Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I feel that people are focusing too much on the OPs property being a council house and putting responsibility on the council to resolve this.   imagine for a moment that the OPs house is privately owned, now what powers would they have to take action on the trees? Pretty much none without taking the tree owner to court right. Well as the trees are privately owned, that is the same power that the council have right now.   the information with the £375 will be inline with high hedges legislation as this will be the only power the council will have and it is common for there to be a charge for this.   this is not a social housing issue, but a neighbor dispute with a private homeowner.   i used to work as a tree officer for a local authority and from experience have seen that people’s idea of dangerous and what is actually dangerous are two different issues. A councils power to enforce tree works are also limited and will usually only be where a private tree poses a risk to the highway, not to another property as that is a civil matter (even where the council own the 2nd property).    With regards to risk to underground pipes, this is something you will be unlikely to successfully argue as various studies have found that unless a tree is planted on top of the pipe and crush it, the roots will not cause damage, but rather only enter through already damaged areas as they are opportunistic, any tree roots in drains are usually a secondary issue where a pipe had existing damage and to resolve it will require a permanent repair to the pipe to prevent recurrence.   the only options i see here are to calculate the height allowed under high hedges legislation (it varies depending on what direction the property faces , the location of hedges etc) and try to enforce that which will involve the fee. Otherwise there is little you can do as the private homeowner has a right to have trees in their garden although they may be liable if they were to cause damage to your property (such as a shed) or the councils property in the future.
    • Served on 16 Feb.   On reviewing the MCOL website today for an updated, I noticed that 1) Hermes has aknowledged the claim, but not yet filed a defence, and 2) that I there was a glitch / error on the form. Essentially, it looks like I had accidentally left the "I will send detailed particulars of claim" box ticke (I thought I had unticked it), with the result that the claim section has been truncated, and some extra text has automatcially been added - in red below):   "...Claimant seeks £XXX, plus I will provide the defendant with separate detailed particulars within 14 days after service of the claim form. The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of..."   This is obviously not ideal. Is it better to try to amend the claim somehow, or to just submit a brief POC that a) clarifies that I am seeking £XXX plus costs (which was automatically truncated), and b) sets out my calculation of the £XXX?  
    • Hi   It amazes me how they pass the buck as they don't want to deal with a private homeowner but if the shoe was on the other foot they would be hammering down on you for breach of tenancy.   As this is council housing you need to make a Formal Complaint in writing to the Council Housing about this (as a social housing landlord they have a complaints process they have to follow). you need to exhaust their complaints process. Make sure and title your letter Formal Complaint.   From what you have posted this tree is not just a nuisance but also a Health & Safety risk:   1. The tree being overgrown is now a danger to the occupants/Guest/Visitors to your property   2. The tree has overgrown into the Council Housings Boundaries your property causing damage/endangerment to the occupants/guest/visitors.   3. As the roots of the tree are also overgrown into your property you have concerns that these may be causing/damaging to any underground pipework that may be within the boundray of the property.   4. So far the Councils actions have been to treat their Council Housing tenant as a third class citizen with a private homeowner aloud to cause endangerment/possible damage due to these overgrown trees which are encroaching on your council house property/bounderies.   You also require clarification why you were sent the Healthy Neighbourhood Information which states I have to pay £375 to make a complaint. (make sure and attach a copy of the response that states this cost)   You also require copies of the following:   1. Complaints Policy (not the leaflet) 2. Customer Service Standard (not the leaflet) 3. Health & Safety Policy (not the leaflet) 4. Public Liability Insurance Policy. (not the leaflet) 5. Clarification from you if their is any underground pipeworks running through the bounderies within the garden area (you should have full knowledge of this it being your property/plans) 6. Compensation Policy (not the leaaflet) 7. Equality & Diversity Policy (not the leaflet)   When you get the above policies sit with a pen/pencil/highlighter and take you time reading them and just think to yourself 'DID THEY DO THAT' if not mark it then leave it for a while then do the same again this way you can basically throw/write back stating the haven't followed x policy with which part of that policy and your reason. (you are building evidence to use against them using their own policies. I would also like to refer you to The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provision) Act 1976: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1976/57/part/I/crossheading/dangerous-trees-and-excavations     You need to remember yes it is the Council but the Council Housing is a separate entity and is a Registered Social Landlord (RSL)   Is the Council Housing classed as a registered Charity? (what is their registration number whether charity or RSL?)   Also have a wee look at this CAG link:     
    • @rocky_sharma   Fame at last!!   Dunno how much help it would be in your case, but I could try digging out the txt of my defence if you think it might be relevant to your defence. We might hafta do this via PM, then e-mail though if ya wanna go down that route.   Good luck with yours anyway mate.
  • Our picks

tigeress289

No Insurance and car seized

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 516 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

