Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello. I feel this may be considered to be a petty complaint on my part but would really appreciate views and insight please and I promise to wear my big girl pants and not take offence.  I have lived in my home since 1986. My neighbours moved in a year or two afterwards. In November 2013 I had solar panels installed optimised individually by solar edge and the panels are meant to be ' self cleaning'.  On Wednesday 21.8.19, my semi detached neighbours had a new TV aerial and a satellite dish fitted. It's near to my boundary wall,but clearly fitted on their own wall. I did not look out while his installer was working and did not know what had been done till I went to the front door to see what all the drilling was about then later to get washing in and saw the items on a flex pole. My issue, and this may be where you say I'm being petty, is that the  aerial is angled back and is over my airspace and sitting over my end solar panel. I went next door and told my neighbour my concern about birds sitting on the  aerial and guano issues as well as shading potential interns of the panel.  He said he'd ring the installer. Next morning, he is cleaning in his garden. I saw him and asked if he'd spoken to his installer. He said yes and the chap couldn't get back for 2 weeks.i asked if it could not be sooner, could the aerial not just be slightly moved when the discussion became heated. He said I had no rights to the space above my roof, I had to look at other aerials In the immediate area and he'd taken pictures and would do something if birds mucked Inthe panels and if it was him, he would have bought panels from a company who visited to clean them. I told him I fully appreciated the signal issue but asked could he not have the aerial on the chimney as I do and he told me not to be stupid as he had a dish as well and dishes cannot go on a chimney. I told him I was aware of this. He was by now shouting at me to listen and as I said, it became heated. He then said if I thought the air above my homeward mine I could sort the issue and he would cancel the installer call back. I rang his installer. My neighbours had not recontacted him. He asked if my concern was birds pooping on my panels  and the metal Ariel shadow would have no impact on panel generation and he would ring my neighbour. I am on my own and hate conflict and feel a little intimidated, but am also sure I've done nothing wrong. He told me it was my responsibility to have come out as the work was being done. So, please be frank, am I being petty? Should I just live with this ? I'm aware neighbour issues can escalate and have no desire for that, I just want the darned thing angling slightly away from my solar panel. My aeriels are the chimney ones...his is the new one at the front aspect. Thanks for reading this. 
    • Sorry I should have seen that. Vcs always reply to SARS at the very last minute 
    • Sar(email to VCS) went on 07/08/19 and CPR letter went on 14/08/19 to dcb legal.
    • Thank you all for your input so far. I have now received a letter back from my CPR 31.14 stating 'CPR 31.14 is not relevant to small claims matter, pursuant to cpr 27.2......we are under no obligation to disclose the documentation at this stage.' I assume this response is expected?   I have reworded my defence and made it more succinct, I'm not sure what else I could add?   1. Due to the sparseness of the particulars, it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. However, it is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.   2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question. However, the defendant has no liability as they are the Keeper of the vehicle, and the Private Parking Company has failed to comply with the strict provisions of PoFA 2012 to hold anyone other than the driver liable for the charges.   3. Signage at the site is not sufficient. A sign is present on the left hand side of the entrance, away from the driver, and therefore cannot be easily read by the driver of a passing vehicle. On closer inspection this sign states ’Refer to the full Terms & Conditions signs located throughout the car park’. Signs are located so that information is often obscured by other parked cars and is difficult to read. These signs state ‘Entry to or use of this privately operated and managed car park is subject to the current terms and conditions of vehicle control services ltd. Motorists/persons utilising this car park hereby accept in full the terms and conditions.’ Therefore, the driver is deemed to have agreed to the terms and conditions by having entered the car park before knowing what those terms and conditions are. The elements of offer, acceptance and consideration both ways have therefore not been satisfied and so no contract can exist.   4. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the defendant contracted to pay, This additional charge is not recoverable under the protection of freedoms act 2012, Schedule 4 not with reference to the judgement in parking eye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4) of the civil procedure rules 1998    In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success. Accordingly, the Court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative, using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4. 
  • Our picks

Hair Bear

Penalty for unpaid tax

Recommended Posts

I bought a secondhand car, insured it via telephone before driving it but then drove it the short distance home to get it taxed on my PC.

 

Due to events not worth going into, I didn't get chance to tax it until a couple of days later (so left it in a garage), which I did.

even so, I've now got a DVLA fine for the car "being used or kept while untaxed in XXXXX Street".

 

Would I be correct in assuming that there is no fighting this one,

that that's it,

i'll just have to pay up because I hadn't yet taxed it on the date in question

(although ironically the tax is backdated to the start of the month when you pay it)?

 

Note also that I'm convinced I never went anywhere near the particular street in which they say I was spotted!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds as if you have a penalty for "Using or keeping an untaxed vehicle without a SORN" as it was spotted on the street. You now have a chance to settle the out of court penalty otherwise it's a magistrates court fine. If that is not paid, your vehicle will be clamped.

 

If you are certain that you were not on the street mentioned, you can contact the DVLA and argue your case or plead not guilty in court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sounds like you were caught by an ANPR dvla contractor


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

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Thank you for your responses. Can I ask them to send proof that I was on that street? And would it make no difference anyway, since even if I wasn't on that street I evidently hadn't taxed it on the day in question? 

Edited by Hair Bear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you ever have the car on a street while it was untaxed ?

 

The answer will be yes.

 

In your situation, I think you had to buy the car tax, the same day as you bought the car. Either online or at a post office.

 

You did not do that and the letter suggests evidence of the car being on a street on a day it was not taxed. Ask for evidence if you want, but I would suggest you pay the penalty first to avoid further actions and then query evidence afterwards. 

 

 


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Purely out of curiosity, if I don't pay and go to court will the fine be more if i'm found guilty? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes lots more


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

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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...