Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello I've got a parking ticket, see here... https://ibb.co/DfHqg9F https://ibb.co/QvqH52m https://ibb.co/pbPPdDg https://ibb.co/X2F1X25 I've been parking at a particular corner in a small Tesco car park for years. Recently they put two electric charging plugs, one where that spot is and one at the bay next door, so I stopped using them out of courtesy in case they need to be used (I use that Tesco every day and drive past every day but have yet to see anyone use them). Recently I went back to Tesco when it was reasonably dark. All the bays were full, including the three blue badge bays. I have one but none of the cars parked in the bays did, I noticed as I walked past them (nobody ever gets pulled for that because Tesco have never policed this small car park before). Since there was two free electric bay spaces, and since I wasn't going to be long (just one product), I parked into my former 'regular' spot. There was a notice on the wall but if I'm honest I didn't read it because (a) I'm thick, and (b) I honestly thought it was just telling people how to use the device (like I said, I'm thick) rather than this being a parking fine. I went back during daylight and the sign is very obvious (as you can see from the picture), although not so obvious at night, although probably still obvious enough for you to tell me "tough luck, pal". Now they want £100 or £60 if I pay quickly. Am I doomed?
    • Hi All   After a bit of advice to see where I stand. Bought a car in Sept 2022 on pcp. Been told it had a big inspection and was good to go. Had many issues with it throughout the year including trims coming off the car and sunroof not closing.   While getting the sunroof repaired at month 12, in Sept 2023, the bodyshop guy said your cars been in a bad accident. Garage said it hasn't but offered to take the car back at half of what I paid for it as long as I buy a replacement from them before inspecting it (probably damage control) (car was £78k, said they'd offer £40k "trade in value" as if doing me a favour).   Ended up getting a forensic inspection done for £2400 in Dec 2023, confirmed car was in a bad smash (write off level but unrecorded on hpi) and potentially unsafe to drive - front end is slightly bent towards 1 side, what looks like a hairline crack on the chasis, overspray, bonner with patches of filler all over it, damaged rubbers etc   Raised complaint to finance company and few weeks ago to FOS... just wondering what people's experiences have been like going through the FOS, main thing that concerns me is that it was 12-13 months after I bought the car that I realised what caused these issues and raised the issue to the garage/ finance co but the damage/ misaligned panels are actually visible in the advert photos which I saved thankfully.    Dealership has had my car for 4 weeks to let a few bodyshops look at it (without giving me a courtesy car!!!) Not giving me any updates either because I went to the FOS about it and didnt want to speak to them over the phone anymore as opposed to emails. Note: hanging trim was reported within 3 months but due to part delays it didn't come until like July 2023, within 2 months the piece came off again, claimed under repairers warranty for another replacement 6 weeks ago and within 2 weeks this time the trim is coming off AGAIN (assuming it won't stay on due to the car being actually bent out of shape slightly)   Any idea if I have a good case or if there's anything else I can do?   Thanks
    • After the dealer failed to refund the money I checked the sort code and account number to reveal which bank received the money. It turned out to be HSBC BUSINESS DIRECT ONLINE. I called them and they confirmed the account name wasn’t Langley Cars though obviously didn’t tell me the correct account name. My bank contacted HSBC after I reported this to be fraud and they did in fact do a charge back but reversed the decision when the dealer sent a copy of the receipt he gave me for the deposit where it said it was non-refundable. I said that doesn’t mean anything when the car should never have been put on the forecourt when it was a death trap, and not fit for purpose.   The MOT revealed only a few of the faults which he agreed to correct in a week as I needed the car to travel out of London for work. He didn’t meet that deadline either because there were other more serious problems as identified by my independent car check. The same mechanic informed the dealer of these faults. The car wasn’t fixed by the agreed date due to the extensive repairs needed. So he was in breach of our contract on many levels.    I requested the bank find out the correct name of the account and they said the only information they had was like you said was the account number and sort code. I challenged the bank stating that whenever I create a new payee if the name doesn’t match the registered account name, it declines the creation of the proposed payee. So what happened in this instance?    I checked company’s house using the address from where the dealership is located and there was neither the two names, one was aa advertised in AUTOTRADER and the other on the courtyards entrance. I thought as I had made payment to the dealers ‘Trading as’ name that it would more than likely be enforceable than any other. Indeed the Bailiff was the one to call me and say that a variation of the warrant of control needed to be done before he could go and enforce the order. I cross-checked the address on Companies House website and got 3 different business names. Only one appears to be car related.  I am unsure as to what I can do within the variation of the warrant which the bailiff felt was appropriate. I will speak to him again Monday. 
    • Their PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. iit was not posted until 13 days after the event for one thing meaning it would be deemed to arrive on the 15th day instead of the 14th day. Now though we cannot expect that your PCN also missed the deadline there were still two other things wrong with the wording of the PCN that if your PCN has the same wording as your friends means that your PCN would not be compliant either. Their PCN does not specify the period of parking as required n the Act. It does show the ANPR arrival and departure dates but as those times include driving from the entrance to finding a parking place then later driving from the parking place to the exit cannot be described as a parking period. I suspect that the " Important Note" on your form will also not comply though I cannot be sure until we see your actual PCN.The reason I can't confirm that is because they sent out the PCN too late they have said that they are pursuing your friend on the assumption that they were the driver as well as the keeper-something that Courts do not accept. But it does look as if your PCN is not compliant which means that the keeper cannot be held liable to pay the charge. Only the driver can be made to pay it. If you have not appealed and revealed who was driving, there is no way that  Excel know who was driving.  So just to be sure please send them an SAR . On another topic do you have any proof that you did not stay there for so long just to really spoil Excel's day.
    • As your first PCN was a Notice to Driver which would have been followed by a Notice to keeper over a month later [even though it may only state Parking Charge notice] it is even more necessary to send PE an SAR. If either document fails to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act  2012 Schedule 4 then both you and your father are in the clear. So you do not need to worry about is any paperwork from unregulated debt collectors and fifth rate solicitors. The only thing to look out for is a Letter of Claim and all you have to do is respond with a snotty letter back to them .  
  • 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