I was stopped in a random police check point on a Saturday on my way back from the cash and carry locally to where I live.

 

I was driving my brothers vehicle as mine was being repaired.

We both have fully comp insurance and both are covered to drive other vehicles with owners consent.

 

The officer that stopped me asked where I was coming from and going to,

I replied from the cash and carry and on the way home.

 

I was asked for my Insurance and I explained that the vehicle was my brothers.

The officer went to his car and returned saying I was uninsured and he would be seizing the vehicle.

 

I explained I had Insurance on my own vehicle and gave him the registration.

He went back to his car and returned saying I was not insured and he would be seizing the vehicle, which he did.

 

I made my way home with my wife and the contents of the vehicle by mini cab.

I then contacted my brother to explain what had happened and he went to the compound with his insurance and paid and retrieved his vehicle the same day.

 

I was give a seizure proforma form by the officer and when I got home and tried to read it, I realised that it was unreadable and could not make out a single word on it.

I have now received a conditional offer of fixed penalty but I will not pay it as I was insured.

 

Being the first time I have been stopped and treated in this way,

I am finding it hard to see why both Insurances came back as not insured

 

. I think the officer inferred I was a business but could not check the proforma form when I got home as I have already stated it was unreadable. There is also nothing on the conditional offer form other than that I used a motor vehicle on a road/public place without third party insurance. Contrary to section 143 of the RTA 1988 and schedule 2 to the RTOA 1988.

 

Having spoken to my insurance company they say I am insured by third party cover.

I have told friends about this and amazed how many have said they have had similar experiences with the police as if it is the new thing to raise fines and endorsement's.

 

One funny point is that adding business use to your cover is sometimes cheaper even if you don't have a business, it just stops this kind of police targeting to stop.

 

My question is how to fight this,

do I write to the processing services or can I write directly to the CPS.

I have 21 days left in which to either accept a £300 fine and 6 points or defend myself.

 

Any help/advice grateful.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Send the insurance details to the relevant dpt and that should be the end of it.

If they want to take you to court (unlikely) the judge would whip the officer, the cps and everyone else involved in his own courtroom.

Your brother needs to put a claim through to recover the release fee as he was insured.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, I will sit down over weekend and write a letter. Would it be a good idea to enclose a copy of my brothers Insurance as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, everything to show they made a mistake is good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you, I will sit down over weekend and write a letter. Would it be a good idea to enclose a copy of my brothers Insurance as well.

 

Hi, do you have cover for business as I get the feeling that they have taken action on the basis that you haven't.

 

You were coming back from a cash and carry with stock, is that correct?

 

I of course might have the wrong end of the stick.

 

Spud

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use a cash and carry and I don't have any business.

Some organisations have agreements with cash and carry to let their employees have a card and shop in there.

Doesn't mean you run a business.

I buy in bulk because it's cheaper, especially cleaning products which last me a year or so.

Business insurance is required only if driving for business purposes, not to buy your own goods that you're gonna use yourself.

By no stretch of the imagination that can be considered a business.

Said that, was the op shopping for his business?

If so then business insurance is required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, it's not you who's had the car seized is it?

 

That's why I asked the OP if he was using it for business.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I am a Builder but sometimes use a cash and carry near us which is open to the public with no membership.

 

We sometimes buy bulky items and split between us. I assume the officer had made his mind up straight away after I said I was coming from a cash and carry.

 

Some friends seem to imply that they think the officer was prejudice as I am British Indian buying from a cash and carry.

I don't want to think that way as this was an insurance issue for which both cars were insured.

I have even thought about the business side but legally I am still covered by third party cover which section 143 refers to.

