Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

TPS now BWLegal from 2014!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1773 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 all. 

 

My mother has just received the attached invoice request from BW as well as the notification from TPS. As you can see the alleged 'offence' was undertaken in 2014! A number of other online forums have indicated that TPS have just sent out a batch of these across the UK so look to be trying to clear their systems to make a quick buck.

 

This is the first correspondence she has had with them so surely this contravenes POFA in terms of notification timescales in the first instance.

In terms of next steps should she just ignore for the moment as it would seem that TPS/BW are chancing their arm?

 

Cheers!

 

DDW

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. Thanks dx. Have filled in and attached accordingly. DDW

 

For a windscreen ticket (Notice To Driver) please answer the following questions....

 

1 The date of infringement? 01/10/2014.

 

2 Have you yet appealed to the parking company yet? No as attached letter is first correspondence from TPS/BWLegal.

 

Have you received a Notice To Keeper? (NTK) [must be received by you between 29-56 days]

what date is on it No (As above. Attached letter is first contact from TPS/BWLegal)

Did the NTK provide photographic evidence? Have not received NTK or any other evidence apart from attached letter(s).

 

3 Did the NTK mention Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) No as did not receive NTK.

 

4 If you appealed after receiving the NTK,

did the parking company give you any information regarding the further appeals process?

[it is well known that parking companies will reject any appeal whatever the circumstances] N/A

 

5 Who is the parking company? Total Parking Solutions.

 

6. where exactly [Carpark name and town] did you park? B&Q, Neath, Neath Port-Talbot.   B&Q have subsequently moved out of this location. Unsure if TPS still manage site.

PCN.pdf

 

No, she still lives at the same address btw. Cheers, DDW

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi dx.  Thanks for your response- much appreciated.

 

Just as I thought...no such rule and cant keep you there!

 

She received nothing (no initial windscreen ticket, NTK or anything else) prior to these letters.

If she had received any threatograms or invoices I would have definitely raised on this great site at the time so am very sure of that.

 

I am unsure about CCTV but 100% sure that there was (and still is) no ANPR cameras on that particular site.

With that in mind, (and as this is her first notification) this must surely out of time in terms of POFA.

 

Wouldn't that alone be enough to beat TPS if they do gown down the claims route?

And of course will ignore in any case unless they do. 😀

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Gick. 

Thank you for your response.

Yes, she was the RO of the car at the time in 2014 but definitely received no correspondence until now.

Cheers, DDW

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks lookinforinfo.

BW seem to be quite active at the moment as are TPS sending many old invoices out across the UK. As you state above there are immediate discrepancies and issues...

It seems they (along with most others) try the extra 'legal fees' charge en masse.

 

Thanks again brassnecked.

 

Just waiting for the LBC. My mother has already had 2 text messages from BW wanted her to ring them to discuss a 'personal matter'. Suitably ignored of course.

 

Thanks ericsbrother.

 

Just playing the waiting game now....

In terms of getting in touch with the DVLA,  is this simply an SAR to them with £10 to cover costs?

 

Cheers, DDW

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

 

Thanks dx and eb- much appreciated. Have written to the DVLA so just waiting for a response. Hopefully they will have 'slipped up' here. Ibbotson certainly makes very interesting reading too!

 

In terms of an update, BW have text my mother 3 times and have now sent a lovely follow up threatogram (attached).

 

I've also undertaken some research on the former B&Q parking site in question.

 

The site is now run by G24 Parking, has new signage and ANPR installed also.

 

I'm going to dig around further in the meantime to determine if TPS had initial authority from the landowner and permission to erect their signage back in 2014.

 

Let's see what I can find! Cheers, DDW

 

PCN2.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Thanks eb! 

 

I have an update....

DVLA letter sent asking for data requests.

 

Have also been in touch with the council planning department and spoke to a lovely lady who totally sympathised as she had recently been caught up with something similar and was very happy to help!

 

I have a telephone call scheduled with her next Monday to confirm if permissions were actually needed by the council

(she couldn't confirm this when I spoke to her but would research for me in terms of private land ownership).

 

In the meantime I checked the planning app portal and can confirm that the council has received no planning for signage or cameras etc from TPS and/or B and Q themselves (there doesn't seem to be planning apps from they new PPC either!).

 

Have attached evidence of this dating back to the mid 1990's.

The only planning permission given has been for security fencing!

 

I have also attached Google Map shots of the site.

I could not go into the car park any further as Maps changes the view to 2016.

 

The photo evidence is from 2011 (none exists for 2014 unfortunately).

 

Looks like there are parking signs as such in those views but when you zoom in they are illegible

- the best I could get are also in the attached.

 

Regards, DDW

BandQsignage.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...