Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The reason that I have indicated that it is the seller who should bring an action against Hermes is not because they are the seller – but because they are the person who suffered the loss. If you haven't suffered a loss then you probably don't have the status – locus standi – to bring a court action. Of course there is a slight problem that you didn't enter into the contract with Hermes – the purchaser did. Until 1999 this would have been a problem and would have prevented you from bringing any kind of action at all – at least on the basis of contract. However, since 1999, the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act gives the beneficiary of any contract full third party rights as if they were a contracting party. The only exception to this is that if the contract specifically excluded non-contracting parties – and I'm not aware that Hermes has yet amended their contract to try and prevent this. Of course as usual, Hermes will make a big point about the fact that no insurance was purchased. Hopefully you have been reading around the threads on this sub- forum and you have seen that our view is that it is completely unfair and in fact it is absurd to require a customer to pay money to protect Hermes or any other service provider from the consequences of their own negligence or the criminality of their own employees. Every time this point has been raised with Hermes in mediation, Hermes have settled and we consider that it is because they want to avoid going to court to get a definitive judgement that their insurance scam – is precisely that – a scam. On the basis of what I understand here, this is more than just negligence there is criminality and your bike has been stolen. You've already begun a complaint and you have been knocked back and so I think there's no point in mucking around and I think that you should simply issue a letter of claim to Hermes giving them 14 days to settle in full or else you will begin a court action. Make sure that you have read around the forum about taking a small claim in the County Court. It's very easy but you need to be aware of the steps. If you send the letter of claim, then don't expect that they are suddenly going to refund you your money. They won't. They will force you to issue the court papers and who will then force you to pay the hearing fee. At this point, they will opt for mediation and they will try to knock you down and get your compromise in your claim. You should stand your ground and refused to compromise even a single penny. We will help you all the way. You seem to be a seller and a purchaser here who are getting on very well together and so as you are motivated by a common purpose, you may want to get an agreement where you decide to share the fees of court action – which won't be very much. I haven't checked the court fees for this value claim – but I expect that the whole thing will be only about £120. Of course you will get that back when you win – but bear in mind there is a is a slight risk factor and that means that £120 would be the extent of your risk and would be the maximum that you would lose. It is inconceivable that you would lose. You should be claiming the cost of the bike, the cost of delivery, plus interest which is presently 8% – a very good rate in today's economic climate. Of course you will also claim back your court fees. If you want to proceed then please let us know and let us know also that you have read around the stories and also the steps involved taking a small claim in the County Court and that you understand what you are doing. If you do your basic reading over the next couple of days then we can help you draft a letter of claim on Sunday and you can send it off on Monday. I would recommend that you post your draft letter of claim on this forum so we can check it. Keep it short and to the point.
    • That's what keeps divorce lawyers and mediators in work, I suppose. You think he's being unreasonable and he thinks you are.   My gut feeling is that it would be better to have this agreed in writing so it can't be challenged later, but that's just my opinion. Here's more information from the CAB in case it covers something you haven't already considered.   HB
    • Biden doesn't seem bothered about negotiating a trade treaty to suit the UK government's timetable. I don't suppose they saw this coming, not that the amount of trade involved makes up for what's being lost with Europe anyway.   https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-boris-johnson-usa-trade-deal-b1807616.html
    • No we haven’t mentioned divorce yet The fair split is I give him half the equity and anything he wants to take from the house  I just feel he is now being unreasonable because I won’t change my mind and take him back 
    • Hi.   Have you spoken to a divorce lawyer or has your husband? Trying to look at this from the outside, it sounds as if it would be better to agree a fair split according to divorce law rather than deciding between you.   Sadly, once money becomes involved things can become more complicated, but I'd have thought a divorce lawyer would be able to advise.   ETA: Here's some advice from the government.   HB
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

OPS/gladstone PCN PAPLOC now claimform - <10mins CCTV passenger leaving car - Broadwater Street West, Worthing


Recommended Posts

you do not use email!