 

As someone who has never committed a motoring offence and had insurance all my driving life, I cannot believe that it has come to the point where officers are looking for clauses in an insurance which we pay heavily for and then treat us like criminals.

 

I really don't care if I owned Tesco's, I was insured.

It come's to something when a driver cannot use a cash and carry as the police will think we are all shopkeepers.

 

Great site and keep up fighting for peoples rights,

Thank You

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So make an official complaint and have it investigated.

It will get sorted, but you have to take action, what you are alleging is very serious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cash and carry open to the public without membership and you're not in business of selling goods.

You are therefore insured fully.

Time to write to them and get this sorted.

Consider that Costco is a cash and carry where you need a membership card to even enter the store and membership is offer to police officers and soldiers.

Do they need business insurance to go there?

Of course not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for replies as I was starting to feel that we are getting more powerless day by day.

 

I tried 2 well known motor insurance solicitors, one said pay the other said £700+ to write letter but only £200+ if they have to go court.

 

To be honest the second gave me confidence as the initial fee was far higher which implied to me I had a fighting chance.

 

I will send the letter and documents tomorrow and keep you posted what happens.

 

 

 

Again Thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't need a solicitor to write a letter.

Just state that you were fully insured at time of being stopped and send evidence to this effect.

Highlight the fact that you don't shop for business at the cash and carry and the store is open to the public without membership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What sort of vehicle were you driving ? Car, van?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just get a letter from Insurers that the vehicle was Insured for road traffic act cover at the time under driving other cars extension.

 

Send the letter to the Police station that the officers are from and it should be dealt with. The Police will then tell you which office to contact to reclaim any costs incurred.

 

Always a risk to drive under the driving other cars extension, as it is really emergency cover, to provide cover for the odd occasion, where you cannot be added as a named driver on the policy the vehicle is covered under. E.g. Insurers office is closed. The driving other cars extension was never meant to be used by people to regularly drive other vehicles.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also will need a copy of his brothers insurance.

as most insurance policys would only cover the car for third party insurance if the car is also insured by the registered keeper


:???: what me. never heard of you never had a debt with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that but seeing as he got his car out of the compound the same day using his insurance, I just took that as common sense.

 

It's a Toyota Hybrid 6 seater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just get the Insurers confirmation in writing that at the time you were stopped you had Insurance.

 

Driving other cars extension cover is not as straightforward as some people think.

The Police deal with this on a regular basis and they will have discussed this with the Insurers.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a simple question, can I legally request a copy of a Police Officers Body camera evidence to defend myself if they want to prosecute me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.


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

Just a quick update.

Received letter back stating I was not insured as being used for business.

 

I have been given an extra 14 days to reply but I see this going to court.

I am going to reply and ask to see footage of any body camera worn as I can get a bit short when dealing with the police as I have no trust in them or common sense.

 

Will keep you informed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rlated threads merged. Please keep to one thread per issue.

 

 

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just a quick update. Received letter back stating I was not insured as being used for business. I have been given an extra 14 days to reply but I see this going to court. I am going to reply and ask to see footage of any body camera worn as I can get a bit short when dealing with the police as I have no trust in them or common sense.

 

Will keep you informed.

 

Interesting. If you assert that you were using the vehicle for non business matters, then it would be for the police to prove beyond any reasonable doubt this fact in court, do you have receipts? Surely a non business transaction would be a few items rather than a large stock purchase?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not necessarily.

I once bought 200 tins of tomato from Costco.

Expiry date of 2 years and bogof offer.

This is a very petty matter imo.

The officer must have been so bored to do this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just a quick update. Received letter back stating I was not insured as being used for business. I have been given an extra 14 days to reply but I see this going to court. I am going to reply and ask to see footage of any body camera worn as I can get a bit short when dealing with the police as I have no trust in them or common sense.

 

Will keep you informed.

 

You can ask for the footage but can’t insist on it unless / until the matter is going to trial.

 

How will the body camera footage help you?

 

 

If you think it will show you being “a bit short” with them it may incline the bench against you!

 

If you think it will show you saying “of course I’m insured officer, as I’m not using the vehicle for business purposes, these goods all being my personal belongings!” : then it might help ......

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...