Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello I am a resident of a communal block of flats owned by a Housing Association and since Tuesday 14th May 2024 Matthews and Tannert had put up scaffolding for a job on the roof last week, which was up for the best part of nine days. They had removed the scaffolding on Thursday 23rd May 2024 but my Sky box is still not working because of the satellite dish outside, and I was wondering whether the scaffolders had touched the dish while it was there and as a result had probably knocked the dish and probably made the dish go out of signal or whatever. I needed someone to check this out as well as to see my Sky box to see what could be the problem, and hopefully sort this out. I have had my Sky Digibox for many years and I have got recordings saved on them that I have had a long time - it would break my heart if I had lost them forever.       I contacted Sky but I almost made the mistake of accepting an offer where I would have to pay £31.50 and wait a whole month without television in my front room for it. I am in debt at the moment and I don't want all this on top of everything else - thankfully I have since cancelled it two weeks later when I told the person on the phone that it is the dish which is at fault as well as the fact that I live in a communal Housing Association property, and so that is one of very few weights off my mind. I emailed the Housing Association's Repairs department and they said that they will contact an electrical company to come out and see to the dish outside. I received a telephone call on Friday 24th May from the man to say that he will arrive on Wednesday 29th May 2024 to do the job. He arrived at around 9.40 am on Wednesday as promised; he went into my flat and had a look at the Sky box and saw the blue screen on my front room TV set, indicating no signal. He also looked outside as to where the dish was.  The main problem was that the ladders that he had with him were not enough to reach the dish outside as the dish was towards the top of the building - obviously the Health and Safety aspect of the job didn't allow him to do this. He then mentioned that whether he could do the job as a result of getting onto the roof and doing it like that as the dish is closer to the top. He said that he needed the key to enter the loft part of the building in order to reach this, and he needed to contact the Housing Officer at the Housing Association who had key to this, but lo and behold, he came on the Wednesday to do the job, and guess what? Wednesday was the Housing Officer's day off and so therefore he was unable to contact him for the key so that he could do the job! I just couldn't believe it myself. I am personally annoyed because this has not been sorted, and the man who came to do this is also annoyed because he came all the way to Nottingham from Peterborough, and he said to me that he won't get paid if he cannot do the job, so you see, we are both angry about this for different reasons. We are both in the same boat with regards to frustration, and we both want to see a conclusion to this, once and for all. Sometimes I wish that I didn't live in a flat which is in a communal building and I am thinking of getting a transfer to a one bedroom flat that isn't in that sort of place. I pay around £85 a month in a Direct Debit to Sky to receive their TV services which I cannot use at the moment, and I don't have much money in my bank account as it is due to one thing and another. I also pay nearly £14 a month to TV Licensing so that I can legally watch TV in my front room. I pay for Sky hence the fact that I want the Sky service in my front room and not Freeview. Also, as the General Election is coming up in five weeks' time, I want the satellite TV to be working properly so that I can catch up with what is on the news channels, and I feel rather "cut off" from that at the moment, and I want it working in time for Thursday 4th July 2024 for ovbious reasons . I have Freeview in my bedroom, but that is not the point  - I don't want to be limited to my bedroom every time I want to watch TV. I have tried putting the Freeview in te front room but it doesn't seem compatable for the same uses that I usually have Sky for.  Sunday 9th June 2024 is Day 27 of the satellite TV not working in my flat, and I feel that something needs to be done about this. You can take this message as a complaint if you like, but nevertheless, I want this message to be acknowledged and also something to be done about what has happened. I have enough on my plate with regards to health problems and depression without things like this making things worse. I would appreciate it if something was done.  I don't like naming and shaming but it is Matthews and Tannert's fault that I am in this situation in the first place, and sometimes I wish that I could sue them. In a nutshell, I have had more than enough after being without TV in the my front room for nearly four weeks. Also, at a time like this, I am missing so much of interest on TV what with the General Election comning up in just a few weeks.
    • There's no facility for a settlement "out of court" as such. But matters that are started under the "Single Justice" (SJ) Procedure can often be concluded without the defendant appearing. The SJ procedure, as the name suggests, involves a single magistrate, sitting in an office with a legal advisor, dealing with matters "on papers" only. Nobody else can attend. The SJ deals with straightforward guilty pleas. Anything where the SJ believes the defendant should appear, or which should be dealt with by the "ordinary" court are adjourned o a hearing in the normal magistrates'  court .As well as this, all defendants have the right to a hearing in the normal court if they wish. Nobody is forced to have their case heard under he SJP.  In particular, as far as traffic matters go, a SJ will not disqualify a driver and if a ban is to be considered, the case will be passed over to the normal court. Because, following your SD, you will be pleading Not Guilty (and offering the "deal"), your case would usually be heard in the normal court, meaning a personal appearance. To be honest, performing your SD at the court is a more straightforward way of doing things. It avoids any possible hitches involved in serving he SD on the court. But of course, as I said, most courts have backlogs which mean an SD may not be quickly accommodated. If you do end up doing your SD before a solicitor, check with them the protocol for serving it on the court. Do let us know what the solicitor says about Wednesday.    
    • Welcome to posting on CAG cabot, people will be along soon to help you try to sort this out. Please complete this:  
    • Quotes of the day penny mordaunt came out swinging with her broadsword, and promptly decapitated sunak while Nigel Farage, representing Reform UK, made contentious claims about immigration policies, which were swiftly fact-checked during the debate.   Good question though raised at labour about the 2 child benefit cap, which I broadly agree with, but the tory 'trap' assumes tory thinking - rather than child centric thinking. There should be no incentives to have kids as a financial way of life paid for by everyone else ... ... BUT the kids should not be made to suffer for the decisions of their parents Free school meals would feed the kids, improve their ability to learn, and incentivise them to go to school. As an added benefit ... it would invest in our nations future.   How far this should go is a matter for costing, social intent and future path of the nation, but not feeding our nations kids is an abomination. There should be at least one free school meal per day for every child who attends school. Full Stop. Its the cheapest and most effective investment in our future we could make.
    • Hey people, I've been browsing this amazing forum for the past year and recieved a letter today which has made me require some help. Received a claim form from Cabot in the Civil National Business Centre in regards to an Aqua Credit Card taken out in 2018. I failed to make payments due to financial hardship and have not taken out any credit or uses any forms of credit since. Received a lot of letters from Cabot and their solicitors Mortimer Clarke which I've ignored    By an agreement between New Day Ltd RE Aqua& the Defendant on or around 26/03/2018 ('ths Agreement) New Day Ltd RE Aqua agreed to issue Defendant with a credit card. The Defendant failed to make the minimum payments due. The Agreement was terminated following the service of a default notice. The Agreement was assigned to the named Claimant. Cabot Credit Management Group Limited, acting as servicing agent of the named Claimant through its Appointed Representative (Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited), has arranged for these proceedings to be issued in the name of the Claimant. The named Claimant may be entitled to claim interest under the Agreement but does not seek such interest and instead claims interest under Section 69(1) of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8% p.a.from03/03/2023 until date of issue only, or alternatively such interest as the Court thinks fit THE NAMED CLAIMANT THEREFORE CLAIMS 1. 3800.82 2. INTEREST OF 379.84 3. Costs How would I go about this and what could happen? I don't remember much details about the card either.
  • 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

