Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes - ignore. Because of another MET victim today I looked at all our MET cases back to June 2014 ... yes, 10 years. They have never dared take a motorist to court and argue their case before a judge.  They have started the odd court case, but as a means of trying to intimidate the motorist into coughing up, when the motorist defended and refused to give in it was MET who bottled it and discontinued.
    • Unpaid wages should be pretty straightforward if you did the work. Don't be intimidated. You need only show you were due money, and did not get money.   The risk is that they have no money to pay you (and legal fees) - frankly a solicitor maybe be costing them more than your claim is for and I might have expected them to make a commercial decision to settle before this point regardless of the merits of the case.
    • Thanks so much FTMDave.  This is so much better   I'm still tempted to leave the blue section in is as if I lose it will at least save me a little bit of money.  But I get your point that it's pretty superfluous.   Thinking I'll get this in the post on Monday unless you think it's worth delaying?   
    • Hi All I have now received a Final Reminder, which I have attached. Can you confirm that I should still ignore this letter and take no further action. It does not appear to say "Letter of Claim" anywhere on the document but I just wanted to check with you all. Many thanks FightUnfairParkingTickets Parking Charge Final Reminder issued 29th May 2024.pdf
    • Hello I am a resident of a communal block of flats owned by a Housing Association and since Tuesday 14th May 2024 Matthews and Tannert had put up scaffolding for a job on the roof last week, which was up for the best part of nine days. They had removed the scaffolding on Thursday 23rd May 2024 but my Sky box is still not working because of the satellite dish outside, and I was wondering whether the scaffolders had touched the dish while it was there and as a result had probably knocked the dish and probably made the dish go out of signal or whatever. I needed someone to check this out as well as to see my Sky box to see what could be the problem, and hopefully sort this out. I have had my Sky Digibox for many years and I have got recordings saved on them that I have had a long time - it would break my heart if I had lost them forever.       I contacted Sky but I almost made the mistake of accepting an offer where I would have to pay £31.50 and wait a whole month without television in my front room for it. I am in debt at the moment and I don't want all this on top of everything else - thankfully I have since cancelled it two weeks later when I told the person on the phone that it is the dish which is at fault as well as the fact that I live in a communal Housing Association property, and so that is one of very few weights off my mind. I emailed the Housing Association's Repairs department and they said that they will contact an electrical company to come out and see to the dish outside. I received a telephone call on Friday 24th May from the man to say that he will arrive on Wednesday 29th May 2024 to do the job. He arrived at around 9.40 am on Wednesday as promised; he went into my flat and had a look at the Sky box and saw the blue screen on my front room TV set, indicating no signal. He also looked outside as to where the dish was.  The main problem was that the ladders that he had with him were not enough to reach the dish outside as the dish was towards the top of the building - obviously the Health and Safety aspect of the job didn't allow him to do this. He then mentioned that whether he could do the job as a result of getting onto the roof and doing it like that as the dish is closer to the top. He said that he needed the key to enter the loft part of the building in order to reach this, and he needed to contact the Housing Officer at the Housing Association who had key to this, but lo and behold, he came on the Wednesday to do the job, and guess what? Wednesday was the Housing Officer's day off and so therefore he was unable to contact him for the key so that he could do the job! I just couldn't believe it myself. I am personally annoyed because this has not been sorted, and the man who came to do this is also annoyed because he came all the way to Nottingham from Peterborough, and he said to me that he won't get paid if he cannot do the job, so you see, we are both angry about this for different reasons. We are both in the same boat with regards to frustration, and we both want to see a conclusion to this, once and for all. Sometimes I wish that I didn't live in a flat which is in a communal building and I am thinking of getting a transfer to a one bedroom flat that isn't in that sort of place. I pay around £85 a month in a Direct Debit to Sky to receive their TV services which I cannot use at the moment, and I don't have much money in my bank account as it is due to one thing and another. I also pay nearly £14 a month to TV Licensing so that I can legally watch TV in my front room. I pay for Sky hence the fact that I want the Sky service in my front room and not Freeview. Also, as the General Election is coming up in five weeks' time, I want the satellite TV to be working properly so that I can catch up with what is on the news channels, and I feel rather "cut off" from that at the moment, and I want it working in time for Thursday 4th July 2024 for ovbious reasons . I have Freeview in my bedroom, but that is not the point  - I don't want to be limited to my bedroom every time I want to watch TV. I have tried putting the Freeview in te front room but it doesn't seem compatable for the same uses that I usually have Sky for.  Sunday 9th June 2024 is Day 27 of the satellite TV not working in my flat, and I feel that something needs to be done about this. You can take this message as a complaint if you like, but nevertheless, I want this message to be acknowledged and also something to be done about what has happened. I have enough on my plate with regards to health problems and depression without things like this making things worse. I would appreciate it if something was done.  I don't like naming and shaming but it is Matthews and Tannert's fault that I am in this situation in the first place, and sometimes I wish that I could sue them. In a nutshell, I have had more than enough after being without TV in the my front room for nearly four weeks. Also, at a time like this, I am missing so much of interest on TV what with the General Election comning up in just a few weeks.
  • 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
      • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Brittania Parking PCN - lease company have paid it !!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1653 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 

I lease my car and I have just received a letter from the lease company saying they have paid a PCN that was issued on 5th November for parking in a supermarket car park. 

