Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • That's wrong on two counts:   1. The time frame is one calendar month, not 35 days   2. The time doesn't start from when your ID "has been confirmed", it starts from when they receive it.   Send them this ICO link   Time limits for responding to data protection rights requests | ICO      
    • Final offer emails-  there is a typo in it - I am Not entitled to a refund in point 1, I did send my email back saying I accept as his typo said I was eligible - but he quickly sent another email saying it was a typo and I was not entitled to a refund.      Email 1   Thank you for your response. We are sorry to learn that you are not happy with the provided resolution.  In regards to your further query, we can confirm that we are now authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). However, your matter does not relate to a contract of insurance, but in fact a plan. Therefore, you do not have the benefit of reporting this matter to the Financial Ombudsman Service.  In terms of your queries, please be advised as follows:  1. Your request: “Refund of the cost you charged me for the boiler repair of £246.”  We have clarified and summed up your concern regarding the repair cost of £246 in our previous response dated 2nd December 2021. As we instructed the manufacturer who attended your property on 13th November 2021 and completed the job successfully. Therefore, you are entitled to a refund.  2. Your Request: "In addition, an exgratia payment of £100 for the poor handling of this repair and complaint." We have clarified and summed up your concern that you logged the claim online and provided your tenant's contact information. As per our record, our relevant team contacted your tenants only on 7th November, 10th November & 11th November. We shared the exact information with the manufacturer so that you or your tenant would not fail to take advantage of your appointment and to ensure matters were resolved swiftly without any further delays. 3. Your Request: "To be freed from my plan immediately with no penalty charged." We have clarified and summed up your concern regarding the cancellation in our previous response dated 26th November 2021. Either you can provide a 30-days notice or for immediate cancellation, there will be a cancellation fee of £144. However, as a resolution to your complaint, we can cancel your plan with immediate effect as a gesture of goodwill by waiving the cancellation fee of £144 that you would normally be required to pay as per the terms and conditions of your plan. Please be advised that we maintain our position and our further gesture of goodwill offer in the sum of £30 remains open to you for acceptance in the full and final settlement.  Please note the following points as discussed regarding your concerns: 1. The cancellation fee of £144 has been waived and offered to cancel your plan with immediate effect. 2. Offered a refund of £30 as a gesture of goodwill.  Once again, we are sorry for the inconvenience we caused you and hope you will find that the points above offer an appropriate explanation and a fair resolution.      Email 2 As you mentioned, your boiler was repairable and it got fixed by a reputable nationwide company for the total cost of £246. In regards to the misunderstanding, we have never addressed your boiler as unrepairable, we always advise you that it was beyond economical repair, in which we use the boiler's purchase value, age, make, and model. The calculation illustrated below outlines how the BER value is calculated. The boilers current market value is calculated by looking at the purchase value and applying a 10% depreciation on this value for each year that the boiler has been in use (age of the boiler). We cover repairs of up to 80% of the boiler’s current market value. As you were concerned about the breakup and calculation of the repair cost which you were offered in the first place, the detail mentioned below: Boiler Type: Ideal (Mini C24, 24KW Combi Boiler) Boiler Value: £566 Market Value: 272.72 BER Limit: £270.72 Part: £320.37 Part + VAT: £384.44 Labor: £54 Total Cost of Repair: (Part + VAT: £384.44) + (Labor: £54) = £438.44 In regards to the repair, our technical team offered an option with the manufacturer (Ideal) repair for £246. As we instructed the manufacturer who attended your property on 13th November 2021 and completed the job successfully. There is not a breakdown for the manufactures offer, as it is cheaper than the original cost of the repair. We offer manufacturing repair for a fixed fee. Therefore, please be advised that we maintain our position and our gesture of goodwill offer in the sum of £30 remains open to you for acceptance in the full and final settlement.  Once again, we are sorry for the inconvenience we caused you and hope you will find that the points above offer an appropriate explanation and a fair resolution. Under the terms of our Complaints Procedure, this is our final response.  
    • quite correct and that is not a bailiff letter!   can i give you a little tip when dealing with all the people  regardless of if they are DCA's or BAILIFFs (not the same }   STOP RINGING THEM! - thats the last thing you should EVER do no matter who it is.   never just pickup the phone or talk about debt of yours or anyone on the phone put it down stating writing only.   now this is for a CCJ there is NOTHING a bailiff can do on a CCJ anyway!! its a county court judgement and there are no rights of entry anyway on county court stuff. only magistrate fines like dvla speeding etc etc.   that letter is infact just a simple letter of them acting as powerless DCA's, they have not been court appointed. i suspect the DCA that got the ccj got it by the backdoor too and now thinks their mates can have a go at being a bully when legally thay cant ignore them!   dx      
    • Firstly, never threaten legal action unless you are willing to take it!   Can you post up the 'Final Response' you received from them today as a pdf with all identifying detail removed.   I've read their T&C you posted and it has a frankly baffling description of how it calculates the BER:   BEYOND ECONOMICAL REPAIR - In the opinion of our approved engineer, we are unable to repair your boiler.   We use an industry standard formula to calculate the BER value, using the boilers purchase value, age, make and model. The table illustrated below outlines how the BER value is calculated. The boilers current market value is calculated by looking at the purchase value and applying a 10% depreciation on this value for each year that the boiler has been in use (age of the boiler). We may provide repairs of up to 80% of the boiler’s current market value.   Version 3.0 Boiler Type Vaillant Eco-TEC Plus 938 Purchase Value RRP £2,521.00 Age 5 Depreciation 10% for each year boiler has been in use Current Market value £1488.63 Threshold £893.18 Cost of Repair £350.00 Outcome Repair Authorised    I eventually worked out how they got from the original price to the 'Current Market Value' [it's not straight line depreciation, for the mathemetically minded it's  (((((£2,521 * 0.9)*0.9)*0.9)*0.9)*0.9) = £2,521*0.59049 = £1,488.63].   But what does 'Threshold' mean?  Not defined or explained anywhere. It isn't the 80% of the boiler's current market value that they refer to. £893.18 is 60% of of the current market value of £1,488.63, not 80%.    So it's hard to tell from their TEC what they mean when they told you "BER limit £270".   Do they mean that £270 is their calculation of 80% of the boiler's current market value? In which case  £246 you want back is well within their limit. Do what Bank Fodder recommends and see what they say.
    • I've been waiting weeks.  Direct number for the mediators is 03001234593 if you want to make sure you haven't been forgotten.  They do seem to have a bit of a backlog though.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Smart Parking ANPR PCN - 10min overstay - Greenwich Shopping Park, Charlton London


