Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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

Family being harrassed and threatened - not sure how to put a stop to it


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2450 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 need advice on how to get an order to stop one of my father-in-law's neighbours from approaching myself, my husband and my children as well as my terminally ill father-in-law.

 

She has been threatening and abusive to us over the past couple of months over a civil matter to do with the birth of a litter of puppies to my father-in-law's bitch that were fathered by her dog. She took responsibility for the care of the puppies and is now refusing to return them unless we pay her £300 for her care provision of the puppies.

 

As my father in law is so unwell he was not able to have looked after the litter and myself and my husband would have had the responsibility for the puppies in addition to caring for him and his well-being, we also both work full time and have our own children and home to look after.

 

We had said that we would look after the puppies as the care for them was relatively minimal - being fed by the mother, cleaned by the mother, etc. All we would be doing would be to ensure that the puppy enclosure was clean and safe.

 

This situation has been reported to the police in terms of the harassment, threats, phone calls, text messages, notes put through the door, shouting at us in the street. Veiled threats are made that she will arrange for her boyfriend or her son to "have a word man-to-man" with my husband.

 

She took the puppies from their mother at just 4 weeks old, without permission, saying that she would hand rear them and that she would return them on 1st August. When the police were informed and this was reported to them as a theft they advised us that it was a civil matter and that we would need to go to a solicitor to request the return of the puppies, if that failed, then to small claims court to request their return.

 

After looking into the possibility it was financially not viable to take the solicitor route and we would just let her sell the 3 puppies and father in law would have the money for 2 of them, she would have the money for 1 of them. It seems I was deluded - she is refusing to return the puppies and I now have no idea if she still has the puppies.

 

We in the meantime are being threatened and harassed over £300 she claims that we now owe her for her taking care of them even though she was not asked to, and in fact was specifically told not to, that we would take care of them.

 

At that point she came to father in law's home, he allowed her in and she just took the puppies away. When we arrived later that morning he had no idea who had been in and no idea where the puppies were.

 

My request for advice primarily is if anyone knows of an order that we can seek to keep her away from all of us, stop her speaking to us and stop her communications via phone, text or notes through the door. The police suggested a non-molestation order but that seems to be for victims of domestic violence in a direct personal relationship with the abuser.

 

I did read somewhere about a protection order for vulnerable adults which might suffice to keep her away from my father in law but cannot remember now where I found the information about that. It would not be suitable to keep her away from my husband, myself or our teenage daughters.

 

I would appreciate any advice on the matter of the abuse she is giving to all of us especially as in his current vulnerable state on 2 occasions my father in law has let her into his home as he forgets that she is not to be allowed in even though he has a note taped to the front door telling him not to let her in.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the Police issue any warning letter to the neighbour about ceasing any harassment against your father in law ? The Police have power to do this.

 

Does your father in law have any legal expenses cover with Home Insurance ? Has he checked whether he get any help ?

 

In regard to the dogs issue, it is a civil matter and there is probably a court application your FIL can make. But how quick this would be and whether it would stop the neighbour selling the puppies, i am not sure. Many local Solicitors offer a free half hour of advice to point people in the right direction.

 

Others with more legal knowledge will hopefully add their comments later.

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Police officer informed us that an harassment warning would probably be ineffective in stopping her and that we would be better off getting a "non molestation order" but this is clearly designed for victims of domestic abuse. In an email from the police ", if .... were to breach a non-molestation order, she would be guilty of an offence and can be much more easily dealt with by the criminal justice system, who would also see that she has had fair warning in the form of the order",

 

in a phone conversation he said that breaking an harassment order would just result in her being given a fine and there would be no option for preventing her from staying away from FIL's home. He has no home insurance so no legal expenses cover.

 

Regarding the civil matter of the puppies - to be quite frank the Father In Law is unlikely to survive 3 more months and I would rather focus on him right now than worrying about antagonizing the neighbor - although it will choke me to know that she has got away with this despicable behavior against someone that she knows is vulnerable - in particular someone who because of his dementia would never be able to prove that he did not allow her to take the dogs, or did not agree to her looking after them.

 

My priority is definitely to get the harassment and threatening behavior to stop towards all of us right now and to prevent her from coming to the FIL's house. I did text her and ask her to stop - all that I received was a barrage of abuse in various forms in response and a few days later my husband was confronted by her outside my FIL's home.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras.
Link to post
Share on other sites

If he was confronted and you have proof of the abuse, then it becomes a criminal matter. Not civil

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably best not to escalate matters by getting courts involved.

 

Ignore the neighbour totally. Accept that the puppies are gone, as your FIL can't prove he did not let the neighbour have them. If the neighbour wants to sell or keep them, then let her.

 

As long as your FIL still has his dog that gave birth to the pups. If your family want to breed more from his dog, then that is your choice, but not with the neighbours dog.

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Truly I am more than willing to let the puppy issue just go - it really is the ongoing harassment that is still rolling on now weeks later. The matter of the puppies could easily be forgotten but she is now insisting that we owe her £300 for looking after them. This feels like it is any reason for an argument, any excuse for confrontation. The incidents are sometimes fuelled by her drinking but this is not the case every time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still waiting to hear back from the police about this particular incident - she was calling hubby over and when he refused to go towards her she said "someone else will be up later to deal with you, it won't be me next time". There have been previous phone messages left when she threatens that her boyfriend or her son will come and deal with things "like a man" - clearly trying to intimidate or provoke. Each incident has been added to the original crime report and the investigating officer is updated. I am waiting to hear back from him regarding the most recent episode.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there.

 

Could you try to put some paragraphs into your posts please? :) I've spaced two of them, but I'm not here all the time.

 

HB

 

I have tried to put the paragraph spaces in but unfortunately they are there when I type the response but not there when the reply is submitted. I have then tried to edit both the original and also the responses to queries however as soon as the edit is submitted the paragraph spacing disappears - is there a trick to this that I am missing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is she ringing on a phone that lets you block her calls?

 

HB

 

I would gladly block her calls, as would my husband, but we have been asked not to but to let her leave messages as this will provide evidence for the police in the recordings - the police have been sent the recordings of her calls to us and the voice mail messages that she has left us. We do not answer her calls.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...