Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good advice thanks very much. Are there any guidelines on how long they should take to send said transcript? I was quoted 28 days on an information request today...    I have just sent two secure messages to NW.   The first was to state that they did not follow my instructions from this morning when I cancelled the DD authority held with PayPal, as they allowed PP to reinstate this mere hours later. I gave them formal notice that PP have no authority to take DDs from my account and so I will seek reimbursement from NW should they allow any in the future.    The second was a formal request for them to re-credit my account for all DDs taken by PayPal in the given time period, in accordance with the DD mandate. Reason being that I did not give PayPal the authority nor instruction to take those payments by DD.    Will relay this to the manager tomorrow and ask for a transcript so I can complain to the FOS if this is not sorted by end of play. 
    • Its directions agreed between both parties how the claim will proceed in preparation for the hearing...Fast Track Directions are not set by the court as in small claims track.
    • Make sure to ask for the name of the person you are speaking to, as well as a full email transcript of the call. If they ask why,  tell them everything on the call is being copied to the FOS for a full official complaint. They usually shift pretty quick.
    • Was the claim dismissed or struck out ?  You keep referring to you " won " you got judgment ...a defendant cant get judgment ?   Andy
    • ericsbrother - thanks for response. Please see photos as requested + more ExternalSignage_EntranceSet_v0.1.compressed.pdf ExampleBayMarkingsSet_v0.1.compressed.pdf InternalSignage_v0.1.compressed.pdf PayMachine_v0.2.compressed.pdf
  • Our picks

    • Future Comms issues. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/416504-future-comms-issues/
      • 3 replies
    • This is a bit of a lengthy one but I’ll summerise best as possible.
       
      THIS IS HOW THE PHONECALL WENT 
       
      I was contacted by future comms by phone, they stated that they could beat any phone contract I have , (I am a limited company but just myself that needs a business phone and I am the only worker) 
      I told future comms my deal, £110 per month with a phone and a virtual landline, they confirmed that they could beat that, £90 per month with a phone , virtual landline  they also confirmed they would pay Vodafone (previous provider) the termination fee. As I am in business, naturally I was open to making a deal. So we proceeded. 
      Future comms then revealed that the contract would be with PLAN.COM and the airtime would be provided by 02, I instantly told them that this would break the deal as I have poor 02 signal in the house where I live as my partner is on 02 and constantly complaining about bad signal
      the salesman assured me he would send a signal booster box out with the phone so I would have perfect signal.
      so far so good.....
      i then explained this is the only mobile phone I use for business and pleasure, so therefore I didn’t want any disconnection time in the slightest between the switchover from Vodafone to 02
      the salesman then confirmed that the existing phone would only be disconnected once the new phone was switched on.
      so far so good....
      • 14 replies
    • A shocking story of domestic and economic abuse compounded by @BarclaysUKHelp ‏ bank complicity – coming soon @A_Gentle_Woman. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/415737-a-shocking-story-of-domestic-and-economic-abuse-compounded-by-barclaysukhelp-%E2%80%8F-bank-complicity-%E2%80%93-coming-soon-a_gentle_woman/
      • 0 replies
    • The FSA has announced large fines against DB UK Bank Limited (trading as DB Mortgages) - DeutscheBank and also against Redstone for their unfair treatment of their customers.
      Please see the links below for summaries and full details from the FSA website.
      It is now completely clear that any arrears charges which exceed actual administrative costs are unfair and therefore unlawful.
      Furthemore, irresponsible lending practices are also unfair and unlawful.
      Additionally there are other unfair practices including unarranged counsellor visits - even if they have been attempted.
      You are entitled to refuse counsellor visits and not incur any charges.
      Any charges for counsellor visits must not seek to make profits. The cost of the visits must be passed on to you at cost price.
      We are hearing stories of people being charged for counsellor visits for which there is no evidence that they were even attempted.
      It is clear that some mortgage lenders are trying to cheat you out of your money.
      You should ascertain how much has been taken from you and claim it back. The chances of winning are better than 90%. It is highly likely that the lender will attempt to avoid court action and offer you back your money.
      However, you should ensure that you receive a proper rate of interest and this means that you should be seeking at least restitutionary damages - which would be much higher than the statutory 8%.
      Furthermore, you should assess whether the paying of demands for unlawful excessive charges has also out you further into arrears and if this has caused you further penalties in terms of extra interest or any other prejudice. This should be claimed as well.
      If excessive unlawful charges have resulted in your credit file being affected, then you should take this into account also when working out exactly what you want by way of remedy from the lender.
      You should consult others on these forums when considering any offer.
      You must not make any complaint through the Ombudsman. your time will be wasted, you will wait up to 2 yrs and there will be a minimal 8% award of interest and no account will be taken of any other damage you have suffered.
      You must make your complaint through the County Court for a rapid and effective remedy.

      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/Communication/PR/2010/120.shtml
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/redstone.pdf
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/db_uk.pdf
       
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/consumerinformation/firmnews/2011/db_mortgages.shtml
      Do you have a mortage arears claim to make? Then post your story on the forum here
        • Like
      • 0 replies
Summersea

NCP ANPR PCN - Crawley Kingsgate - paid but ticket thrown - NTK out of time away since

Recommended Posts

Surely both can be done?

 

Send them the insulting letter which also takes the wee wee out of them about the £60 charge? 😀 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that part is for NCP, not their dogs, NCP added it not their minions..?


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Do you have a link to this 'insulting' letter from EB (who is EB? Ericsbrother?). I've tried to search on this forum but haven't found any 'insulting' letter yet.

