Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Dont really think that cuts it.. simply the above only covers your set aside reason.   put the you have evidence you informed the original creditor of your current address on xxx ..some xxx months/years before the ccj.   id also drop the embarrass ed defence bit at the end.   what defence are you offering that you dont owe the money? Simply saying the claimant might not have paperwork is immaterial. The ccj trumps that.  
    • ther thing we need to do is identify the land correctly, so state where exactly it was. If you mean the Tesco/aldi car park  then there is a sign at the entrance but that isnt an offer pf a parking contract with charges fro breaching it so maybe an invitation to teat at best. Cant tell who it is with though so not good for these bandits
    • Hi,   I've been sent a claim form from Hoist finance UK Holdings, after speaking with them I believe it's with Robinson way.   I dont recall ever being sent a letter of claim beforehand, the debt is a Barclaycard and the amount if around £1500.   Speaking to robinson way they are unwilling to negotiate with me and simply told me to return the claim form.    Is there anything I can do to avoid the CCJ, I'm happy to arrange a payment plan with them and certainly would've if a letter of claim was sent.   Thanks 
    • you have to look back a long way to get all the info you need on contract law that covers the contracts offered by the parking co. let us say wha it is if worded properly, it is a unilateral contract, which is basicaly an advertisement of something that by your actions you accept. they are enforceable as such. CARLILL v Carbolic Smake Ball Co is the mainstay on adverts as contracts.   Burden of proof- well that is a 2 way street in this case as they will say that they had lots of signs so you must have read them. we say that they need to be specific to the circumstance of a motorist entering private land in a car so they ahve to be legible and transparent at the point of entry from the public highway or it isnt a proper offer. Get the signage right and the fact that you drive in a manner that would get you nicked by not paying due care and attention wont allow you to claim that you didnt see the signs. the reality is though that the signs are often piddlingly small, hidden or unlit and usually without the necessary planning permissions so thre illegallya dn thus fail to create a contract.   demand for payment  within 14 days at a a time well after the correct NTK/NTD was issued is OK, problem is that many of the original charge notices are duff so no liability exists.   youcnat ask for other people's personal data, only they can. If you were the keeper at the time then it will be you they are chasing but other than that all you can do is get her to name you as the driver ands ee if they want to obey the law and start all over again against you.   Now as the original Northern Parking services were wound up by the govt for being naughty you should look up the original paperwork you still have and see who the creditor was at the time. Also get pictures of the sigange as all of the signs from the Co I have seen fail to mention the new version of the company and that makes the contract offered by the signage void.   so for example the secod letter of calom that is headed Northern Parking Services - no such company, it was wound up and this lot either dont know who they are or are too lazy or stupid to explain themselves. There is no tie between the 2 companies with similar names so why are they passing themselves off as a bunch of out of business crooks I wonder? I suspect that they took over the books of the wound up co and failed to explain themselves to the old clients and just carried on. Now that will be somehting to explore IF they do take you to court.   We really need to see the signs(ideally as they were back then so streetview archive images plus new photos please) if possible along with the original paperwork and an idea of when they dropped through your letter box with reference to the 12+2 days allowed under the POFA.   If you can get that then it will be fairly easy to compose a stinging response to their LBA.
    • The timeplate only relates to the parking bay. The SYL's are governed by the times on the entry signs to the Controlled Parking Zone. I've looked on Croydons website but can't find the restriction times for Zone W. The T-bar is no longer a requirement, but the SYL must be substantially compliant, which from your photo I would say it is.   You need to get a resident permit or at least visitor permits ASAP or you're going to continue to get more pcn's  
  • Our picks

MortgageWoes

Formal Disciplinary Meeting - ** FOUND IN FAVOUR OF EMPLOYEE **

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1004 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I'm delighted. I still suspect that this was a formality, albeit it didn't feel like that, because they had to officially find you innocent of the allegations, otherwise they would struggle if they had a case where someone really was being a wide boy. The fact that the hearing manager had nothing to ask is a bit of a give away - they weren't even making an effort!

 

I'm sorry you had the stress of this, but on the plus side, nobody can now ever accuse toy of anything wrong. It's done and dusted now. Your former employer screwed up and should have handled this better, and the current employer inherited a problem they had to solve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad it al sorted itself out. As you work in a regulated industry you know that things like this must be done in a certain way but I think that rather than starting with an open mind the investigators made the assumption that there was wrongdoing or intent on your part and once it became clear that this wasnt the case had to thow in a few comments to justify their time on this. This is something we all do to a certain degree so again, glad it didnt get bogged down and you have been exonorated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you again. It was a real eye opener and to think I only joined the union a few months ago.

 

I didn't know this forum existed and having a read of the threads it's clear that you guys really care about things being done right and that means a lot to people like me when your head is all over the place!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...