Announcements
-
-
Tweets
-
-
Posts
-
dx100uk. Thanks. I am just trying to find in POFA2012 where it says that a warden must issue a windscreen ticket. -
By webbscatering · Posted
the offence took place last January 2020 and the signs have since changed, the PCN to Grooms House shows a little sign bearly readable if your driving but now the sign is treble the size, obviously they must have conceded a few cases for the change?. When I took the recent photos there are no signs to the entrance of the main car park its not until you are actually in then you are hit with signs of all shapes and sizes. I think the time stayed was 27 minutes. -
warden photos which means its not an ANPR capture so the NTK is before 29-56 days all as i said above. -
dx100uk - many thanks... -Photos attached pretty much the same quality as they are on the PCN. One photo has the signage but its too poor quality in the PCN to read. -No windscreen ticket. Warden simply goes around with his/her mobile phone camera. -Location street name on the PCN is incorrect (its redacted but its not the road the car was parked in) -PCN is dated 1 day after capture and received by me 3 days after capture. Is this what you refer to as NTK? -Can you pls advise what part of the legislation says they have to have a windscreen PCN or ANPR. Seems quite common that these companies do it by stealth. - I uploaded signage too in case its useful Pics.pdf Signage.pdf @lookinforinfo - the 'incident time' is mentioned twice - both the same time - once in the box in the top right and once in the text. Yes i redacted it as the date/time/area combined collectively identify the PCN. Not sure why the exact time matters? - suffice to say the warden got up before breakfast. The photos do have date/times in the top left - tbh they are too small, dark, blurry in the PCN to see.
-
By lookinforinfo · Posted
You have blanked out the time on the PCN. Were there two times quoted or just one. In addition in the photos of the car were there time stamps on them and if there were, could you please advise us what those times were.
-
-
Recommended Topics
-
-
Our picks
-
Victory against Hermes despite improper pressure from Mediator
anturia posted a topic in Postal and Delivery Services,
Mediator point - Hermes lost my parcel and it is offering just a partial refund of the total amount requested. What's next?. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/434633-mediator-point-hermes-lost-my-parcel-and-it-is-offering-just-a-partial-refund-of-the-total-amount-requested-whats-next/&do=findComment&comment=5109422-
- 13 replies
Picked By
anturia, -
-
Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged"- **Judgment for Conversion of destroyed item. **WON**
hellothere124 posted a topic in Postal and Delivery Services,
Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347-
- 33 replies
-
-
Post in Bailiffs in at BBC obtain 7 years interest on overpayment of TV licence
Its WAR posted a post in a topic,
I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
-
-
Post in Court Claim Against Hermes - item sent via Packlink was lost/tampered with **WON at mediation full amount **
jj58 posted a post in a topic,
Hi @BankFodder
Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them.
In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
Picked By
BankFodder, -
-
-
Recommended Topics
-
-
Recommended Topics
-
style="text-align: center;">
Thread Locked
because no one has posted on it for the last 1415 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
-
Recently Browsing 0 Caggers
No registered users viewing this page.
-
Have we helped you ...?
Recommended Posts