Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 4 th time we've merged your threads  for complete history of your story please keeps to one thread
    • @dx100uk @ anyone else interested in Fighting HSBC UK  Staff/department non compliance and incompetence/interference in between HSBC UK and customers.   I wanted to know what you guys had to say about the reply i got from HSBC UK today.    Recap. I originally turned to HSBC UK to be reunited with Money i saved in accounts that where frozen and made dormant during the year 1995.   HSBC UK Teams tell me that HSBC UK only allows them to have access to account records dated back 6 years. there for they do not have the records, can not locate the records i requested for in my SAR. there for HSBC UK teams Ignored my SAR application for records of accounts made frozen and dormant during the year 1995. HSBC then claim if the accounts where closed they will no longer hold records of these accounts and tell that to the ICO. I again explained to HSBC UK and the ICO the records of accounts where left frozen and dormant.   HSBC UK teams continue to tell me over the phone that The records i requested for in my SAR, will not be located or do not exist because HSBC only allows them to have access to records of accounts dated back 6 years.    I returned to HSBC highlighting there is no such provision in the Data Protection Act.   HSBC UK teams today totally ignored my complaint again and confirmed with me they are classing my complaint as wanting to locate accounts that where closed.   Let me know what you think about the  HSBC UK teams response to my last complaint. Is there any other letters i can send them to confirm thay are not correct about what they have done.    The HSBC UK letter starts of by:You've been unable to recover funds you held in HSBC UK Accounts that were closed in 1994 to 1995, and to obtain the account details for the accounts concerned. You've been advised that we only retain records for up to 6 years, but you've been unable to locate any provision for this within the Data Protection Act (DPA). You require a Certificate of Destruction from HSBC UK to evidence the destruction of the data concerned. You feel your Subject Access Request (SAR) has been ignored by HSBC UK.   HSBC UK Teams now go on to explain: In respect of you being advised we only retain records for up to 6 years, but having been unable to locate any  provision for this within the Data Protection Act (DPA), I can confirm that under the DPA, we are obliged to only keep records for as long as we deem necessary, in order to effectively manage our data. So, for most cases, this will be for no more than 6 years.   In regards to your request for a Certificate of Destruction from HSBC UK to evidence the destruction of the data concerned, I regret that this isn't something that we can provide, as we don't keep records of when individual customer data was destroyed. I'd also like to clarify that if the accounts concerned were closed after becoming dormant, that we would have sent you closing statements at the time.   Lastly, I'm sorry you feel we've ignored your SAR. I want to assure you that we'll always look to accommodate a request for a SAR as best as we can. However, if we're unable to locate the account details and information required, this will mean we're unable to fulfil the request, which has unfortunately been the case on this occasion.   How else do you think i can highlight to HSBC that the teams dealing with My complaint, and request to be reunited with my money is not going to departments that can deal with my demand for services.?  
    • Hi   I have to agree if you have paid off the debt owed to them via this meter and are up to date on your bills  I would look at changing supplier and as said asking new supplier to install a standard meter and look for the best deals for you.
    • I have severe anxiety and going to leave my job and have been invited to a meeting but dont wish to attend that is three hours away from where I am. Can I legally give the  permission to decide without my being there? I cannot handle going as I know I'm going to be fired anyway as on my final warning. I'm also giving in my notice this week too! This job is just too much for me now and I cannot work here any longer. It's no good for my health and sanity  I am sick to my stomach thinking about going and about to hand my notice in anyway    
    • Thankyou it’s because I’m awaiting the outcome and a friend said I will be turned down as I asked them a while back if I had ppi on the account and how much it was and they replied.  But they did only send me a short confirmation with the amount and that they trust that answers my enquiry. i just wanted to be prepared if they wouldn’t turn me down based on that. Thanks for your advice on that mate 
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 405 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi guys

 

I have an issue similar to a few others on here, involving the Swansea based Millennium Parking Services.

 

My vehicle was parked in a residential area in Swansea,

totally oblivious to any signs advising it was Private Property and Permit Holders Only.

 

Received the PCN stuck to windscreen upon return to the vehicle. The original ticket charge of £100 has not been paid.

 

As the registered keeper, I received the NOK a month or so later and have retained it. It has not been acted upon my me.

 

More recently, I received a demand for £160 from Debt Recovery Plus.

 

I have ignored all requests for payment so far.

 

I'm quite comfortable going through the court process if it comes to that,

but would you advise on any action I should take now that might help prevent being taken to court,

or even assist with the defence if that day does come?

 

I'd be keen to save myself on the hassle and time wasted in going to court if I can help it, for the want of a well worded letter of dispute.

 

Cheers,

 

Sham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 The date of infringement? 03/07/2017

 

2 Have you yet appealed to the parking company yet? [Y/N?] NO

 

if you have then please post up whatever you sent and how you sent it and the date you sent it,

suitably redacted. [as a PDF- follow the upload

 

has there been a response?

please post it up as well, suitably redacted. [as a PDF- follow the upload guide]

 

If you haven't appealed yet - ,.........