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 993 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

Parking charge received by post on 24th Jan for contravention on 19th Jan for overstaying by 10 mins.

As one of the appeal option was :

Parking over free period (if you were genuine customer...etc), we made online appeal with copy of receipt.

The appeal was written as RK without naming driver nor RK as the driver on the day of contravention.

Rejection letter received on 13th Feb with POPLA verification code printed.

I don't have knowledge in dealing with private parking firms but seems strange that neither the first letter nor rejection is notice to keeper which I thought is a requirement.

Letters are attached in the post and please advise as got another week to respond.

 

Thanks.

 

 

RPCN.pdf

SPPCN.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore them for now.  The parking authorities own code of conduct states there is a MINIMUM of 10 minutes grace after the time has expired.  They cant change that.

Edited by renegadeimp
  • Like 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

well, as the minimum grace period is 10 minutes then 11 mins is acceptable. as you have a popla code you can appeal and waste their money but before you go down that route please tell us about the event, such as where it was and what your businees there was and how long the free parking period was and whether there is a paid for parking method as well.

your best move on this may be completely different to what you think it is.

we normally recommend that you take the matter up with the store first and rarely suggest bothering appealing to the parking operator as they tend to disallow any appeal regardless of how faulty the original demand is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The place is Greenwich shopping park in Charlton London.

At the entrance is sign stating max stay of 3hrs on non-match day and 90mins on match day (Charlton FC).

It's a free time limited  parking space and there are no paying machine to park.

On the date of contravention Charlton were at home to Accrington Stanley, so should've been a match day as per parking signs.

One of the visiting relative went to do shopping.

The shops around the parking area are JD, Matalan, Outfits, boots, Decathlon etc.

Overall £205 were spent on JD and Decathlon (receipt).

The PCN was received via post, so ANPR but nowhere does it state Notice to keeper nor demand to provide driver's detail.

We made an online appeal with just two sentence stating

"the driver's purpose on the day of contravention was to do shopping and total spent was £205 on 2 shops for which the receipt is attached.

The driver spend times visiting other shops located in the same area. "

Rejection letter was also a surprise as thought we'll receive NTK or some kind of form to fill but with POPLA code.

Link to post
Share on other sites

we need to see the NTK as it has to contain certain information. you call it the PCN but it is the same if the parking c relies on para 9 of the pofa

The blurb about matchdays is just cobblers and only applies to the Sainsburys in Selhurst park, next to the Crystal Palace grounds because that is what the planning consent says but even then they cnat stop you from parking , just shopping.

If you hadnt  jumped the gun you could have got the store to cancel this as they are only too aware of the problems Smart cause. it is to deter footy fand from parking but any contract that is deterrent in its nature is likely to be unlawful

Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Date of infringement: 19th Jan 2019
2) Date on NTK - Not received but PCN received dated 24th Jan 2019
3) Date received - PCN dated 24th Jan 2019
4) mention of schedule 4 of the POFA 2012[y/n] - Can't see on letter
5) Photographic evident of event - yes, two pics of vehicle from front & rear number plate
6) Have you appealed - yes. 3rd option on PCN. "the driver's purpose on the day of contravention was to do shopping and total spent was £205 on 2 shops for which the receipt is attached. The driver spend times visiting other shops located in the same area. "
7)Parking company - Smart Parking
8 ) Where exactly - Greenwich Shopping Park, Charlton London
9) Appeal body - BPA
10) other correspondence - rejection letter. First post attached
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

so we need to see the pcn they sent you, IT IS THE NTK so stop saying you havent had one and start to understand the processes and terminologies. If they ave got the wording wrong then that helps you

you will need to redact your personal details such as your name and address, car reg, any reference numbers and bar codes but leave the date and times visible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Smart Parking ANPR PCN - 10min overstay - Greenwich Shopping Park, Charlton London

Ok read the NTK ( as they rely on para 9 of the POFA- you should have read this by now - and they fail to say in what capacity they are aciting as they list several and none of them either apply or create a right to make claims for your money. More importantly they do not say who the creditor is in this matter so that means there is NO LIABILITY WHATSOEVER in this matter so not event he driver can be lawfully pursued.

Typical Smart, the people who put the moron in oxymoron.

do not correspond with them at all and instead read up about private parking matters. There are other thread about the car aprk where your vehicle was so dot miss them out

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Thanks for advice and sorry for late replying. I've searched here for same location and found other posts. For now we've decided follow your advice and we've not even appealed on popla. I'll post once receive any further replies from them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

when they have wasted a few quid on threatograms and look like they might want to try their luck with court action THEN you hit them with a list of what they have got wrong and point out that if they continue not only will they lose but they will have to pay you money for their unreasonable behaviour.

Smart normally bottle it then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...