 

 

Edited by Summersea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something like this, but doubtless ericsbrother will look in and indicate something better:

 

Dear BWL  NCP, As you are speculating chancers, and know as I know there is no Keeper  liability in this matter as your Notice To Keeper is out of time, so is not POFA Compliant therefore not actionable, you have also added a £60 Unicorn Food tax which is not applicable mthe Keeper cannot be made responsible for this spurious unlawful charge. .  As there is no cause for action I will be contacting the ICO  for breach of GDPR for your unlawful processing of my data.

 

You get the idea? let them know that you know they have no cause of action and their Roboclaim POC will be robustly challenged.


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 OTHER

 

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!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be happy to send that, you could also let them know that it is a 2 way street:

 

Dear BWL,

as you are the private parking world's second best solicitors you will know all about keeper liability because you have been copying Will and John's homework and thus know that none exists in this case and they have no cause for action.

 

You will therefore also know that your client has unlawfully processed my data and that you are obliged to dob them in to the ICO for the same.

 

If you do manage to persuade your client to waste money on a spurious claim that is doomed to fail I will be minded to take civil action against them and seek damages as per VCS v Phillip (Liverpool CC dec 2016).

 

If you want to save them some money and act in their best interests just send me a cheque for £250 now and I will call it quits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about this addition:

 

NCP and BW Legal should know the Protection of Freedoms act 2012 and they should have known that there is no Keepers Liability in this case, that the Parking Charge Notice to Keeper was not in accordance with the POFA and hence that there is no cause for action. Given this your client had no rights to process my data (see GDPR Art 6 Lawfulness of processing) and you should have reported this breach to the ICO.

 

BW Legal has been in breach of this before, see VCS v Phillip, Claim number C9DP2D6C Liverpool 07/12/2016

 

I demand, in accordance with the GDPR, that all data relating to myself (the data subject) held by your client and BW Legal be provided to me (Art 14) and that such data is to be erased (Art. 17 1 (d)).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 factual but too polite.

Dont forget, they are lawyers and know what they are doing even if they look incompetent.

Dont show them all your cards at this time, if they do sue you it will be a certainly that their story will have changed to fit in with the new situation so for the moment stick with the insult rather than detail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Are you referring to the addition or the complete text?

 

I am not interested in fighting a holy war with them here.

 

The information provided (e.g. about the dates) will not change.

 

I think if I just send an insulting letter it is more likely to go to court. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was referring to the addition.

 

 you do what you think best for you but experience shows that being right is less likely to stop them in their tracks than being right and insulting them.

 

reason is if they go to court you can use your letter as evidence that you did correspond to try and avoid a civil suit but they are clearly unreasonable because you have made it clear they have no cause for action and the judges will be well aware of the reputation of the solicitors sent boils down to whether the client wants to look like they have employed idiots to prosecute their case.

 

. It is their client who pays so a short rebuff copied to the client will have more of an effect than a treatise on say planning law or the GDPR because we they think that they can bluff their way through court and will persuade the client to try their luck as they know what you have got to say or that you aren't serious about a counterclaim because it is clear you are a decent person etc.

 

Sometimes being irrational and unreasonable ( careful how though) gets you results beyond what being measured will ever do.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ericsbrother's method is better in this type of situation, short insulting dismissal of their claim; less is more here.


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 OTHER

 

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!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about this:

 

NCP and BW Legal should know the Protection of Freedoms act 2012 and they should have known that there is no Keepers Liability in this case, that the Parking Charge Notice to Keeper was not in accordance with the POFA and hence that there is no cause for action. Given this, your client had no rights to process my data and you should have reported this breach to the ICO.

 

Has anyone from NCP or BW Legal actually checked this case yet or is this still an autogenerated ‘threatogram’? 

 

Should you managed to convince your client to waste their money on a spurious claim that is doomed to fail - then please go ahead. It wouldn’t be the first time BW Legal ends up on the losing side (you might want to check VCS v Phillip, Claim number C9DP2D6C Liverpool 07/12/2016 - interesting reading).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Summersea said:

I think if I just send an insulting letter it is more likely to go to court. 

 

But why do you think that?

 

By insulting them you are showing that you know their "case" is complete pants, that they'd lose in court, that you're not scared of them, that you hold them in contempt and that you'd have no problem doing court.  

 

It's people who treat them with respect who they think are the mugs and they're more likely to take to court, hoping the person will be scared of court or think their carp case actually holds water.

 

No guarantees of course, but EB's classics have shut these fleecers up many a time.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Summersea said:

How about this:

 

NCP and BW Legal should know the Protection of Freedoms act 2012 and they should have known that there is no Keepers Liability in this case, that the Parking Charge Notice to Keeper was not in accordance with the POFA and hence that there is no cause for action. Given this, your client had no rights to process my data and you should have reported this breach to the ICO.

 

Has anyone from NCP or BW Legal actually checked this case yet or is this still an autogenerated ‘threatogram’? 

 

Should you managed to convince your client to waste their money on a spurious claim that is doomed to fail - then please go ahead. It wouldn’t be the first time BW Legal ends up on the losing side (you might want to check VCS v Phillip, Claim number C9DP2D6C Liverpool 07/12/2016 - interesting reading).

So is this insulting enough?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you send what you are comfortable with but bear in mind they already know what you are telling them, they are hoping that you dont.

My view is they dont deserve any respect because they are not honest brokers and if the MoJ had any gumption there would be more solicitors in jail.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please fill in your quit date here

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...