Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • next time dont panic and wet yourself and offer payment !! Date of issue – 14 june 2024 date for aos - 2nd july  date to file defence - 16th july      other than the CCA/CRP and if it ever gets that far..a witness statement, you send them NOTHING and dont ever instigate comms with them. esp by email.. i would be sending one final email in reply to theirs above. PLEASE NOTE: email is NOT to be used for any comms with regard to our mutual court claim. else they'll be sending a whole forest of faked agreements/documents to you one minute before a court deadline removing your shace to object/pull them apart as unenforceable etc. dx        
    • Unbelievably I can't find it, I will have a really good look for it when I have a bit more time on my day off this week. AS a side note, I emailed them offering a token payment to settle the account and avoid court action, which unsurprisingly they have declined. However their reply states:  A Claim was accepted on 19 June 2024 which means we cannot set up a payment plan just yet. You should have received a claims pack from the Court. We would ask for this to be completed with your offer of repayment and returned to either ourselves or the Court.  You have 21 days for this to be completed and returned in order to avoid a Judgment by Default. This means we would need to receive this by 10 July 2024. I was under the impression it was 19 days from date on the claim form. which was the 14th, which would be 3rd July. Could I use this against them as it seems like they are giving me false information in the hope of getting a judgement by default?
    • when is your mediation? honestly I don't think that the ups case is much use actually because it concerns third party rights BUT  as we know now the contract for packlink is direct and there are no third parties rights at all so you don't need it, and frankly the really helpful one will be from @occysrazor case but I don't know if they have it. expect evris mediation to be a complete fail yes
    • jk2054: I have ensured there's not reference to the third party rights in the updated letter of claim. BankFodder: thanks for the edits and information. I understand the Consumer Rights Act prohibits EVRi's attempts to avoid liability in their duty and care of accepting to deliver my parcel according to Section 57.  They have accepted to carry my parcel even though I have identified it as a laptop and specified the value so they must take reasonable care to deliver the parcel or face the consequences if it were lost as it seems to be in my case! I hadn't originally referenced Section 72 because of EVRi didn't offer any insurance whether free or for me to purchase. I understand that if I were to have any sort of insurance from EVRi then Section 72 refer to the rules of such secondary contracts. Is this section indicating that the insurance may reduce my rights or remedies to recourse to full compensation if I had been offered and purchased such insurance?  Is it beneficial to include this in the letter of claim (and subsequently reference both Section 57 and 72 in the MCOL?) although it might not be pertinent in my case?  Perhaps this is just to reinforce that in general EVRi and other couriers are taking such liberties with their customers so it is to send a message that they are breaching both sections? I made a few minor edits to the letter of claim but mainly grammatical type stuff and to keep consistent font, black colour, but the edits you provided are included and are extremely helpful and are putting me in a good position to email and post the letter to EVRi this week and get the ball rolling. Thanks. Evri letter of claim.pdf
    • Thank you for getting back to me I will do my best to get hold of the claim form tomorrow  When I spoke to MCOl on friday I asked for the extra 14 days so penty of time Onlymeagain
  • 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

MET/DCB(L) windscreen PCN PAPLOC Now Claimform - electric bay abuse - ASDA Arla Old Dairy South Ruislip ***Claim Discontinued***


Recommended Posts

After shopping at ASDA when I returned to my car in the car park (operated by MET), which was parked in the bay marked for electric vehicles I saw PCN attached to my car's windscreen and it was regarding electric bay abuse. 

 

My car is not an electric car but is this PCN fair?

Link to post
Share on other sites

any bay markings on private land are purely tarmax graffiti..

 

please complete this:

 

 

 

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

I Know I will get flamed for this , but for once time only I am with MET .

The so called  “graffiti” is there to help people ,

  • Parent and child bays ,
  • Disabled bays ,
  • and electric charge point bays

are all there for a reason  ,

just suppose you had an electric car and it was in need of charging ,had children in the car and need extra space to get them out ,had a disabled passenger who needs extra space .

how would you feel if the bay was obstructed .

I have no doubt the experts here will guide you to having the parking charge cancelled .

But morally ………..

Link to post
Share on other sites

PPC's are not the moral Police

and why should they make money out of it to their pocket?

same as a dca on any debt you don't pay

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

1 The date of infringement? ANS: 5th Dec 2019

2 Have you yet appealed to the parking company yet? [Y/N?] ANS: N

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

5 Who is the parking company? ANS: MET Parking Services Limited

6. where exactly [Carpark name and town] did you park? ANS: (840) Arla Old Dairy, Ruislip, HA4 0FY

.............................

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under.

There are two official bodies, the BPA and the IAS. ANS: BPA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@sparkeyrjp -   

I have children and all parents and child bays were occupied (unfortunately no body receives ticket on those bays)

I searched for other empty spaces except disabled bays, only option was to park in electric charge point bays and there were plenty of those available if any body needed to use the electric charge point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

await the NTK.

