Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • He was one of four former top executives from Sam Bankman-Fried's firms to plead guilty to charges.View the full article
    • The private submersible industry was shaken after the implosion of the OceanGate Titan sub last year.View the full article
    • further polished WS using above suggestions and also included couple of more modifications highlighted in orange are those ok to include?   Background   1.1  The Defendant received the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the 06th of January 2020 following the vehicle being parked at Arla Old Dairy, South Ruislip on the 05th of December 2019.   Unfair PCN   2.1  On 19th December 2023 the Defendant sent the Claimant's solicitors a CPR request.  As shown in Exhibit 1 (pages 7-13) sent by the solicitors the signage displayed in their evidence clearly shows a £60.00 parking charge notice (which will be reduced to £30 if paid within 14 days of issue).  2.2  Yet the PCN sent by the Claimant is for a £100.00 parking charge notice (reduced to £60 if paid within 30 days of issue).   2.3        The Claimant relies on signage to create a contract.  It is unlawful for the Claimant to write that the charge is £60 on their signs and then send demands for £100.    2.4        The unlawful £100 charge is also the basis for the Claimant's Particulars of Claim.  No Locus Standi  3.1  I do not believe a contract with the landowner, that is provided following the defendant’s CPR request, gives MET Parking Services a right to bring claims in their own name. Definition of “Relevant contract” from the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4,  2 [1] means a contract Including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land between the driver and a person who is-   (a) the owner or occupier of the land; or   (b) Authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land. According to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44   For a contract to be valid, it requires a director from each company to sign and then two independent witnesses must confirm those signatures.   3.2  The Defendant requested to see such a contract in the CPR request.  The fact that no contract has been produced with the witness signatures present means the contract has not been validly executed. Therefore, there can be no contract established between MET Parking Services and the motorist. Even if “Parking in Electric Bay” could form a contract (which it cannot), it is immaterial. There is no valid contract.  Illegal Conduct – No Contract Formed   4.1 At the time of writing, the Claimant has failed to provide the following, in response to the CPR request from myself.   4.2        The legal contract between the Claimant and the landowner (which in this case is Standard Life Investments UK) to provide evidence that there is an agreement in place with landowner with the necessary authority to issue parking charge notices and to pursue payment by means of litigation.   4.3 Proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and country Planning Act 1990. Lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under this Act and no contract can be formed where criminality is involved.   4.4        I also do not believe the claimant possesses these documents.   No Keeper Liability   5.1        The defendant was not the driver at the time and date mentioned in the PCN and the claimant has not established keeper liability under schedule 4 of the PoFA 2012. In this matter, the defendant puts it to the claimant to produce strict proof as to who was driving at the time.   5.2 The claimant in their Notice To Keeper also failed to comply with PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 section 9[2][f] while mentioning “the right to recover from the keeper so much of that parking charge as remains unpaid” where they did not include statement “(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)”.     5.3         The claimant did not mention parking period, times on the photographs are separate from the PCN and in any case are that arrival and departure times not the parking period since their times include driving to and from the parking space as a minimum and can include extra time to allow pedestrians and other vehicles to pass in front.    Protection of Freedoms Act 2012   The notice must -   (a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;  22. In the persuasive judgement K4GF167G - Premier Park Ltd v Mr Mathur - Horsham County Court – 5 January 2024 it was on this very point that the judge dismissed this claim.  