Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
  • 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

Cpm/BW windscreen pcns - BW PAP LOC Now Claimform - (residential car park) The citrus Building, Maderia road, Bournemouth ***Claim Dismissed with Costs** now another PAPLOC for another same place ticket ***Dismissed again with costs***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 498 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

Thanks for taking the time to write that! All completely valid pints. Unfortunately I struggle to get what I’m thinking down onto paper which is clear here

 

ill be up early tomorrow  to make these changes, get it all printed and off to the court and BW. Then play the waiting game and see if they actually pay their fees!

 

thanks again to everyone who has contributed. Really appreciated 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a couple of other points...

 

In p6.1 - I'd not state that you had to park in accordance with T&Cs set out by CPM. Just state that you were allocated a large, generous, parking space as part of your lease agreement, which is situated under the main apartment block. The space is capable of accommodating two vehicles. The Claimant has an agreement to manage the main car park, but this does not extend to the parking spaces under the apartment block. You'd need to fit this into the flow of your WS though...

 

You use the word 'perused' a couple of time - I think you mean to say 'pursued'?

 

Make a clear distinction, when you are challenging the terms of parking, that you are doing so for the avoidance of any doubt, on the basis that "if, let's say, they did apply to me" - but your primary position is that The Vehicle was not parked on land covered by the Claimant's management agreement. They have no locus standi in the matter.

 

Less is more sometimes, so don't get completely bogged down with signage.

Edited by shamrocker
Link to post
Share on other sites

:rockon:

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

Good luck, hope they get pwned in court. could you post a pdf of final submission, think the no locus standi, over your space should be a key for sure

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

On 02/01/2020 at 12:22, brassnecked said:

Good luck, hope they get pwned in court. could you post a pdf of final submission, think the no locus standi, over your space should be a key for sure


yep will get it posted up once I’ve removed all of the sensitive information. 
 

the next stage for me is checking they have paid their fees on the due date. I assume that is just a case of calling the court that the hearing is taking place at? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

not necessarily so...

that will simply have been an office junior allowing funds to be paid from their running A/C with the court system,

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 there’s still a chance it might not make it to a court room then? Whilst I’m confident here, obviously the ideal situation would be for it not to make it to a court room full stop!

Link to post
Share on other sites

remote but not unheard of. esp on residential parking matters.

 

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

46 minutes ago, shamrocker said:

I wouldn't use the fee payment as an indication of their confidence - they probably haven't got a clue about the circumstances of the claim the payment relates to.


I would agree with you there. It’s completely evident that they are being advised by BW legal who clearly want to push it as far as possible to get paid as much as possible. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

they paid up but that doesnt mean they will turn up.

 

Gladdys wont be there and nor will the person who wrote their WS.

there are cases in the past where the person who signed off the WS was a made up name and that only stopped when a judge ordered the parking co to put the person before him or drop the claim. they dropped it.

 

what usually happens is they pay some locl lawyer £50 to turn up and speak for them. You challenge their credentials in case they try to save even more money by sending an unqualified person and demand to cross examine the witness who signed off their guff, esp if you have matters of fact that you say arent true.

 

the judeg can then use their powers to determi9ne what they will and wont listen to in their court. Sometimes they can be harsh when it comes to accepting evidence but usually this is on the claimant needing to prove their case

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

So, less than a week now until my court date and I have spent the day reviewing everything to keep it fresh in my mind and ensuring all of my paperwork is together. One thing that I’m not overly clued up on though, and may be a little assuming, is if the claim is struck out, what is the process for claiming costs?

 

im aware I’m capped to 7hrs at about £12.50(?) as well as small costs for things like postage however what I’m not sure on is how I present this or request it? Do I have to have evidence with me as to the costs or is this something that would be done at a later date? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's best to have something prepared.  If/when you win, just tell the judge you would like to claim costs and hand over a simple sheet of paper with a list.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perfect, I’ll get that ready. Thanks!

 

is there anything else I need to be aware of at this point? Other than turn up on the day suited and booted with all of the case paperwork, evidence and see what happens?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, thinking about it, prepare two lists, one with the normal costs allowed in small claims, and one for costs for unreasonable behaviour.  Depending on how your case goes you might be able to argue for unreasonable behaviour, especially if they don't turn up (supremacy of contract, actual written agreement to park as you did, abuse of the court procedure to pressurise you to pay rather than a genuine attempt to recover a debt owed, etc.)

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

The LiP rate is £19 or £19.50, I can't remember and I thought you could claim five hours, but someone like ericsbrother will comment, I'm sure.

 

Do you have your bundle referenced and divided into sections so you can find relevant documents easily?

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

are you taking timeaway from work to attend?

 

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

then you are also entitled to £90

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 need to write out a schedule of loss that includes your travel, lost earnings, postage and stationery costs and ask for 5 hours LiP research tiem @£19.50/hr

state this is  a request under CPR 27.14.2(g) for their unreasonable behaviour. You may get full pay if you are lucky but it is generally set by convention

If you failt o put this in writing and give it to the court on the day you wont get a bean

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...