 

have you received a Notice To Keeper? (NTK) [must be received by you between 29-56 days]

what date is on it

Did the NTK provide photographic evidence? NTK received - dated 02/08/2017. Photos are included (they don't show ticket attached to screen, if that matters?)

 

3 Did the NTK mention Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) [Y/N?] NO

 

4 If you appealed after receiving the NTK,

did the parking company give you any information regarding the further appeals process?

[it is well known that parking companies will reject any appeal whatever the circumstances] I ignored it

 

5 Who is the parking company? Millennium Parking Services

 

6. where exactly [Carpark name and town] did you park? Residential housing area - Heritage Gate, Swansea/Neath, SA10 6DF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore DR+, clueless and powerless.

 

When did you receive the NTD and when do you receive the NTK, EXACT dates please.

 

What were the reasons why you were parked in a residents bay, were you visiting someone?


Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry HB.... schoolboy error! I'll do that now.

 

I had you down as a bit older than that, Sham. :)

 

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK,

what we need to see is the screen ticket, NTK and the signage.

 

The first 2 to see if they are compliant with the POFA to create a keeper liability and to also see if they have missed out key bits that show why they are claiming at all.

 

The signage will determine what sort of contract is being offered to you, if at all.

 

Again they commonly get this wrong as things like "no parking" arent a contract

so any demand for breaking that command is an unlawful penalty

or a matter of trespass that has nowt to do with the parking co.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ignore DR+, clueless and powerless.

 

When did you receive the NTD and when do you receive the NTK, EXACT dates please.

 

What were the reasons why you were parked in a residents bay, were you visiting someone?

 

NTD was received on the date above - i.e. 3rd July. The NTK receipt date, I'm not sure of, but it's dated 2nd August.

 

Reason for parking was because I was visiting a facility/premises nearby that had no parking available and had used this same residential area for parking previously.

 

The signage was not apparent in the slightest

- two small signs fixed to a wall at the bottom of the road

(the road joins a public highway, and appears no different to any other public highway),

 

then some others fixed to some perimeter boarding (which looks like they're saying is Private Property beyond the boarding).

You'd easily be none the wiser regards the presence of any signage until you discover a ticket on your screen.

 

It's an obvious con job,

as they could quite easily fix proper signage to the lamp posts,

where they're be close to the areas actually being parked on and more obvious to drivers.

 

There are plenty of alternative areas to park up on should you become aware of the possibility of being issued with a ticket for parking this particular area.

 

I'm obviously leaving aside the actual legal grounds for issuing and enforcing a parking charge and just addressing the common sense approach to deterring drivers by displaying adequate signage.

 

I'll add some photos of the area below when I reply to ericsbrother shortly. This will give you a better idea.

 

OK, what we need to see id the screen ticket, NTK and the signage. The first 2 to see if they are compliant with the POFA to create a keeper liability and to also see if they have missed out key bits that show why they are claiming at all.

The signage will determine what sort of contract is being offered to you, if at all. Again they commonly get this wrong as things like "no parking" arent a contract so any demand for breaking that command is an unlawful penalty or a matter of trespass that has nowt to do with the parking co.

 

Thanks EB! Attached below is a copy of the sign and the NTK. I haven't got the ticket to hand, but will hunt it down later.

 

Also in the attachment are photos of the general location and positioning of signs and parking area.

 

I'll let you just digest that before I ask any questions.

 

Thanks again...

 

Sham

 

Edit: Just to add, that I've commented in the attachment that the car was parked roughly where the last visible car is - it's the one furthest up the hill that I refer to (almost out of view).

mps-location.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

now their big problem is the largest words on the sign say PERMIT HOLDERS ONLY.

this means that any other person is prohibited to park

and this means that no contract is being offered but a notice of prohibition.

 

AS they are not offering a genuine contract for parking

their claim for a breach of contract is untenable,

 

the amount claimed becomes an unlawful penalty as there is no genuine attempt to create terms to offer you as a non permit holder.

 

If the signs said free parking for permit holders everyone else £100

that would be a contract and you can either accept the huge parking charge or go elsewhere.

 

Plenty of cases like this where parking co's have got spanked

and it is even in the Beavis decision

so the stupid gits should have taken notice of the detail of that great "victory" for the parking cowboys.

 

Now,

the road markings and street furniture look just like the council ones

so there is no real evidence that the land is privately owned.

 

the signs on the walls are too small to read from a moving vehicle and in any case they dont appear to refer to the road

but to the curtilage (cobbled bit) so unclear and inadequate especially bearing in mind Dawood v Camden.

 

If the council have spent any money at all on lighting or other maintenance here

then the parking co dont have a claim as it is a public highway as far as that decision goes

(mind you people's driveways would fall foul of that decision but there you go).