I was not notified by a ticket on my car so did not have the opportunity to appeal this. However, the lease company think I can still appeal this and wondered if someone could offer any guidance on this?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Brittania Parking PCN - lease company have paid it !!

the lease company have no legal right to pay this

it is NOT A FINE or a penalty charges notice.

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Lease company had no right to pay it, nor add the fee, as it's not a council PCN or a Police penalty.

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

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

how have the lease company gotten the money out of you?

 

its not in their T&C's that they can do this.

 

go find the bit they are relying upon to do this

 

bet it says nothing about private parking charges, only Penalty charge notices i'e parking FINES

this is not a fine, its a speculative invoice because you supposedly broke some kind of imaginary contract by entering that private land.

 

teach them the diff!!

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4. Depending on the Local Authority or Private Parking Operator, the Lessor shall either pay the fine or parking charge notice and re-charge the Lessee or shall advise the Local Authority or Private Parking Operator that the Vehicle is on lease to the Lessee so that it can deal with the Lessee direct on the matter

 

. Indemnify the Lessor against all fines penalties and liabilities imposed on the Lessor or arising in respect of any non-compliance or contravention of any transport traffic or other law or regulation which occurs at any time during the continuance of this Hire Agreement together with any cost or expense relating thereto incurred by the Lessor including (but not limited to) payment to the Lessor of an administration expense of GBP 35.00 in respect of every fixed penalty parking ticket in respect of the Goods received by the Lessor whether or not paid by the Lessor

 

 

These are two clauses which relate to parking tickets

Link to post
Share on other sites

well in their own words it is NOT a fixed penalty parking ticket

they obviously know the difference as they list them separately...

pay the fine or parking charge notice

 

so they have not only broken their own T&C's

they have entered into a contract with the private parking company when there is no contract for them to even enter into as they were not there and were not THE DRIVER. they need to READ the speculative invoice carefully

they should be naming the driver ONLY as they are ONLY the registered keeper

 

moneyback please ..how did they get the money from YOU. 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

good great

 

so now you tell them the above.

 

particularly..

they have entered into a contract with the private parking company when there is no contract for them to even enter into as they were not there and were not THE DRIVER. they need to READ the speculative invoice carefully

they should be naming the driver ONLY as they are ONLY the registered keeper

there is no legal remit that as the RK they must or could be held responsible for it remaining outstanding once they inform the private parking fleecers of the name/address of the driver.

 

politely suggest they go get their moneyback, remove the £35 bogus unlawful fee from your account and do what they should only be doing for speculative invoices.. and that is to inform the company of the driver details.

  • Like 2

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

no penalty and no keeper liability . If thye had passed on the NTK and you had told the lease co you arent engaging with the parking co then the first part of that term may allow them to recover the money from you once paid. they didnt pass the charge notice on so they are in breach of the terms and anyway, no mention of any admin fee for anything that isnt a FPN so they cant charge that either

Link to post
Share on other sites

response from Leasing company

 

As per the contract that you signed when you took the vehicle, you agree to reimburse us for all fines and penalty charge notices incurred during the lease, along with the added cost of the £35 administration fee,

 

If you do not pay the invoice you are in breach of your contract and will be treated as such,

 

It is irrelevant that the fine has been paid, you do not own the vehicle and therefore get no say in how the fine is dealt with, it is at the owners discretion how a fine is dealt with,

 

We also have no say in a how a fine is dealt with, if it is paid then it is paid,

 

Private parking fines are enforceable, social media and the internet will have you believe that they are not, however this is wrong,  it is the issuers choice whether they pursue the end user who incurred the fine or not,

 

The invoice is overdue and needs paying today,

Link to post
Share on other sites

They havent a clue what they are talking about.

They believe the internet..idiots!!

 

Wait till eric sees that response!!

 

Dx

  • Like 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

if it is at the owners discretion then that is so but it is NOT within their powers to order an ice cream, eat it and then bill you.

This is no different.

It is contract law and not criminal law.

 

If one is being picky you can argue that consumer law applies to the agreement between yourself and the lease co but the more general contract law applies to the parking conditions so you are not bound by their retrospective incorrect interpretation of an unfair term that wasnt in the original contract so you are no longer bound by any of the terms.

 

They are right about FINES but these arent fines they are invoices and the POFA makes that clear by having hoops to jump through to create a liability.

If the invoice is wrong no-one has to pay it.

 

Penalty charges are covered by specific legislation and the Road Traffic Act, the parking cowboys arent

 

I would write to them again pointing uout the errors of the work experience schoolchild who wrote this letter and to get a grown up to have a look

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

they?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

would think if they did that it would be against consumer rules

just because they don't know the diff and blindly think you have to pay, and charge you a fee for their blindness and stupidity , it wouldn't go well for them.

 

they need to be educated

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its about time these Lease Companies were made to see the difference between a speculative Invoice and a real PCN, if they were to take the car it coud prove very expensive for them, as they would likely breach the contract as invoice not real penalty or fine.

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

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...