Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the xx/xx/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the xx/xx/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, xx/xx/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

Brittania/BW Claimform - 3xPCNs - sth Esx college Lukers rd Southend ss11nd


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1822 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’m hoping someone may be Able to point me in the right direction.

 

My son received 3 parking tickets last year from Brittania parking.

He has ignored all correspondence from them.

 

Today he has received a letter from bw legal which states they have been instructed by Britannia parking Ltd to commence legal action.

The total they are claiming us £575.37

I believe the car park is one which takes pics on way in and out.

 

The letter is giving me the options to :

 

agree he owes the debt

 

owes some of the debt but not all of it

 

doesn’t know whether he owes the debt

 

disutes the debt.

 

then it’s for income and expenditure forms with it.

 

I do do not believe he has just deliberately ignored the letters.

My son had a stroke last year (his 20) which has left him on a lot of medication and problems.

I am his appointee now for dwp as he isn’t able to manage.

 

I just wanted to know if anyway could give me some advice or point me in the right direction.

 

Many thanks for your time.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds like a PaP letter. Wait for more advice. Meanwhile have a read of the forums for more info. its easily sorted.

  • Confused 1

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

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

concentrate on the one ticket they have issued the pap letter for only at present.

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 am confused as I can’t work out if it’s a parking charge or parking charge notice.

 

It looks like brittania sent it to DRP to deal with. They state on the letter parking charge.

On the letter that’s come today it states pcn.

 

So I think it started with brittania then to DRP and now BW legal

 

Thank you once again.

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

They have also put all 3 tickets on the one letter from bw legal

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

doesn't matter...both are merely speculative invoices not PENALTY CHARGE NOTICES [which are fines and can only be issued by councils/police etc]

 

Britannia are the PPC

DR+ are a powerless DCA

BW legal are a letterhead for hire solicitor.

[everything came from the same printer anyway..]

 

so post 3 please

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

In the end you willingly find that he owed nothing- for a variety of reasons.

I am sorry to hear of his health problems but it is true that many opinions on these parking tickets is to ignore them as most times a few debt collecting letters are sent them the whole matter goes dead. I suppose that with three tickets they think that a Court case might get them some money coming in.

If you fill out the questionnaire on the above post that will help us to avoid any payment.

 

What would also help is if you could post up a copy of their NT K if they are all worded the same way as well as photos of the notices in the car park and where they are placed in the car park.

Please check with the local Council that they do have permission to erect signs and cameras there under Town and Country (advertising) regulations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Date of the infringement 13/9/17, 19/9/17,28/9/17

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] Not sure this has been received.

 

3 Date received

 

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

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Not been sent any

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

 

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up No appeal

 

7 Who is the parking company? Brittania parking

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Southend college, Southend

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. BPA

There are two official bodies, the BPA and the IAS. If you are unsure,

please check HERE

 

If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here

Edited by dx100uk
format
Link to post
Share on other sites

which one is the pap letter for ALLL three?

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

FWIW: the pap letter is for ALL the outstanding speculative invoices

so that will quickly take this above £600 if it gets to court

so you need to counter it properly

as sure as eggs is eggs

this will be escalated straight to HCEO's if you lose the court case. [iF one happens!!]

 

dx

  • Confused 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

If the HCEO DCBL you could have the CH5 cameras with them for Can't Pay, Looks like they are claiming for all 3 at once, so heed DX and get moving on this one 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

docs sorted in post 10

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

so where was he supposed to have parked in a manner that is the cause of this action?

 

Knowing exactly where this was allows us to have a look at the site on google and also offer advice on the likelihood of Britannia having a valid contract with the landownr and be able to offer parking contracts to the public. For example, on a residential development it is rare for the parking co to ahve the correct authority and even rarer for them to get their signage right.

 

Now Southend College is still to vague if there are multiple car parks or if he parked in a place that wanst a car park

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for replying.

The college is called south Essex college as situated in Lukers road Southend ss11nd.

The car park is situated under the college. But access is from Elmer approach Southend.

 

Hope this is specific enough.

 

Thank you once again

Link to post
Share on other sites

google earth Elmer approach Southend

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

Any signs on the entrance from the road for a start that indicate a restriction or some other condition of parking as a start.

  • Confused 1

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

We need to know what the signs say, what T & C's they appear to offer for parking and there are cameras do they look like ANPR or CCTV.

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

From what I can read on the sign on the left there isnt a contract offered at entry and the sign is an invitation to treat.

This menas that the terms offered by other signage elsewhere isnt binding as you can take it or leave it but the parking is allowed without acceptance of the further offer.

 

Common explanation of this is a shop has a sign outside saying 50% off most items so you go inside and look at a pair of trousers and ask the price to be told they are not included in the sale. The sign outside is an invitation to treat, it invites you to make further enquiries and then enter negotiations regarding the items of interest. it doesnt force the shopkeeper to sell you those trousers at 50% off nor does it force you to buy them just becuse you went into the shop to see what was on offer. the shopkeeper cant sue you for not buying the trousers or make demands that you pay for his heat and light and this is in effect what the parking co is doing.

 

As it appears to be a P&D the terms are those on the machine and only accepted when you put the money in .

Any sign around the car aprk that is different to the machine conditions are meaningless when it comes to offer and consideration

 

so my approach would be for your son to respond to the PAP letter and state that " there was no contract formed between myself and your client and in any case the signage at the entrance is merely an invitation to treat, not an offer of terms so nothing to accept. Any claim will be vigourously defended as being vex".

 

Now that might not make them drop the matter but it does create a paper trail and buys a bit of time to get some pictures of the signage at the site plus any paymant machinery taken and posted here plus time to look for any paperwork and post that up here as well so we can rubbish that if possible.

They will also know that their costs on pursuing this will rise and it wont be a walkover so hw might just get the result desired, ie they go back under their stone.

 

I have written the short response in a way that doesnt state who was driving, your son may have a lot more leverage on that if they havent got their paperwork right so no "I" or "we" or "they", use the third person impersonal , so "the driver" if you need to say anything about the events later

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...