 

Might be worth asking the council about adoption or whether they installed the road signs, did the lining out of the junction etc

 

Also,

Millenium are not BPA approved operators so why is the BPA logo so prominent on their signage (larger area, font and central positioning)?

that is in my opinion misrepresentation of their position when they are just associate members

so they can go on the training courses ( they must have missed a few)

so it might be worth complaining to your local Trading Standards as you can be certain that the IPC arent going to help you.

 

So a joke,

are you member of the BPA?

yes, I'm a country member.

yes I remember

Edited by honeybee13
Paras

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks a million for your detailed answer EB. I've read up on this pretty extensively and had been thinking along the same lines that you've stated. You've helped to bring some proper clarity to my thinking on it though.

 

Parking Control Management v Bull seems to be a good source of information and reference for my situation.

http://nebula.wsimg.com/b84a6ffd1e3514097ca033a01c8db4b7?AccessKeyId=4CB8F2392A09CF228A46&disposition=0&alloworigin=1

 

Would you advise responding to any of the begging letters at this point or simply wait it out for a letter before action? [if that ever materialises]

 

Thanks again!

 

Sham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep,

that is a good marker,

it was widely reported at the time on motoring forums.

 

There have been load of others where the same conclusion was reached,

particularly a bundle of them in Manchester with AS parking services using tatty bits of carboard as signs

then trying it on in court

losing most claims

and breach of the DPA counterclaims as well.

 

I would let them huff and puff

but it is likely that eventually they will get someone like Gladstones solicitors

( the IPC in a different dress,- well twin set and pearls this autumn) to chase you

so a response to their letter would be a wise move,

if only to create a paper trail should they be dumb enough to let gladdys talk them into losing money by suing you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi EB

 

Just looking in quickly, but received the much awaited Letter Before Claim from Gladstones a few days ago.

 

It gives 30 days to respond or pay etc.

 

Do you need to see a copy of it before you can recommend a suitable response?

 

Cheers

 

Sham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re Gladstone letter mentioned above - I've attached it below.

 

Advice on best way to respond would be much appreciated.

 

Thanks

 

Sham

glads-letter.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes you need to reply

EB will help I'm sure

 

bu its worthy to note the PAP doesn't apply to private parking charges


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks DX. I'll wait for EB to look in and hopefully suggest something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, you now need to respond.

 

I note that Gladdys no longer pretend that you owe £160 because they need to feed the unicorns

but the claim for the extra £60 is still not allowed under the POFA or civil procedure rules.

 

By replying at all you fulfil the requirements of the PAP so no need to dance to their tune.

 

you respond using their ref no's ect and state something like:

 

dear sirs,

 

it is denied that any monies are due to your clients either as a contractual charge or as monies due as a result of a breach of contract.

 

This is because the signage at the site does not offer a contract but is prohibitive in nature and therefore any improper parking becomes a matter of trespass and as your client has no interest in the land so has no locus for that matter.

 

As you are aware of your duties to the courts you will now no doubt tell your client that they should consider the decisions of similar cases such as NWCP v Mr H, Preston CC 29/9/17 and PCM v Bull and realise that to continue would be an abuse of the civil procedure and risk a claim for a full costs recovery under CPR 27.14.2(g) for their unreasonable behaviour.

 

This is not the sole reson for denying the debt but one that is good enough to stand on its own.

 

This is enough to make it clear that you have read up a bit and arent ging to be bullied or frightened into paying them just because they are the worlds most amusing solicitors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks EB - much appreciated!

 

Can I just confirm one thing please?

 

Is this line "This is not the sole reason for denying the debt but one that is good enough to stand on its own."

part of your proposed response to GS?

 

I assume it is, but just making sure it's not a comment made to me in relation to the content of the response.

 

Thanks again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes.

let them know you have more ammunition but keep your powder dry for the moment

 

you are also going along with the pretence that as lawyers they are just acting for their client in a dispassionate way rather then being the bandits who are the IPC and have dropped their client in it in the first place with their crap advice on the wording of the signage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks EB. Fully understood! I'll get the letter written up tonight and posted off to them tomorrow.

 

Thanks again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Update

- after sending a response to the LBA letter

, I have now received another letter from the Chuckle Brothers, aka Gladstones.

 

It mentions

"rules of interpretation require simply that the parties knew of their obligations to one-another".

 

It states further - "....you were offered use of the Land by way of signage...".

 

Wrong on a number of accounts,

but I'm sure you've seen the same letter many times.

 

Is it advised to reply back, or simply ignore?

 

Thanks,

 

Sham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They know thye are talking rubbish or they wouldnt have sent the letter, just filed with the court a propery thought out claim. As they only have huff and puff they are hoping you throw in the towel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Update - received a claim form for this now. Usual particulars. I'll get moving on MCOL and CPR requests ASAP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...