Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. 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. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
    • Please provide advice on the following situation: I rented out my property to four students for 16 months until March 2024. Initially, the property was in very good condition, but now it needs extensive renovation. This includes redoing the bathroom, replacing the kitchen, removing wallpaper, and redecorating due to significant mould growth. The tenants also left their furniture on the grass, which is owned by the local authority. As a landlord, I've met all legal requirements. It seems the damage was caused by poor ventilation—windows were always closed, and heating wasn't used. There was also a bathroom leak fixed by reapplying silicone. I tried to claim insurance, but it was denied, citing tenant behaviour as the cause by looking at the photos, which isn't covered. The deposit barely covers the repair costs, or else I'll have to pursue money claims, which I've never done before and am unsure about its legal complications or costs. Any thoughts on this?
  • 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
      • 160 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

court date for speeding and FtF - Can I transfer case to local court


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1605 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

Definitely Fixed Penalty territory (up to 49mph in a 30 limit).

In fact, had you been able to respond to the request for driver's details you would have almost certainly been offered a Speed Awareness Course (provided you have not done one for an offence that occured in the three years prior to this one and that it was not in Scotland).

 

They are normally offered up to 42mph.

 

Unfortunately the court cannot deal with the matter by way of a course. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a course two years ago but I will try the fixed penalty. Like you said, if you don't ask, you don't get. 

 

Thanks MITM                         

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

***************UPDATE***************

 

Hi everyone,

 

I went to court today where the magistrates agreed to set aside the previous judgement and reopen the case.

 

Now, I don't know if this is good news or bad, but they decided to cancel the charge of speeding and only reopen the charge of FtF. I was asked how I intended to PLEAD on the charge and I said I will be pleading NOT GUILTY, before a hearing date was set for 6 week's time. But without the speeding charge, it appears that I have lost my 'bargaining chip'.

 

What do you guys think?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without being there it's difficult to say why they did what they did.

 

It could be that the speeding charge was discontinued beforehand anyway (you were never convicted of it). All is not entirely lost.

 

You can still ask for the deal when you go to court for your next hearing. 

 

Defendants often arrive at court facing only the FtF charge. It just takes a little bit of effort from a kindly prosecutor (who fancies a quick speeding conviction instead of a trial for FtF!) to see it through.

 

Be nice and polite - "please, thank you, that's very kind", etc.

I know of one driver who failed to secure the deal.

When making his request he was, shall we say, less than polite to the prosecutor "demanding his rights to a fair trial" and all that.

He got his fair trial (for FtF) and was convicted.

 

In case that fails, what exactly were the circumstances that led you to fail to provide the driver's details?

 

I know you said you only got a reminder 7 days before the deadline and that you delayed responding in order to check out the limit.

 

Did you respond too late or not at all?

You need to decide whether you are going to defend the charge if your request for the deal fails.

 

The downside of doing so is that it is a notoriously difficult charge to successfully defend (if it was easy everybody would simply pitch up and say "Didn't get the notice, guv").

 

As well as that the cost of failure will be high.

You will lose your discount on your fine (so you will pay 1.5 week's income instead of 1 week's).

But the crippler is the prosecution costs.

 

The standard rate for a trial is £620 (as opposed to £85 for a guilty plea).

You may be asked for a little less than that but you should be prepared for that at worst.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Man in the middle, thank you for that response.

 

Looking back, of course I had no good reason for not responding to the reminder.

I thought though that I might get more time to respond after I emailed to say that I didn't receive the initial NIP.

 

I am a chauffeur and I was doing a contract away from home at the time (which was why I got this charge 95 miles from home).

 

I returned home after the time on the reminder (7 days I think), had lapsed but I thought the NIP would be re-issued.

But instead of a re-issue of NIP, I received a summons.

 

By the way, my wife checks my mails when I am working away from home otherwise I wouldn't even have known about the reminder until after the time had elapsed.

 

On 27/09/2019 at 15:57, Man in the middle said:

Without being there it's difficult to say why they did what they did.

 

It could be that the speeding charge was discontinued beforehand anyway (you were never convicted of it). All is not entirely lost.

 

They were actually having the discussion in court and I was tempted to get involved and ask for the whole case to be re-opened but I thought it might be impolite.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The hearing for my re-opened case is on 11 Nov.

I am abroad and was due back on 31 Oct.

 

Due to a change in circumstances, I had to postpone my return to 14 Nov, three days too late for my court date.

 

I have contacted the court via email (with copies of my return ticket showing the old date and the rebooked date) to explain and ask for a short adjournment. But they said No, that I knew the date of hearing before I travelled so they wouldn’t adjourn.

 

Shall I just send a plea of ‘guilty’ now with my statement of means to at least benefit from the discount on my fine?

Do I have any options?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...