Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Excellent news! Thread title updated. Please do consider a donation in light of the help received here. The help we give is free, but try telling that to our server hosts!
    • Hello dx100uk, After months of waiting for a response I finally got a reply and I must say it was the worst 4 months of my life the - fear of the unknown. So, they wrote back and said I was in the wrong BUT on this occasion they  would not take action but keep me on file for the next 12 months. It. was the biggest relief of my life a massive weight lifted -  I would like to thank you and the team for all your support
    • I have contacted the sofa shop who are sending someone out tomorrow to inspect the furniture. I suspect if anything a replacement will be offered although I would prefer a refund. Few photos of the wear in the material, this is how it was delivered.  
    • Yup, for goodness sake she needs to stop paying right now, DCA's are powerless, as .  Is it showing on their credit file? Best to use Check my file. All of the above advice is excellent, definitely SAR the loan company as soon as possible.
    • Hi all, I am wandering if this is appealable. It has already been through a challenge on the Islington website and the it was rejected. Basically there was a suspended bay sign on a post on Gee st which was obscured by a Pizza van. The suspension was for 3 bays outside 47 Gee st. I parked outside/between 47 & 55 Gee st. I paid via the phone system using a sign a few meters away from my car. When I got back to the car there was a PCN stuck to the windscreen which I had to dry out before I could read it due to rain getting into the plastic sticky holder.  I then appealed using the Islington website which was then rejected the next day. I have attached a pdf of images that I took and also which the parking officer took. There are two spaces in front of the van, one of which had a generator on it the other was a disabled space. I would count those as 3 bays? In the first image circled in red is the parking sign I read. In the 2nd image is the suspension notice obscured by the van. I would have had to stand in the middle of the road to read this, in fact that's where I was standing when I took the photo. I have pasted the appeal and rejection below. Many thanks for looking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is my appeal statement: As you can see from the image attached (image 1) I actually paid £18.50 to park my car in Gee st. I parked the car at what I thought was outside 55 Gee st as seen in image 2 attached. When I read the PCN issued it stated there was a parking suspension. There was no suspension notice on the sign that I used to call the payment service outside number 55 Gee st. I looked for a suspension notice and eventually found one which was obscured by a large van and generator parked outside 47 Gee st. As seen in images 3 and 4 attached. I am guessing the parking suspension was to allow the Van to park and sell Pizza during the Clerkenwell design week. I was not obstructing the use or parking of the van, in fact the van was obstructing the suspension notice which meant I could not read or see it without prior knowledge it was there. I would have had to stand in the road to see it endangering myself as I had to to take images to illustrate the hidden notice. As there was no intention to avoid a parking charge and the fact the sign was not easily visible I would hope this challenge can be accepted. Many thanks.   This is the text from the rejection: Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a suspended bay or space. I note from your correspondence that there was no suspension notice on the sign that you used to call the payment serve outside number 55 Gee Street. I acknowledge your comments, however, your vehicle was parked in a bay which had been suspended. The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief. The signs relating to this suspension were sited in accordance with the regulations. Upon reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO's) images and notes, I am satisfied that sufficient signage was in place and that it meets statutory requirements. Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted. I acknowledge that your vehicle possessed a RingGo session at the time, however, this does not authorize parking within a suspended bay. Suspension restrictions are established to facilitate specific activities like filming or construction, therefore, we anticipate the vehicle owner to relocate the vehicle from the suspended area until the specified date and time when the suspension concludes. Leaving a vehicle unattended for any period of time within a suspended bay, effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN. Finally, the vehicle was left parked approximately 5 metres away from the closest time plate notice. It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they park in a suitable parking place and check all signs and road markings prior to leaving their vehicle parked in contravention. It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times. With that being said, I would have to inform you, your appeal has been rejected at this stage. Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN: You should now choose one of the following options: Pay the penalty charge. We will accept the discounted amount of £65.00 in settlement of this matter, provided it is received by 10 June 2024. After that date, the full penalty charge of £130.00 will be payable. Or Wait for a Notice to Owner (NtO) to be issued to the registered keeper of the vehicle, who is legally responsible for paying the penalty charge. Any further correspondence received prior to the NtO being issued may not be responded to. The NtO gives the recipient the right to make formal representations against the penalty charge. If we reject those representations, there will be the right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.   Gee st pdf.pdf
  • 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

Northwest mini centre help please


Cheshirecat386
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2432 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

How so?. How can you show he wasn't "hoping it'd all come right & he'd be able to trade his way out of trouble"?

That is a potential defence for each and every charge : the volume in itself proves nothing - surely the timings (in combination with the accounts for the firm) are more relevant?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because he's been taking money off people since 2011 for restoration work that he's never done.

The fact over a 6-7 year period he's filled two large storage units and a yard with customers cars and not even touched them while living a life of luxury is to me fraud.