Lidl cash back charged to card but given & how to get CCTV from them.


woking
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2596 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

Hi Guys,

 

Need your advice on this unusual problem.

Sorry story is a bit long. I’ll spilt it by bullet point to make it easier to read:

 

1. 23 Dec 2016 – went to the store made small purchase requested £50 cashback. Was deep in my thoughts. Felt a bit awkward at the end of interaction with cashier who started behaving strangely by completely ignoring me and started chatting with colleague. After packing few purchased items I was waiting patiently not realising what for. Felt as something did not finish - no eye contact from cashier, no thanks / goodbye. I’ve felt a bit strange and waited for much longer that socially acceptable in such situation and then left the store without exchanging a word with cashier.

 

2. Few day later realised I did not had my cash. As I was not out of the house since visiting store I could not have spent it or lost somewhere.

 

3. Waited for store to open again and went to speak with manager on 27 Dec 16 to ask them for my cashback and checking CCTV to confirm it was not given. Duty manager said he cannot view CCTV but checked till for that day and there was no extra cash in the till. He also found small receipt with my signature that confirms I’ve received cash. Signature seemed to be mine but I do not remember signing it nor receiving cash.

 

4. I’ve got my receipt with cashback on it. I am guessing I was asked to sign small slip confirming I was given cash and then was given my store receipt. That triggered me into thinking I got what I needed and made to forget about my cash by cashier starting to completely ignoring me.

 

5. I’ve spoken to customer services and same manger again who were pointing at each other saying I need to request CCTV footage and pay for it and that only store manager / area manager can view CCTV.

 

6. 6 Jan 16 spoke to customer services who then spoke to store manager who then checked till records again stating no extra cash was reported on that day.

 

7. Managed to speak to store manager in person on 6 Jan 16. Did not get much was just fobbed off making it sound it was my fault and I should have checked cash in store and they conducted their investigation. This person was quite elusive did not wanted to talk. Said nothing I can do. Both managers felt a bit arrogant almost as if they were saying good luck with that! If you know what I mean.

 

8. 6 Jan 16 stated electronic communication with customer services sending all above information via web form. Starting message with I am making formal request for CCTV footage under Data Protection Act 1998 confirming I am happy to pay for it. Providing all relevant details timing till number etc.

 

9. 18 Jan 17 sent them all above information in registered letter.

 

10. Did not get any response for around 10 calendar days and called them again to chase up for reply.

 

11. Received reply on evening of 20 Jan 17 (Friday) stating they passed for investigation to area manager. Provided instructions for requesting CCTV and how payment should be made. Advised that I need to contact police if I felt there was theft.

 

12. 20 Jan 17 I replied via e-mail and asked to place hold on the footage to ensure it is not overwritten as I’ve read somewhere that their retention period is 30 days.

 

13. 21 Jan 17 (Saturday) send request for footage as per their instructions.

 

14. 26 Jan 17 received letter stating request is outside of system storage capacity.