 

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

agree, do nothing until the NTK comes through the post. It has the be served between 29 and 56 days after the date of the incident or it isnt POFA compliant and that means no keeper liability can be created.

MET have yet to get any of the tickets we have seen here right so dont be in a hurry to sort this matter out.

If you go to that place frequently can you get some pictures of the signage at the entrance to the car park and also what is placed around the car park. If there are specific signs at the charging points then we need to see those as well.

There is no equivalent for parking in a charging bay in the RTA and even Westminster just say please move along when finished but it is not clear whether they will do you for parking in a residents only area if you are charging your car and come from out of town but they do mention paying for 10 minutes parking to charge for 4 hours so perhaps they rely on the residents permit scheme to enforce the use of the EV bays.

Now I sympathise with Sparky's position except that the private parking bandits arent there to enforce anything nor to make you change your ways, they are there purely to make money for themselves.

If for example the store used the money to provide more EV points or maintain the existing infrastructure then I would tut loudly as well but there is a conspiracy of silence when it comes to the Govt rolling out schemes for such things they arent paying for and the supermarkets, developers etc who pay for their installation but seem to be supine to any idea without considering how their customers really feel about such things.

they all seem to think that they should act like insurance companies do and create a cartel to maintain their position rather than offering a genuine choice to the consumer

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Today I received NTK from MET with mention of Parking Charge Amount £100 is Due. 

The date of the issue of the notice is mentioned as 6th Jan 2020 which surprises me as it took almost 7 days to arrive in post. 

It also mentions that 28 days from the date of the notice,  if the amount is unpaid then they have right to recover that from me.

@Ericsbrother,  Please see attached single image showing where my car was parked and second set of images showing signage.

 

Pixs .pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

we need the NTK please bothsides as well

 

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 charge is for electric bay abuse.

I dont see a condition on their signage that says you agree to paying them anything for such a thing, there is a notice saying that it is prohibited for anyone other than someone charging their car up to use the bay but that isnt an offer to park in that space for £100.

the signage at the entrance is an "invitation to treat" so you are not bound by the terms offered on the other signs unless you wish to be.

both of these things as not matters that will be looked at in an appeal to POPLA so not worth appealing.

I  also offer the opinion that as the paint job in the bay does not fulfil the requirements of proper sigange as required under the Road Traffic Act ( yes I know it doesnt apply but is Cleary the gold standard for signage etc) then there is no such restriction.

It has already been found by the courts that so called disabled parking spots need the blue plate as well as some paint on the tarmac to be determined as to their proper function on private land and their usage has to be made clear on the sign AT THE ENTRANCE and your invitation to treat doesnt mention it as a prerequisite so nil points there.

I can put a sign in my front garden saying do not park in front of my house and it carries no weight whatsoever despite the intention being clear , dont get bogged down by argument about " you can clearly see it is a charging point". Well, nothing to stop the disabled parking in any space they wish so without the force of correct signage and legislation to support it nothing to stop you from parking there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Why?  They're not taking you to court.  They're just sending toilet paper.  Sitting idle is an excellent idea. 

 

In fact replying to them would show you're taking their silly threats seriously and you could admit to something and lose your rights under the POFA.  So keep on enjoying ignoring their nonsense.

 

Come back here though if they send an LBA.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

rocky you MUST read threads to self help .

 

 

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

you have another thread where i mentioned another case about disabled parking bays needing specific notice at the entrance.

The same will apply with this bay as well.

 

Also look up the standard on road  signs for electric charging points and see if they are the same in your case.

If they arent what does their signage mean exactly?

Link to post
Share on other sites

no, you have to appeal to the parking co first and you are too late for that by a mere 2 months. also what do you think the people paid by the parking co's are likely to say about somehting they have no jurisdiction over?

 

stop panicking and do your homework then igniore them some more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

I have received Letter Before Claim from CST Law Firm who has been instructed by MET Parking Services to commence legal action against me. 

since last one or two months I have started receiving letters again. 

Not sure if the gap between two letters is more than a month than case is still valid but looking forward to get some help.

I suppose Letter Before Claim now officially requires me to respond or take some action?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Threads merged.

You need to send a snotty letter to CST Law.

There are plenty in the threads immediately below yours. 

Please post up a draft of what you propose to send, and we'll suggest any tweaks.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

They only do this because they are hoping you have moved and wont see it nor reply..to a letter before action, the one and only time you should ever respond to a speculative invoice claim.

 

Then they are pretty much guarantee d to get a backdoor CCJ by default.

When should they do so 'upfront ' their chances of a win are very slim if properly defended. 

 

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

Don't fill in their form!  You should show total contempt for their procedures.

 

I love the bit "The charge amount includes £0.00 claimed by our Client for the time spent and resource facilitating the recovery of the charge"!!!

 

BTW, how much are they claiming from you?  There is bound to be Unicorn Food Tax in there.

 

Have a look at the snotty letters at the end of Ellemar21 & bolmgsr's threads.

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

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...