 

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
  • Replies 106
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It usually means that they do not have at least one of the documents which means that there is no contract between them and the motorist. That is good for you.   When doing your WS you can s

I hope you get DDJ Harvey!

ig and nore.   word is they are getting rather desperate for money as no-one is using their cars much at present...

like most OPS contracts they don't exist or are fake.

their WS will be interesting..

 

do not file yours before you get theirs.

 

  • 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

Thanks @brassnecked would be interesting to hear other thoughts on this!

 

Okay @dx100uk  won't file mine until I see theirs, has to be 7 days before the court date correct? Also the reason I am emailing (the court - not OPS!) as I am overseas so cannot guarantee post from here will make it there in time, especially with Corona / Christmas post added into the equation!

 

Regards seeing OPS WS, how does that work - should they post it to me? Do I need to provide them with mine or only to the court please? If I do need to provide anything to OPS it will also be email as again I am o/s (I will set up a new specific OPS alternative email address that isn't my usual mail, I have blocked them there already!) 

 

Thanks again all - take care!

 

RATPCN

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i can see your issues, however OPS will come up with a pack of lies and fake documents within their WS as they always do.

this is evidenced by the other OPS claimform threads here which sadly all the OP's have failed to update them!!

 

if they have an email AD for you, they will do this 1 min before the deadline giving you no chance to counter them in yours.

something that i think with their past history is very important.

yes you can email the court yours.

 

on the N157 from the court it will give the timescale for WS exchange, i believe that is typically 14days not 7?

 

 

 

 

  • 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

Thanks again @dx100uk spot on with the 14 days!

 

As such I have begun drafting my WS, will be going back to m1n1me's for more and having a trawl through others I can find on CAG as suggested as well as previous advice on this thread 🙂 and also including the previously recommended claim from Lewes (Brighton) County Court where my Claim will also be heard

 

Would welcome any feedback from caggers on this thread and beyond on my formative WS

 

1.     It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of [motor vehicle].

 

2.     It is denied that the Defendant parked on site without pre-authorization at XXXXXXXXXXXX at the times mentioned in the Exhibit List. 

 

3.     It is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant. 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 simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the carpark is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper Claimant is the landowner.

 

4.     It is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The contract for the provision of parking management services the Claimant provided to POPLA and has failed to provide to the Defendant references the Client & supposed landowner XXXXXXXXXX who were declared insolvent in April 2016 and dissolved August 2017.

 

 

5.     The Defendant contends that the Claimant has no authority or agency to do such therefore there can be no claim. The Defendant also contends the wording of signage supplied after the event which states “parking is permitted for…vehicles parked wholly within their allocated space”. As the Exhibit List demonstrate the vehicle was clearly not parked wholly within any space, evidently as there was never any intention to park at the location. 

 

6.     The Claimant has failed to show the Defendant, upon request under CPR 31.14, any authority or agency to enter into contracts with the public by way of an assignment from the proprietor to do the same and to make civil claims in their own name or any other documents pursuant to CPR31.14. The Defendant informed the Claimant’s refusal to comply would be referred against the Claimant in any defence. 

 

7.     It is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The contract for the provision of parking management services the Claimant provided to POPLA not the Defendant references the Client & supposed landowner XXXXXXXXXX who were declared insolvent in April 2016 and dissolved August 2017.

 

 

8.     The Claimant entered a contract with the Client stating fees for the PCN’s will not exceed any ATA code of conduct. ATA Code of Conduct 23.1b states this sum must not exceed 70GBP unless prior approval from the BPA has been granted. Thus the claimant is in breach of their BPA Code of Practice.

 

9.     The Claimant is again in breach of their BPA CoP as they have not allowed the minimum grace period of 10 minutes as illustrated in the Exhibit List to be considered in any correspondence, appeal or complaint against them. The Exhibit List will show that the time period was five minutes one second.  The ten minute grace period is a matter of law as decided in the Beavis case… 

 

 

10.  The Claimant has failed to show, upon request under CPR 31.14, any evidence of planning permission for installation of cameras and signage under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007.