He text me two weeks ago and told me he didn't have the cash,time or means to complete my car yet the same week he took on a friends car as in insurance job and completed the work.

his in it's self proves he did.

 

He's told everyone he's skint and has no money yet handed over £3500 to someone that seized his tools off him on Friday morning.

 

He's took a deposit off a customer then emailed them weeks later saying work is going on and we are ready for first instalment money's been sent then a few weeks later same again yet the car hasn't been touched - it's blatant fraud.

 

I'm not saying we have to persue him as a group but as a group of victims we are better equipped to deal with it, seek advice and move forward.

 

You seem very negative to the whole thing.

Have you had dealings with Chris??

Does he owe you money??

Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem very negative to the whole thing.

Have you had dealings with Chris??

Does he owe you money??

 

No, I have no dealings or connection with him.

 

My "negativity" is in:

a) the difficulty in enforcing a judgment against an insolvent company

b) the difficulty in getting a judgment against a director for a company's debts

c) the difficulty in proving a prosecution for fraud (being to the criminal standard of proof rather than the civil standard of "balance of probabilities).

 

In case you are still in doubt, I posted further up the thread:

Did they get any extra money from you based on the emails / photos?

If so would you consider reporting him to the police where they can consider if there has been a fraud by false representation?

 

In other words, if there is stronger evidence of a dishonest false representation causing a loss, I was suggesting reporting it for consideration of prosecution!

 

I just want any expectation of outcome to be a realistic one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I don't want to post the full story or updates on here as Chris also reads this site.

 

I want to find a way of getting names/ numbers for all affected and then seeing what police will do - lot more chance of them taking it seriously if there is a group.

 

And yes, he did get next instalments based on the emails saying he had done work.

 

I know it's fraud, you know it's fraud but how to get him in custody is another matter.

 

Problem is admin tell you to start a new thread each time. Anyway.

 

He did export money based on the emails = fraud.

 

However getting him in custody is another matter.

 

I agree, multiple threads of different issues makes knowing just how many people are in our situation very difficult. As an update to my car, I had it dropped off by NWMC and the "business is being taken over by the receivers who will be in touch with me" (that was after my last phone call last week).

Link to post
Share on other sites

the more complaints the more weight

 

 

the more threads

the more publicity

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, multiple threads of different issues makes knowing just how many people are in our situation very difficult. As an update to my car, I had it dropped off by NWMC and the "business is being taken over by the receivers who will be in touch with me" (that was after my last phone call last week).

 

So they just randomly turned up with your car and dropped it off.

Carnt understand why he's gone to the bother of delivering some cars back to owners but then others have been left there for the liquidators to seize.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, sorry I've only just seen your post.

 

Yes, my car was returned back on Monday 11th September.

The car was a wreck (seemingly much more than when it had been collected)

 

 

most of my stuff I had bought for the car and dropped off

(in the months leading up to my wedding in November 2016 when the car was supposed to be ready for - another story) were inside the car, in boxes.

I had also bought new carpets and underlayer for the car too, these were nowhere to be seen.

 

 

I called Chris and spoke to him the day after and he said he would have a look for them but thats the last I heard from him.

Phone goes to 'invalid number' now so i'm guessing he's gone properly AWOL and changed numbers.

 

Is your car still at the unit?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Latest update - chris has gone AWOL. Steve and Mark have taken over workshop and want all cars gone by end September. Derbyshire police very interested in this case as below. Lots of people have been defrauded.

 

People affected need to ring 101... press # for alternative station and say Derbyshire. Then get through to that constabulary (if you are not from round there).

 

You can quote this incident number and it will make a bigger case. If you can get in to make a statement then great!

 

Ex-employees / customers alike!

 

EDIT: CASE NUMBER 797250917

Link to post
Share on other sites

Latest update - chris has gone AWOL. Steve and Mark have taken over workshop and want all cars gone by end September. Derbyshire police very interested in this case as below. Lots of people have been defrauded.

 

People affected need to ring 101... press # for alternative station and say Derbyshire. Then get through to that constabulary (if you are not from round there).

 

You can quote this incident number and it will make a bigger case. If you can get in to make a statement then great!

 

Ex-employees / customers alike!

 

EDIT: CASE NUMBER 797250917

 

Thanks very much for the update, have you had any luck with the case so far or are they looking into it? As I said earlier, we could do with all people knowing this information but as there are so many threads it is difficult to know how many people are in the same position. Maybe post that 'post' on all related threads so police can get as much info as possible?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only just sorted it today. There is a Facebook group too - look under 'disgruntledNwmc' and hopefully it should come up. Quite a few of us on thrrr.

 

Great stuff thank you. I will look it up and be in touch with Derbyshire. Will update on here as and when I find out more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...