 

15. Chased them up for finial outcome of area manager investigation knowing what they will say.

 

16. 16 Feb 2016 Received response stating CCTV has now been overwritten they conducted till review and no extra cash was found. Nothing else they can do and I can contact the police.

My view on that is that they ignored my initial request under Data protection act sent to them on 6 Jan

 

 

17. Purposely delayed providing instruction for requesting footage and timed it so that I have 0% chances of making it successfully and that it reaches them before 30 days retention period to cover up for their employees.

 

I’ve seem to exhausted my option to get this resolved with the company and looking for advice on taking this further.

 

I feel up to taking them to small court claiming for postage, petrol cost for number of trips inconvenience and original cashback.

 

Just wanted to get your views on chance for success and some help with small court procedures if will be going that way.

 

Thanks for reading!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry to say that I think you're on a hiding to nothing. It's your word against theirs and to bring any kind of complaint – including a small claim, you would have to produce evidence.

 

The only thing I can suggest is to start looking around the Internet and see if anyone else has had similar experience – particularly in that store. Other than that, I think you may have to grit your teeth

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry but this could be a simple mistake by the cashier or it could bean example of the many times used trick played by unscrupulous people.

 

 

The distraction part is the critical bit so I dont think it is a simple error.

 

TBH the discount supermarkets save money by not having the necessary staff to do all of the things you would expect

 

 

their head office wasnt going to tell you that they have found the recording and you are right etc,

 

 

too much like hard work and would ruin their reputation and profits as they would have to look at loads of other queries in depth once it became public knowledge that someone had been rooked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s exactly how I felt.

 

 

The fact they did not find extra cash in the till speaks for itself.

Managers felt confident I will not get anywhere and really long delay in providing information on how to get copy of the video seems to be their way to cover up.

 

I asked them for copy of video under Data protection act on 6 Jan but they only replied with instructions on 20 Jan when they knew I would not get anything I as it will be overwritten by the time they get my request.

 

 

Area / store managers also knew of the issue but did not investigate in reasonable time allowing video to be overwritten.

 

It could be simple fact that they did not want to spend money on getting this video to me as it would have cost them much more than £10

 

 

I would have paid them for getting it.

But at the same time they spent £15 on getting their refusal letter with my cheque back to me by posting it SD by 9.00am!!!

 

Good question is whether I have good chance of convincing the judge if I take them to small court…

 

I’ll post separate thread with instructions on how to get video from Lidl under Data protection act.

 

 

Hopefully it will help someone not to get caught in the same situation…

Link to post
Share on other sites

you can complain to the ICO about them destroying your data when they knew that they should be keeping it , they might get a letter telling them off a little bit but that is all.

 

 

You have nothing to do court with and no-one to sue.

As the money was obtained by fraud you cant sue the store because they arent responsible unless you can show that they knew about this from previous complaints and did nothing

 

 

We can surmise that the person responsible has done it before or was guided by someone else how to but that isnt proof of anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you find yourself in a situation where you need to get copy of CCTV video from Lidl be aware that you need to act quick. They have 30 days retention policy after which video will be over written. They also have 7-10 day response policy. If you contact them via on-line form they will take 2 full weeks to respond you! Lidl is not keen on providing footage to you as it not in their interests and will cost them significantly more than £10 they are allowed to charge you for it. They will ignore your requests for copy of CCTV video unless requested as described below:

 

Here are instructions on getting copy of the video:

Should you wish to request CCTV footage, please write to the following address, providing the following:

 

 

• £10 Cheque made. Payable to Lidl UK GmbH.

• Photographic ID.

• The store name concerned.

• Description and timings of the video required.

 

Data Protection Officer

Lidl UK

19 Worple Road

Wimbledon

London

SW19 4JS

 

Hope it will help someone :)

 

https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/cctv/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I was hoping I could sue Lidl for not taking my concern seriously and refusing to check CCTV video as well as delaying information on how to request copy of CCTV video with intent to cover up for themselves.

 

With lack of key evidence I guess there is not much I can do now.

I should have gone to the police.

They would probably have to provide them with the copy much quicker and it would not be lost.

 

Lesson learned. Hopefully this information will help someone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears that Lidl would not necessarily cooperate with police and refuse to provide CCTV footage as below Facebook user found out:

 

 

https://www.facebook.com/lidluk/posts/1052090894848728

 

But quick to go to police and provide CCTV when someone steals from their cashier :)

 

 

http://www.gazetteherald.co.uk/news/14184580.Police_issue_CCTV_following_supermarket_fraud/

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...