CPP ANPR PCN - overstay MOTO Heston East - Fell asleep


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2280 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 there,

I recently fell asleep in a services area because I was too tired to drive.

I then received a Charge Notice from the lovely people at CP Plus.

 

Below is the relevent information for my case.

Any help would be very greatly appreciated.

 

1 Date of the infringement 11/2/18

2 Date on the NTK 20/2/18

 

3 Date received: Didn't note, just screamed profanities.

 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? No, it mentions the Data Protection Act.

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes

 

6 Have you appealed? I sent this email to MOTO which they kindly forwarded onto the appeals email.

Good afternoon.

 

My name is ..............., I am writing to you because I recently received a charge notice from CP Plus.

 

I work in the railway and I was working at an area called Grately.

I was driving back to Leyton in London where I live when I became too tired to drive and pulled over at the services area in MOTO Heston Services.

I remember I was around 45 minutes from home at that time but I was just too tired to continue safely. I fell asleep almost straight away and woke up leaving the services area and overstaying by 32 minutes.

 

I’m just an honest working guy and felt it was dangerous to continue driving.

I’m appealing to you to please cancel this charge notice as it was an sincere mistake made in the sake of safety.

he notice reference number is ................... I can supply any other supporting information that you may require to verify my case.

 

Thanks for reading my email and considering my situation.

 

Kind regards,

........