11.  The Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.

 

 

 

Thanks again,

 

 

RATPCN

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What you've written in itself is fine but in needs to be split up into comprehensible sections, such as

   - grace period & CoP (IMO at the top as this is one of your most important points)

   - it wasn't a parking event

   - they have no locus standi

   - POFA (but IIRC you outed yourself as the driver, right?  If so drop this section)

   - no planning permission so illegal contract

   - £60 unicorn food tax.

 

Etc.

  • Like 1

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

@FTMDave I'd hoped so too but looks like someone else handling, thanks for the input, it was very much lacking structure was just trying to note down all the right elements! 

 

Should I also include a sequence of events piece similar to m1n1me's approach? 

 

Thanks again!

 

RATPCN

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The finasl part of that Lewes Judgment regarding the Unicorn Feed tax, is worth slipping in somewhere about the addition of any "Admin" or other DCA fees to a claim is abuse of process, as only the driver can be sued for such .

  • Like 1

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

Just spoke to CC and OPS have not filed anything yet, deadline is 4PM tomorrow.

 

Will try and get my redacted WS and Exhibit List up here later today for any feedback from you wonderful caggers 🙂

 

@FTMDave you are correct outed myself as driver at appeals stage as never thought things would get this far, assumed appeal would be successful due to Grace Period and being honest about who was driving was right approach!

 

Apologies I am not sure which part of my WS references POFA that should be removed? Can you just confirm that for me please! 

 

Thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry RATPCN, my bad, you've not mentioned POFA in your WS so you don't need to change anything.

 

I was just making the general point that it would be better to order the WS into sections each of which deal with different points of law, it would be easier for the judge to see the legal arguments you're making.

 

BTW, your paragraphs 4 & 7 are duplicates.

 

Yes, it might be worth sticking in a quick introduction describing what happened, then you briefly entered the site but never parked and left well within the grace period.

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1

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

Evening All,

 

PFA redacted WS and EL, hoping these will be sufficient to defend my case, yet to add a sequence of events section to WS which I will do tomorrow before sending off to CC and can try to post here for your kind review?

 

Should I also send to OPS at the deadline, I have still received nothing at all from them - or if they don't provide me their WS and EL I duly don't provide mine? 

 

Approaching the end game now! 

 

 

Thanks!

 

RATPCN

Exhibit List Redacted.pdf Witness Statement Redacted.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

hold until after midnight UK time 

see if they email theirs.

 

would good if they did then we can rejig yours if necessary wont hurt being a bit late you are a LiP.

 

dx

 

  • Thanks 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

Well done with the WS.  It's straight to the point and succinct (which will go down well with the judge) unlike the pages & pages of tripe that OPS will send (if they actually do get off their backsides and send something).  A few small suggestions ...

 

I would move current paragraph 9 to fit in after paragraph 6, and touch the paragraphs up so they read coherently.  It seems to me that current paragraph 9 belongs in that part which is dealing with the "no parking event" argument.

 

In paragraph 6 you mention the driver leaving the car for under five seconds.  Does this show up in the POPLA appeal or their images?  If so, OK, but it could undermine the "no parking" argument and if it could be left out it would be better.

 

In paragraph 11 draw the conclusion at the end.  "Lack of planning permission is a criminal offence and makes it impossible for the defendant to have entered into a contract with the claimant".  

  • Like 1

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

Those changes look good FTMDave.  Wonder if they will bottle it and not submit anything  or send  last minute email?  might be better as DX says to use the wait a bit as LIP.

  • Like 1

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

Thanks all, will move the points around - I was moving the paragraphs around like pieces on a chess board at times today!

 

Yes @FTMDave the driver (myself) got out of the drivers side, and took something out / put something into the drivers side rear door I think / checked for something on the back seat - I can't remember what for the life of me what it was but did not leave the vehicle and pretty sure photographic evidence has open doors at all times so vehicle not left unattended and secure at any point!

