Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good evening DX100   Here is a draft of my response to the court order.  I would be obliged if you could review it and avise me if I am on the right track.   Defendant Statement of Position in Response to the Order of the Sheriff   The defendant suffered Severe Depression illness almost 12 months prior to the closer of the Bank account. HBOS was made aware of the defendant illness.  A Medical Certificate dated 15 Sept 2017 was handed over to the bank as a proof. (A copy of the report will be submitted exclusively to the court review) The defendant, with the support of her ex-partner, sought a resolution from the OC regarding the escalation of her OD account, which it was mostly formed of extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account. HBOS agreed to reduce the outstand OD sum to £XXX and closed the account. The defendant is confident that her ex-partner has settled the agreed sum with OC, but not absolutely certain, considering her health state at that time. She has been actively trying to reach for her ex-partner for documented evidence, but the fact that, we believe, he is a currently deployed by the UK military forces abroad and communication has been, to put it politely, very difficult due to the nature of his deployment. As the court is aware, the defendant has been trying to retrieve the data of her dealing with/from OC which it should reflect history of the above.  The defendant has already written twice to HBOS, as well as visiting her bank branch, on 01 March 2021, in person demanding the requested data.  HBOS promised to send the data to her as soon as they can. In addition to the above reasoning and contend, the defendant refute the claimants claim is owed or payable.  Due to punitive and extortionate fees the facility became untenable. Any alleged balance  claimed will consist totally of default penalties, punitive charges levied on the account for alleged late, rejected or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety and any alleged balance was due to punitive and extortionate charges . It is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:-               a.    Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and Conditions at inception, which this claim is based on.               b.    Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.               c.    Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account and justify how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.               d.    Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.               e.    Evidence how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.     10.   By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Same thing. The fact that you declared £4.99 means that is the extent of any reasonable foreseeably consequence. Just go for that small amount. If they cause any problems then you can have a laugh when they spend many times more than what you're claiming in order to resist you. In future, when you contract with somebody – you need to understand that effectively it is an exchange of the reasonable expectations which you create in each other by your agreement.  
    • Current situation: contacted myhermes website's robot talk about the parcel and waiting for their email response. Thanks @BankFodder   I understand that if I were going to pursue under contract law, £4.99 would be the amount that I am entitled for compensate. How about if I were going to pursue this matter under tort - negligence? Would this allow me to pursue them according the true value of the items?
    • Hi UncleB, thanks for responding. I did call them back and it appears to be hit & miss with Devitt and dependent upon which Customer service agent you get.   Spoke with a very pleasant lady and told her that I, like them recorded all calls and gave date time of call and specific time at which a green card was stipulated in order for me to take out the policy.   *Two days later a hard copy of the green card landed on my doorstep. *Free of charge too.
    • Have you received a Parking Ticket? - Private Land Parking Enforcement - Consumer Action Group   please complete the above then we'll be best placed to advise further but the bottom line is no and don't ever appeal.    
  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 25 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

Gemini Parking Solutions - Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park - Parked in No Parking Area - Motobike


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 724 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

Hey guys

 

on 19/10/2018 I have parked my motorbike next to the car bay in Olympic Park, the ground was not marked by yellow crossing lines there, while I am pretty sure it was in other places, so I assumed it is not a problem to park there. Received a PCN on that day and waited for NTK which arrived on 21/11/2018. The Parking Charge is 100£ at the moment. If not paid in 29 days, I am informed (threatened) that charge will go up by another 60£

 

I will try to scan and redact the NTK once I am in the office and will send it here as well

 

Questionnaire:

 

Date of infringement: 19/10/2018 at 13:15

Not appealed to PCN

Received NTK: 21/11/2918

The NTK mentions Schedule 4 of Protection of Freedoms Act 2012

Parking Company is Gemini Parking Solutions

Location is Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park London

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and welcome to CAG

 

Have a look at some other threads to see wht happened in those cases

 

Here's one

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?468641-Gemini-Parking-Solutions-PCN-Queen-Elizabeth-Olympic-Park-On-a-motorbike&p=4938261&viewfull=1#post4938261

 

and another

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?460534-Gemini-Parking-Solutiobs&p=4866552&viewfull=1#post4866552

 

plenty of others too.

 

Gemini are members of the BPA and must follow the codes of practice.

 

Once we have your images (pdf file please) we can advise better

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

did they slap a ticket on the bike at the time? I not then they are too late sending out their NTK.

besides that no parking isnt an offer of a contract to park, it is prohibitive so you cant agree with them to break a contract as the only way of forming it.

They are just stupid but they are also greedy so telling them this wont make them stop trying to collect money they dont deserve.

Ignore them until they decide to threaten court andthen we will suggest what to say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Take your name off the pdf PDQ.

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

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have hidden the attachments for you. Nobody (except site team) can see them. carry on posting as normal.

 

If you want your username changed as well, let us know

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

The NTK is not POFA complinat, thye have missed off the vitakl detaisl of who the creditor is, thye havent used the correct phrase to indicate what is owed and how much has been paid to date and the wording should say they dotn know who the driver is so can rely on the POFA to create a keeper liability. Incompetence or laziness- doesnt matter, the end result is that this isnt an invoice that is enforceable on ANYONE, let alone the keeper.

So, add that to their failure to understnad the difference between a contract to park and prohibition and they are stuffed.

However, appeal to POPLA and they will tell you that you havent obeyed the signs so you owe the money, again ignoring the difference in the relationships created by the signs that dont hold you to anything.

So, what to do? I wouild ignore them and dont appeal as you will only make them think they might get you to pay. Let them spend their money chasing you and when they threaten court action with a proper letter before action you let them know that they havent got a contrcat to break and they are rubbish at their job so ought to ask the BPA to give them some more training in joined up writing

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those clowns would have put a ticket on a pushbike with a kiddie trailer if it was left like you parked your motorbike.

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

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

no that's a letter from a powerless DCA not a letter of claim from one their favourite paperwork only fake/tame solicitors

 

dx

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

Agreed. Notice how the letters say 'may consider' and 'if our client'. This means nothing at all.

 

Only a Letter Before Action/Claim from a *cough* reputable *cough* solicitor has any legal standing and only then should action be considered.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

for starters it is from DR+ and you shoudl know all about them by now and secondly I INTEND to go to the moon this afternoon for a site meeting with a parking co.

Chances of me going? the same as DR+ doing anythig because they cant

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Hey Guys,

 

I thought I would jump on this message as I also encountered a similar issue with Gemini. 

I was planning to ignore as recommended above. Like the original poster, I didn't see any road markings and I fact saw no instructions or signage at the time. 

 

The only issue for me is that as I had a rental car, could this make me more liable?  

 

PCN to hirer attached. 

 

Thanks in advanced.

 

 

2019-03-13_22-55_(1).pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

this topic is for advising mbazalik

please create your own topic at the top of this page 

  • Thanks 1

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

Also your Reg No and PCN numbers are shown

My time as a Police Officer and subsequently time working within the Motor Trade gives me certain insights into the problems that consumers may encounter.

I have no legal qualifications.

If you have found my post helpful, please enhance my reputation by clicking on the Heart. Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Attachment removed

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...