility for the state of the carpark and are giving out penalties and to people who cannot see the bay lines. to be continued.......

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if anyone is following the thread any more, so this will be my last post. I have had another letter stating that basically they will no longer communicate with me and I have to pay. I have decided to pay the £25 so I don't get charged the full amount, but will continue to email them....every single week until they admit they are in the wrong and give me the money back as the whole thing is crazy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like you've already decided, and paid up.

 

Their images show the lines quite a bit clearer than your images, so there's some doubt over how this might have ended up had you fought on.

 

In any case, really don't keep hammering it out. Now you've paid, just move on. As the council said, this isn't a matter for a member of parliament, and you've closed the case now anyway. It's not worth even more of your time and energy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...