 

In fact they are as follow - 16:21.55 stood leaning into back door, 16:22.01 stepping away from back door having shut it, 16:22.04 getting back in front door. 

 

It's not included in the POPLA appeal but the images I have for this come from my SARs request w/ POPLA.

 

POPLA denied my appeal on the following 

 

At the time of contravention the vehicle was not authorised to park on site as they were not given pre- authorisation by One Parking Solution prior to parking on site. A grace period is provided to allow a motorist to review the terms and conditions and decide whether or not to remain on site. As you made use of the facilities to check your GoogleMaps and wait for your wife to return from the coffee shop the grace period does not apply.

 

As mentioned earlier in the thread I'd taken a wrong turn, saw what I thought was a side road (which turned out to be an OPS killing field) next to a parade of shops my wife alighted 16:19.17 as she'd spotted a Starbucks, I turned around and stopped to check my directions and she returned to the vehicle and left the location 16:23.15

 

What does LiP stand for please @brassnecked / @dx100uk? Thanks!

 

Night folks, until tomorrow...

 

RATPCN

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well therefore how about

 

It is denied that the Defendant parked on site without pre-authorization at XXXXXXXXXXXX at the times mentioned in Exhibit 5. This was not a parking event. Photographic evidence Exhibit 6 confirms the Defendant was turning around and did not leave the vehicle for more than 5 seconds and simply to move an object from the front seat to the rear seat with the engine running, which clearly would not have been enough time to read the terms and conditions of a “parking contract” therefore no contract was instigated under BPA Code 30.1.7.

 

I'm probably going OTT but hey, in my job I always say it's better to prepare too much than too little, better that the surprises are good ones rather than bad ones!  It just crossed my mind that OPS could use this "leaving the vehicle" against you.  They're almost certainly too stupid to realise but hey ...

 

If no-one has any other alterations to suggest, get the WS off tomorrow.

 

LiP is "Litigant in Person", i.e. not a company or someone represented by a solicitor, and if you make tiny mistakes in the procedure the judge is supposed to allow you leeway.

Edited by FTMDave
Usual typo!
  • Thanks 1

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

i don't believe the grace period, or the use of it, is defined anywhere...nor what it can or can't be used for...it's just the fact that it exists.

else some other PPC would have already gone there and lots of claims would have been countered using those words, ...its only to read the t&c's.. never seen that stated before and it needs a mention in your WS.

 

ps i've not read your ws too busy...sorry do it later if i can.

 

  • 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

Thanks everyone, 

 

I have just submitted WS and EL to CC,

 

I have still received nothing from OPS, I have asked the CC email team to confirm if they have? 

 

As previously mentioned I will be emailing OPS my documents from a dummy email, but was advised to wait until I had received theirs? 

 

Do I hold fast? What if they don't provide them to me? 

 

Thanks as ever Caggers!!

 

RATPCN

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it makes much odds now.

 

The tactic of waiting for OPS' WS was so you could counter their lies in your own WS.  But as you've sent your WS to the court that's it, the WS is finished.  You might as well send yours to OPS now. 

 

If OPS mess you around by not providing their WS they are digging their own grave!

  • Haha 1

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

missing_ops_WSs_investigator....😀

  • Haha 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

I would add that in order to qualify for data from the DVLA they must comply with the Code of Conduct. 

 

BPA  Code of Conduct 

Glossary

A Parking Accredited Trade Association (ATA) A parking operator must be a member of an Accredited Trade Association (ATA) that is recognised by the DVLA to be able to request the Registered Keeper’s details if they have ‘reasonable cause’.

AOS The Approved Operator Scheme (AOS) is the BPA’s Accredited Trade Association for people and organisations that undertake management of parking on private land. Members of the AOS must adhere to the BPA AOS Code of Practice. 

 

 

It calls into question their ability to use the DVLA for information.

I know that you have sent your WS but should your case end up in Court [and it may well not ]

then include the above.

Edited by lookinforinfo
  • Like 1
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...