 

7 Who is the parking company? CP Plus

 

8. Where exactly? MOTO Heston East

 

I'm looking at an appeals template and it has this as a possible argument in it:

Your Civil Parking Notice constitutes an invoice for payment. Accordingly your invoiced charge must include an element of VAT. However, your civil parking notice does not state either a VAT registration number or an invoice reference number and so cannot constitute a lawfully valid demand for payment.

 

Any success, with this approach?

Edited by dx100uk
merge/format
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, now you've identified yourself as the driver. Not a clever move, and you should have come here first before engaging with them.

 

I suspect they won't be interested in the safety aspect / why you slept, but the fact that you could have paid them to stay longer ........ and didn't.

Edited by dx100uk
quote
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I'm regreting that now, yet some forums have said not to deal with the parking company, rather try to contact the services to get them to cancel it. It was very nice of the lady who replied to forward it onto appeals team for me :evil: Thanks BazzaS.

Edited by dx100uk
quote
Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the major usual planks of defence is that they have to pursue the keeper of the vehicle (who may be able to not identify the driver and still avoid 'keeper liability)'. That has been removed now they know who to pursue as the driver.

Edited by dx100uk
quote
Link to post
Share on other sites

can you scan up the NTK both sides to 1 PDF please

read upload

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

because 99% of muppets payup thinking its a fine

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've only been driving over here around 3 years and this parking business is just a disgrace, like the leaches of society. I guess I'm not sure what to do now, whether to appeal through their bogus system and then to Popla. I just hate giving these low-lifes money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't have to pay them unless they take you to court and win. That's not a certainty, but it makes life a little more awkward that you named yourself as the driver.

 

But all is not lost. I'll have another look at this tomorrow and make some comments on your options.

 

Do you pass this services on a regular basis by any chance?

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks DragonFly.

 

I don't go past it often at all.

I might be able to make a deliberate trip out there to view signage but I think I have the added problem of arriving in the dark and leaving in the morning light.

 

A lot of people saying to me just ignore and they will send thier red nasty letters.

A colleague at work lived in his car for six months and said he picked up dozens.

 

But I thought the Beavis case had a big effect on this?

Mr Beavis said in an interview that it "turned out to be the wrong advice to ignore". Thanks again.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing/quote
Link to post
Share on other sites

Do not ignore!

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

Right then Rhino, first a couple of observations, and then I'm setting you some homework :lol:

 

This is the approach to Heston East. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.488471,-0.3922728,3a,75y,92.69h,87.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTYMYbRawT6EsGh8RVwpAJQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

As we can see from that, there is, as you come off the M4, a speed limit of 40mph. Now, whilst this is a limit and not a target, it must be accepted that (smaller) vehicles (at least) will be travelling at at least 30mph as they reach the top of the exit slip, which is where the parking sign is that sets out the Terms & Conditions and therefore (so they say) forms the contract.

 

Here it is... https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4883128,-0.3905047,3a,60y,90.47h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-aMEoEz2rfr_faZxPa2rbQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Good luck with reading that from a moving vehicle, never mind understanding and agreeing to it!

 

 

Now then, for your homework.

 

Heston East is in the London Borough of Hounslow. You can start by looking at their planning portal. http://planning.hounslow.gov.uk/planning_user_accept.aspx? to find any and all planning applications, approvals, refusals and anything else related to Heston East.

 

What you're looking for in particular is planning applications and approvals made by CPP for their ANPR Cameras and all of their signage. These are applied for and approved under two different planning regimes, general planning and advertising consent (respectively) and cannot be covered under deemed consent. So they MUST have been granted planning consent for either to be there legally. A contract cannot be formed by an illegal act. So if they've broken planning laws, there is no contract regardless of what they may claim.

 

Also, you're looking for any planning applications, approvals and/or variations on any time limits for parking.

 

You may find that planning permission for the car parks was granted with no arbitrary time limits (unrestricted parking). And therefore it's either Moto or CPP that have introduced a time restriction. Whilst they might like to, they can't do that (lawfully) without varying the planning permission for the site.

 

If you can't find anything on the planning portal, then you're going to have to phone Hounslow council (Planning Department) on Monday 020 8583 5555 and you need to ask for details of all of the above. So...

 

Planning consent for ANPR cameras.

Advertising consent for all of the parking signs.

Planning consent and any variations of time limits for parking.

 

Don't contact Moto or CPP again for now, get the above information back to this thread and we can look at what they do (or don't (which is more likely)) have and formulate a plan from there.

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing they needed approved there, so looks like it's a call on Monday.