5.4  A the PCN does not comply with the Act the Defendant as keeper is not liable.  No Breach of Contract   6.1       No breach of contract occurred because the PCN and contract provided as part of the defendant’s CPR request shows different post code, PCN shows HA4 0EY while contract shows HA4 0FY. According to PCN defendant parked on HA4 0EY which does not appear to be subject to the postcode covered by the contract.  6.2         The entrance sign does not mention anything about there being other terms inside the car park so does not offer a contract which makes it only an offer to treat,  Interest  7.1  It is unreasonable for the Claimant to delay litigation for  Double Recovery   7.2  The claim is littered with made-up charges.  7.3  As noted above, the Claimant's signs state a £60 charge yet their PCN is for £100.  7.4  As well as the £100 parking charge, the Claimant seeks recovery of an additional £70.  This is simply a poor attempt to circumvent the legal costs cap at small claims.  7.5 Since 2019, many County Courts have considered claims in excess of £100 to be an abuse of process leading to them being struck out ab initio. An example, in the Caernarfon Court in VCS v Davies, case No. FTQZ4W28 on 4th September 2019, District Judge Jones-Evans stated “Upon it being recorded that District Judge Jones- Evans has over a very significant period of time warned advocates (...) in many cases of this nature before this court that their claim for £60 is unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process and is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme Court v Beavis which inter alia decided that a figure of £160 as a global sum claimed in this case would be a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore unenforceable in law and if the practice continued, he would treat all cases as a claim for £160 and therefore a penalty and unenforceable in law it is hereby declared (…) the claim is struck out and declared to be wholly without merit and an abuse of process.”  7.6 In Claim Nos. F0DP806M and F0DP201T, District Judge Taylor echoed earlier General Judgment or Orders of District Judge Grand, stating ''It is ordered that the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverabl15e under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in Parking Eye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4)) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998...''  7.7 In the persuasive case of G4QZ465V - Excel Parking Services Ltd v Wilkinson – Bradford County Court -2 July 2020 (Exhibit 4) the judge had decided that Excel had won. However, due to Excel adding on the £60 the Judge dismissed the case.  7.8        The addition of costs not previously specified on signage are also in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, specifically paras 6, 10 and 14.   7.9        It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant in this case has knowingly submitted inflated costs and thus the entire claim should be similarly struck out in accordance with Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4).   In Conclusion   8.1        I invite the court to dismiss the claim.  Statement of Truth  I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.   
    • Well the difference is that in all our other cases It was Kev who was trying to entrap the motorist so sticking two fingers up to him and daring him to try court was from a position of strength. In your case, sorry, you made a mistake so you're not in the position of strength.  I've looked on Google Maps and the signs are few & far between as per Kev's MO, but there is an entrance sign saying "Pay & Display" (and you've admitted in writing that you knew you had to pay) and the signs by the payment machines do say "Sea View Car Park" (and you've admitted in writing you paid the wrong car park ... and maybe outed yourself as the driver). Something I missed in my previous post is that the LoC is only for one ticket, not two. Sorry, but it's impossible to definitively advise what to so. Personally I'd probably gamble on Kev being a serial bottler of court and reply with a snotty letter ridiculing the signage (given you mentioned the signage in your appeal) - but it is a gamble.  
    • No! What has happened is that your pix were up-to-date: 5 hours' maximum stay and £100 PCN. The lazy solicitors have sent ancient pictures: 4 hours' maximum stay and £60 PCN. Don't let on!  Let them be hoisted by their own lazy petard in the court hearing (if they don't bottle before).
  • 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

