Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

CEL ANPR PCN claimform - no permit -Fox restrnt Connault Hse Hotel Lynx way Lon E16 1JR ***Claim Discontinued***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1598 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 guys,

 

I have just received attached PCN .

It was not me who was driving the car, but my partner on said date.

The place of PCN is Fox restaurant, she was the customer at the said restaurant at that time.

 

Can someone please advise if we should pay for this said charge?

She did not see the signs around, however I am able to take some pictures if need be.

 

Look forward to hearing back.

 

Thanks

7.12.18.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

bit of a strange one this then

they claim exact timings but have not include any ANPR pictures?

so unless an operator was there the whole time with a stop watch????

 

the NTK if they claim is anpr is out of time [14 days only to send it]..I bet this is the case

 

but for a vanishing windscreen ticket is within the 29-56 days limit...

 

typical CEL then:lol:

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

1 Date of the infringement - 02/11/2018

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] - 04/12/2018

 

3 Date received - 07/12/2018

 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [y/n?] - N

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? No

 

6 Have you appealed? {y/n?] post up your appeal] - N

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up - N/A

 

7 Who is the parking company? Civil Enforcement Ltd

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] By Fox bar, Connaught House Hotel, Lynx Way, London, E16 1JR.

 

Jokers... If it matters I have parking permit of E16 too lol. Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

your council? on-street parking permit means nothing on private land.

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

well they cant have it bothways:-

either

 

its an ANPR capture as it gives exact timings..but the NTK is out of 14 days limit

 

or

 

its a vanishing operator windscreen PCN

 

cant be

both

 

 

go down there and take lots of pictures of the signs

what they say

where they are

and look for ANPR cameras

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

Make sure that you take pics of any fixed cameras, they will or should be on poles by entances and exits, or the lack of them.

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

First of all, phone the hotel and tell them that their pet cowboys are issuing demands when they are timed out to do so and as such are breaking the law.

it is your intention to fight this but you will be dragging them into the court battle that CEL will inevitably start so it would be wiser for them to tell CEL to stop this nonsense.

 

If they ask why you think it was incorrectly/unlawfully issued expalin about the lack of evidence and the time critical need to send the NTK out within 12 days of the event.

 

Google dates back to 2015 and has no signage there so another argument, that the hotel failed to indicate that patronage is only for people who accept unfair terms on an unseen contract decided by people who have been taken to court for attempting to inforce unfair contracts in an aggressive way. Make sure they know that social media is your friend end their enemy in things like this.

 

the PCN fails to be a proper notice in any respect, clearly CEL have decide to save money on printer ink by missing out all of the necessary parts to make this legal and enforceable.

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

Hi Eric - greetings!

 

I have called the hotel/bar and spoke with Duty Manager.

He would not get into any talks with me and kept on telling me that there are signs everywhere and I should have seen it.

In reality he would not get into any talks with me and was completely not bothered.

 

Not sure how to proceed now then.

I have also taken some pictures of the area and in fact there are small cameras all over the place with roughly 10 signs around the car park area.

jpg2pdf_(2).pdf

Edited by dx100uk
quote
Link to post
Share on other sites

Permit holders only.

 

so no offer of parking to you as you dton hold a permit. Therefore any claim for breach of contract is an unlaful penalty as thre has been no genuine offer of terms.

 

Usual CEL garbage signs and along with their garbage NTK they wont win a court claim. They dot care though, they will get enough people to pay up to make it worth their while to continually flout the law.

 

Now go ad find the social media pages of the otel and slag them off for their use of a bunch of crooks wh brweak the law with their signs and how useless the management are at recognising the difference.

 

Continue to igonre CEL though

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
  • 1 month later...

Hi there,

 

I just received a letter from QDR Solicitors trying to recover the debt, which has now grown to £182... Going from previous experience I think it is likely they will be following with court documents soon. Should I file it for time being or start preparing? 

 

I didn't get much from speaking with the hotel directly and posting on social media pages... 

 

Thanks 

2.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

not a letter of claim

safe to file

 

its actually from ZZPS too anyway claiming to be QDR

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

you MUST read these letters carefully so you dont jump to the conclusion they want you to.

solicitors act as DCA's because they already have a CC licence but Dca's arent on the solicitors roll.

 

ask yourself why the bill has goen up to £186?

read the POFA paragraph where is says about notices via the post only and you will see that they can ony charge the invoiced amount as the keeper couldn't have read the signs to agree to further amounts being added. So, they either say you were the driver and lose when you say you aren't or they stick to the rules and create a keeper liability.

 

this limits the amount of money they can earn so they tell lies.

you can tell they are lies because they are written down and sent to you when you werent the driver

--end of as far as the law goes but they will want to try and get "their" money.

 

they are all ex-clampers and are still used to getting their way by violence and intimidation so difficult to break old habits

 

open another social media account with a different email addy and trash the hotel some more. the get your first account to agree with the new comments and soon others will join in

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Good morning guys,

 

Hoping your summer is going well.

 

I have just received a claim form through the post from CCBC in regards to the above ticket.. I am starting to get worried as this is becoming serious again..

 

I have never had a pleasure of filling this form out, so was hoping someone could guide me and advise of the next steps I need to do please.

 

Obviously as suggested I have plastered their social media pages with no interaction from others, tried speaking with manager who did not care what I had to say etc. Not sure if I mentioned previously, but my partner was the driver of the vehicle at the time and she was a customer at the restaurant, but did not get a ticket for staying as she thought it would be included with the bill etc.

 

Any help would be much appreciated. Something else to add, I am leaving for holiday on 21st of September for 2 weeks. What would happen if my court case would be turned on the days during my holiday? 

 

Thanks

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...