Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well that will lead to more backdoor CCJs. I think you need to complain to all and sundry.  Let's start with the BPA.  The BPA are PE's mates, so they will never decide that PE have done anything wrong.  But that's not the point, correspondence between the two may lead to PE promising to write to the Scottish address, which is all you want.  Check the below for accuracy as methinks you have sent more correspondence that what I've quoted.  How about something like - Dear BPA, Re : Parkingeye Ltd PCN no.XXXXX, Claim no.XXXXX PCN no.XXXXX I am writing to complain about your above-mentioned member. I understand of course that you cannot enter into the merits of why a PCN was issued. The reason for my complaint is that, instead of writing to me at my address at XXXXX, Scotland, your member insists in writing to me at XXXXX, England, which is an address which I have never lived at.  I have always resided at the Scottish address.  The address registered with the DVLA for the vehicle is my Scottish address. I first because aware of this mess when the person who lives at the English address kindly contacted me, to tell me that a County Court Judgement for me had arrived at that address.  I requested that Parking Eye agree to a set aside by consent.  However, they refused.  I ended up paying £XXX despite having had no chance to defend myself. Regardng the second PCN, I attach correspondence dated XX February and XX March.  The latter was a complaint - which your operator has completely ignored.  Even worse, they have instructed debt collecting agencies twice to write to the English address.  On top of this, the person at the English address is moving out next week which means I am in danger a second time of losing a court case by default. I would therefore like to complain about your operator and would request that you instruct them to do what should be a simple thing - to write to me at my correct address. Yours, XXXXX
    • The lucky winner put the £100 into Premium Bonds just over a year ago. Check who scooped the £1million jackpot and all other major prices above £1,000 in our tables.View the full article
    • Hello DX -  So an update:  Resolvecall have written to say they have closed the account with them and passed it back to Capquest after receipt of my SB letter. Capquest have written twice, once offering a payment plan and the second letter after receiving my SB letter saying they are looking into my complaint and will respond within 8 weeks.   Absolutely no mention of what the debt is, was or from when or any details still.   Is this a case now of waiting to see what they come back with or is now the moment for me to send another letter via Solicitor please?
  • 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

Primark Shoplifting legal advice


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2197 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 just had a look at RLP's website to see if it says anything about the supposed database. It says this:

 

What Personal Data do you hold?

 

If you are 16 years or over you are advised that basic personal information regarding your wrongful act may be held on a national database of individuals involved in civil recovery incidents. This information is available to prospective employers within client companies with a legitimate interest to screen an individual’s integrity in relation to employment decisions. No screening can take place without your knowledge or consent, which would be requested during the recruitment process. This information is held within a closed user group in accordance with the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998 for a period not exceeding 3 years if 16 or 17 years old at the time of the incident or 6 years if 18 years or over. This information may also be available for the purposes of crime prevention and detection and available to the Courts, legal advisors, crime partnerships and the police where there is a legitimate reason for doing so in accordance with the Act.

 

Note: The only employers it's available to are companies that are clients of RLP so there is no possibility of a school using it. No school would be a client of RLP because they aren't retail businesses.

 

And in any case paying RLP wouldn't remove you from the database!

 

Their website has gone very quiet about court cases since they lost big time at Oxford in 2012. No cases at all have been listed on the website since then. I wonder why that could be? And of those listed prior to then most were either thefts by staff or default judgements where alleged shoplifter (foolishly) ignored the court papers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. this database has nothing to do with dbs checks? And when I fill out forms about any crimes and records etc or even civil issues I still say None?

 

Nothing WHATSOEVER to do with DBS checks. Neither DBS checks nor employers own application forms ask about civil actions you have been involved in. They ask only about criminal offences for which you have received a conviction or official penalty or sanction.

 

I work professionally with schools recruitment and I'm very familiar with Enhanced DBS applications.

 

The relevant question on the application form is Question e55 and reads

“Do you have any convictions, cautions, reprimands or final warnings, which would not be filtered in line with guidance?”. You don't.

 

The corresponding guidance says

"section e, question 55 is asked for Police National Computer (PNC) matching purposes."

 

Only those can be listed on the Police National Computer [PNC]

(which is what the DBS Disclosure does, confirms if anything is listed about you on the PNC) and you don't have any of them.

 

The DBS procedure does not check databases held by any private company such as RLP, nor could it legally do so, and nor can RLP or any other private database enter information onto the PNC.

 

Although on an Enhanced DBS the police can also add "other relevant [non-conviction] information" this is very rare and in practice would only be information relevant to the risk to children that someone applying to work in a school presented.

 

My LA told me that since DBS started they have never received a DBS for school emplyees showing any "other relevant [non-conviction] information".

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...