 

Well, that's telling :lol:

 

The council, if they don't really know what they're talking about (surprisingly, some don't) will say something about "deemed consent". There's no such thing once your advertising signage exceeds a certain size, which is quite small, they need specific permission for each sign (which can be on the same application/consent).

 

If they don't have planning consent then the signs and/or ANPR cameras are placed in breach of the law. And if a party (in this case CPP) attempts to create a contract (their T&C's for parking) that was based on an illegal act (no planning consent) then the contract cannot be enforced. It really is as simple as that.

 

Whilst they can apply for retrospective planning consent for the ANPR cameras, the same is not true of the advertising signage. There is no such thing as retrospective consent for advertising, so any claim that they made in court would be doomed to failure. Though this shouldn't be the only point of your defence as some Judges still don't get it.

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok cheers DragonFly :)

 

Mondays conversation with the planning department will be with the planning department regarding

 

Planning consent for ANPR cameras.

Advertising consent for all of the parking signs.

Planning consent and any variations of time limits for parking.

at TS5 9NB.

Will keep you posted. Many many Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just make sure the council don't confuse the two sites (East & West bound). Whilst it's doubtful, CPP/Moto may have applied for planning permission for one side. If that had been granted, they might have assumed that it applies to both. It doesn't.

 

I won't mention the area (so that they can't change it before anyone challenges it), but there's a big retail outlet near me which is "Managed" by ParkingLie.

 

There are two very distinct car parks, separated by a road, roundabout and about 300 metres. So they must be separate sites even if they're on the same retail park. They do have planning permission for signs and ANPR on one of the sites, but not the other.

 

Just waiting now for someone to get 'caught out' on that second site and post here :evil:

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got off the phone to the council.

No planning consent for the camera.

No advertising consent.

No applications regarding parking, although he said that might have occurred with the original services application.

Edited by dx100uk
Quote
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh Dear!

 

Well, if they choose to take you to court over this, their case has already hit the iceberg. It's now just a question of how fast it's sinking :lol:

 

That won't be your only line of defence, but it'll put one hell of a hole in their case.

 

Sit back and wait for all the begging & threatening letters now. Keep them, don't reply to any of them, but do keep this thread updated with any further developments.

 

 

I know that it would mean a trip to the archives for someone at the council planning department. But it really would be good to know if there were any parking restrictions (ie. any specific period for free parking) on the original application/consent. I'd put money on there being absolutely none.

  • Confused 1

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps, also. If it ever get's near a court. Moto and/or CPP will be able to explain to the Judge exactly what this means in relation to a (seemingly self imposed) 2 hour free parking limit and road safety.

 

I'm sure the Judge would love to know :lol:

 

2618017495_786458af08_m.jpg

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh Dear!

 

Well, if they choose to take you to court over this, their case has already hit the iceberg. It's now just a question of how fast it's sinking :lol:

 

That won't be your only line of defence, but it'll put one hell of a hole in their case.

 

Sit back and wait for all the begging & threatening letters now. Keep them, don't reply to any of them, but do keep this thread updated with any further developments.

 

 

I know that it would mean a trip to the archives for someone at the council planning department. But it really would be good to know if there were any parking restrictions (ie. any specific period for free parking) on the original application/consent. I'd put money on there being absolutely none.

 

Ok very interesting. Thanks so much for the help and wise counsel.

 

 

 

It’s going to be a bit difficult to receive red nasty letters and not do anything about it, but I guess I’ll just have to think how satisfying it would be to pull the knowledge gathered out of a hat at court. I’d love to let them know now, but I’ll see it through if that is your advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps, also. If it ever get's near a court. Moto and/or CPP will be able to explain to the Judge exactly what this means in relation to a (seemingly self imposed) 2 hour free parking limit and road safety.

 

I'm sure the Judge would love to know :lol:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]71033[/ATTACH]

 

Yes I also found this on their own website :!:MotoWebsite.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s going to be a bit difficult to receive red nasty letters and not do anything about it

 

The way to look at it is that you're not doing nothing. You're letting them waste their money. :wink:

 

It'll give you a warm glow inside when you see how desperate they are by seeing quite how much money they're prepared to t̶h̶r̶o̶w̶ ̶a̶t̶ ̶i̶t̶ waste. I've got almost a whole drawer full of letters from PPC's, DCA's and their pet/fake Solicitors. They've probably spent hundreds of pounds chasing me for money I don't owe :lol:

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...