Brechin Car Company of Scotland car rejected, garage ignoring, using S75


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2625 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

we bought a car just before xmas

within days it developed faults,

 

 

we exercised our right to reject in writing to the garage at beginning of year and you guessed it they are ignoring us.

 

 

we have gotten trading standards involved as they think there may be mis-represented laws they have broken such as saying it has warranty and it doesn;t and that there is service history which has never been received and failing to disclose where it came from when asked.

 

 

this will not get us our money back

so we are going down the route of S75 with credit card company

only 2000 was put on card and remainder paid in cash a total of 17500 in all.

 

 

What I wanted to know if anyone else has been successful in getting their money back through S75 and if so what happens to the car if we do prove successful and get our money back.

 

 

At the moment the big hunk of junk us blocking my driveway as we had to sorn it get tax back this is now in the second month and doing my head in.

 

 

any help. advice or experiences welcomed.

 

If the credit card company pay up then effectively the car is now theirs,

is that right, will they come and collect it.

 

thanks

tracey

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which garage please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

How did you pay the remainder of the £17500?

Cash???

Not that it matters, a s.75 should be applicable, but expect a big fight from cc company.

They'll be giving you £17500 when in fact they only lend you £2000, but those are the rules, so for once they'll lose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the company is brechin car company in scotland and remainder was paid in cash and yes I expect a fight

 

 

but I have loads of evidence of the fault before the garage even took possession of the car and sold it on as well as misrepresentation on their behalf.

 

what I wanted to know was how successful other people were and what happens to the car if money is paid out by cc company

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread title amended to include the name of the Garage.

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

This must be a relatively new start in Brechin as the traditional car dealers there were decent kind of lads. Can you tell me the owners name please?

A £17500 car and no warranty????

If dealer ignoring you why not try and dump car on their premises & put keys through the letter box or hand to the office?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the Brechin Car Company Address by any chance: Montrose Road, Brechin, Angus? (just need to be sure)

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that the address and it is relatively new although they have traded in lochee dundee under a different name.

 

 

Can;t take car back would mean driving it and it is unfit to drive because of gearbox issues and engine issues

not about to drive it and get stuck halfway there.

 

 

besides it is their faulty vehicle as we have rejected it so it is up to them to come and collect

 

 

there is no insurance on it anymore and we have sorn it to get our tax back

so once again not driving it and risking getting fined and points on licence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you had better take it back and leave it on their forecourt.

 

Cost you about £90 for a tow truck but you claim that cost back as well.

 

If you dont there is the argument that you havent actually rejected it and could well be using it.

 

Even if you paid £1 on the card and the item is between £100-£30000 you are covered.

 

The card issuer will want to get this sorted or they lose a fortune

Link to post
Share on other sites

the v5 is in my husbands name

there is no insurance or tax on the vehicle and

I wouldnt put it past the garage to leave sitting on the road where my husband is liable for all tickets etc that are issued so that not gonna happen.

 

 

a section 75 has been started

 

 

what i wanted to know s what will happen to the car after ths is resolved

 

 

will the credit card company come and collect it etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you contact DVLA & send V5 back to them stating you are no longer the owner,

the garage can leave it on the road without any comeback on you.

 

What make & mileage of car?

What are the faults.

 

Have just looked at their website and it appears they specialise in Executive cars.

 

 

At a guess, and looking at the fairly high mileages,

I reckon many of these vehicles are ex company or ex lease cars.

 

They certainly know how to charge.

 

As previously advised, take car back to garage on trailer or recovery truck.

 

Write a review on this outfit on the web to warn other punters.

Edited by scaniaman
dipit
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi madasamuppet

 

Ok I asked those details for a reason and you mention Lochee in Dundee so here we go

 

First look at there website (Brechin Car Company) again and go to the bottom of the website where you will find and FCA number 718699.

 

When you check there FCA Ref Number: 718699 on the FCA Register:

https://register.fca.org.uk/ShPo_FirmDetailsPage?id=001b000001SHGOfAAP

(In the above click on Trading/brand names and have a look and check the other details)

 

An Endole check of Lochee Cars Limited: https://www.endole.co.uk/company/SC497335/lochee-cars-limited

 

On further checks of Lochee Cars Limited need to add this as it may be of concern as they have had there First Gazette notice 10th Jan 2017.

 

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/company/SC497335

 

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/company/SC497335/filing-history/MzE2NTc4NDE3OWFkaXF6a2N4

 

Now what you may need to do is write and object to them being struck off due to you ongoing dispute from your recent purchase: https://www.gov.uk/object-to-a-limited-company-being-struck-off

 

I am sure others will be along to advise

Edited by stu007

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update - my credit card company came back and said that they weren;t liable as the name on my credit card is different to the name of the garage, But after alot of searching on the internet and the info obtained here I provided them with evidence of a direct link between the companies and they are now saying I may have a claim under section 75. What they are asking for is an independent report from a garage detailing the faults and the cost of repair. Even after I have sent them evidence from the company who put it to auction that the car had faults. What I want to know is whether this is normal practice and can I claim the cost of this back from the bank as well. we are already out a lot of money why should be further out of pocket with no gaurantee of seeing any of our money back. thanks in advance for help

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the claim's approved, you should be reimbursed for the cost of the report also.

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

The car has been sorn so would need to get tow to garage and back which costs money the report costs money no guarantee will get back and if we had dumped car at the garage we had bought it from we would have no way of getting a report done surely if they want one it's up to them to arrange

Link to post
Share on other sites

No its for you to arrange.....that is the process...if you want your money back then thats whats required.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once plonked on their forecourt they will be committing an offence by moving it on to the public highway.

 

 

A phone photo of it on their property will stop them from even thinking about that.

 

 

Glad card co moving but they are placing the onus on you to do things that wouldnt need to be done if you had just returned the car.

 

 

Are the card co going to reimburse this or will you still have to sue garage for the extra expense (probably) nayway, it is a small amount compared to the whole.

 

the v5 is in my husbands name

there is no insurance or tax on the vehicle and

I wouldnt put it past the garage to leave sitting on the road where my husband is liable for all tickets etc that are issued so that not gonna happen.

 

a section 75 has been started

 

what i wanted to know s what will happen to the car after ths is resolved

 

will the credit card company come and collect it etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

got a report done and bank are going to foot the bill up to £100 well that the cost in total.

 

 

Have sent them the report which points out even more faults with the car including the brakes

so wait to hear back.

 

 

just have to wait and see what they come back with after all the stuff I have sent them can't see how they can come back and not give us our money back/ will keep posted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

still not sorted out but had an interesting conversation with bank who wanted us to email garage and tell them car is still available to collect, they asked us to confirm where we got the cash to pay the balance of the car. they said its still not sorted out they will try to get a chargeback for the amount paid on the card but said this does not affect any decision made concerning us but the wifey I spoke to mentioned something about us maybe selling the car via webuyanycar or similar and them paying the difference. surely we shouldn't have to do this and if this is the decision they come to do we have to accept these terms

Link to post
Share on other sites

still not sorted out but had an interesting conversation with bank who wanted us to email garage and tell them car is still available to collect, they asked us to confirm where we got the cash to pay the balance of the car. they said its still not sorted out they will try to get a chargeback for the amount paid on the card but said this does not affect any decision made concerning us but the wifey I spoke to mentioned something about us maybe selling the car via webuyanycar or similar and them paying the difference. surely we shouldn't have to do this and if this is the decision they come to do we have to accept these terms

 

Surely a chargeback for the amount paid on the card is different to a S75 claim?.

 

If the CC company are liable under s75, they are liable (equally with the garage, on a joint / several basis) for the whole sum, within the limits of s75, not just for the portion paid on the credit card.

 

You only want a chargeback (which gets you the sum you paid on the card but no more) if the CC company aren't liable under S75, or the whole sum was paid on CCard!, otherwise you are letting the CC company off the hook (and they may turn out to be a better target for a claim than the garage, if that company may be being dissolved........)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Just and update SUCCESS we have received a letter from bank saying they will pay the cash amount in full and final payment along with towing and garage report fees. they have removed the £2000 from my credit card statement and are requesting a chargeback from mastercard. they have said that we need to keep a hold of the car for 45 days and if mastercard do not come and collect then we can do with it what we want. Has anyone else experienced this and which part of the law states this, is it 45 days from when and will they notify us when the timescale is up. Well chuffed we are getting our money back and so glad that in the end I persevered and paid the initial amount on my card. thank you to everyone who helped and offered advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done...almost resolved ...I will not amend your thread title until you advise all sorted.

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...