Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm afraid that I think that as you've assembled the chair and you are unable to return it into its saleable condition, then you probably have a problem. I don't think you could take advantage of the distance selling rules in those circumstances and that means that the seller would be entitled to apply conditions to the return of the item. If that's the case then you only fall back is that the item was defective if you find that there is something wrong with it which is preventing its disassembly. On the other hand, this itself raises an interesting issue. Does a chair become of unsatisfactory quality because you can't take it apart and put it in a box? From the sounds of it, the sellers terms and conditions that there is a restocking fee for the return of an online sale even if it is within the 14 day period, seems to me to be quite unenforceable but on the basis of what you say, that issue doesn't arise here because you are unable to put the chair back into its saleable condition and it's not clear that the chair is defective - 
    • Hi everyone, I'm in need of some urgent advice please. Apologies for the long post - I felt it was better to provide all the information clearly at the outset.   I purchased an office stool (that cost £104.39) online, which was delivered on 18th May. After assembling the stool, I found it wasn't suitable for me, so contacted the seller on 27th May to initiate a return.    The seller told me that there would be a "£24.95 handling charge" for returning the item. He quoted the terms and conditions from their website to back this up (please see below), although this is confusing because 35% of £104.39 does not equal £24.95: "Please note that furniture items are subject to a 35% restocking fee. Furniture returns will only be accepted if the item is unused and still in the original packaging. All furniture returns must be made within 14 days of delivery."   I told the seller that, under the Consumer Contract Regulations, the trader cannot charge any fees in the event of cancellation. The response was: "If you not happy to pay for the collection charge for us to arrange this with a courier to uplift then you can send this back to our office directly arranging your own courier, please note we would not cover the cost if this is the case."    I agreed to this, because from my reading of the CCR I thought that the customer was responsible for return delivery:  (5) The consumer must bear the direct cost of returning goods under paragraph (2), unless— (a)the trader has agreed to bear those costs, or (b)the trader failed to provide the consumer with the information about the consumer bearing those costs, required by paragraph (m) of Schedule 2, in accordance with Part 2. Also, from getting quotations online I thought I could arrange delivery, for what was at the time a smallish box, for a much cheaper price (£7-8).   However, when I tried to disassemble the stool for return, it would not come apart. I contacted the manufacturer for further guidance, but the only how-to video they had available was not applicable to the model, and the manufacturer representative was unable to provide further instructions.   I have now been sent a 'built box' to return the stool without the need to disassembly. The issue is that the size of the box means that shipping charges are now £30 minimum i.e. more than the 'handling charge' the seller quoted.    Am I obliged to pay this return fee, or should this actually be something the seller should pay for? 🤔 I feel like I may have two potential arguments against it: Return delivery would not be nearly so expensive if the stool had come apart as the manufacturer said it should.  The Consumer Contract Regs state that a consumer is not responsible for return shipping if the trader has not provided information about the right to cancel and about return shipping on a durable medium.    What even counts as a durable medium? The dispatch note that came with the stool had no such information, while the order confirmation email simply had a link to their terms and conditions (which includes the statement about the restocking fee quoted above).   Does this clause mean the seller is still obliged to pay return shipping? Any advice would be greatly appreciated! I'm starting to stress a little about this because the 28-day cancellation-and-return period will be in two working days (although I realise that may be extended if it can be considered that the seller did not provide the required cancellation information).    Thank you in advance!  
    • so what you mean is that "each" parcel contained a single dinner plate. Thank you that clarifies things. As you been advised by my site team colleague, please make sure that you read around a substantial number of the Hermes stories on the sub- forum. You will get to understand the principles and also the similarities and approach from Hermes. Of course Hermes is being abusive of the system because they exploit a taxpayer funded under resourced justice system simply to put their customers into a kind of triage where only the most persistent finally get through to the end which is almost always – mediation – and then will manage to get their money or most of their money. Hermes are abusive of this system and of course they are actually going to spend more money than the value of your damaged items trying to smash you down. Because their attempts to crush you are effectively subsidised by the taxpayer, they don't really care. Make sure you understand what they will say about the prohibited items list because your plates are made of china or porcelain and will be prohibited items, according to Hermes. On the other hand, they were correctly declared and they were accepted for delivery. The values were correctly declared – and once again after you have completed your reading, you will understand the significance of this. Hermes will also try to say that you didn't have a contract with them and you should sue packlink – who conveniently – are based in Spain outside the jurisdiction. They were say that you are attacking the wrong people. Once again, when you have completed your reading you will understand the standard reply to this. Once again you will discover that this is Hermes being abusive of the system and misleading their customers as to what their rights are. Make a formal complaint to Hermes. Tell them that they are responsible. Don't give them a deadline, but wait a reasonable time – 10 to 14 days – after which you will send them a letter of claim if they haven't put their hands up by then or if you have had no response. By that time, you will have done enough reading to understand the way it goes but we will advise you and support you all the way.   Come back here when you have been knocked back by Hermes and we will take you through the next step  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

VCS Spycar PCN PAPLOC - now claimform - no stopping - East Midlands Airport


Recommended Posts

Send it to Elms.

 

Send by normal 2nd class post - but get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.

  • 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
  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

chargeback is 120days (total 540 days) - debit cards this is a section 75 under the CCA - credit card there is no limit other than 6yrs limitation.   dx  

If you have a read through some other VCS or Excel (both companies are run by the same shyster) airport threads you'll soon get the idea.   Airports have their own bye-laws which a private c

I see that you do go round looking at other threads [well done] so I suspect you are probably aware of the Airports Act 1986-an Act that covers most airports in the UK.    Under section 63 [

  • 2 weeks later...
1 hour ago, Alaska101 said:

They did say they were not obliged as CPR31 only deals with larger claims.

no, i expect it says CPR doesn't apply to a fast track claim. however as this claim has not even been allocated by the court yet , how can they 'guess' it IS a high value claim and will be fast track, .. it wont anyway its too small.. so CPR does apply ..usual twaddle designed to confuse.

 

so scan up everything they have sent after redacting as JPG's to ONE multipage PDF please

read upload carefully

 

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

Please ignore my previous post. Elms have only provided response to point 03 (see below) of CPR31 request. I have attached all the docs they sent me (took me hours to convert 267mb pdf to 4.2mb lol). 

They have neither provided any contract nor proof of planning permission etc. See Attached.

Any furtrher guidance would be much appreciated. Thank you

 

 

1. The contract between Vehicle Control Services Limited and the landowner that assigns the right to enter into contracts with the public and make claims in their own name. 

2. Proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007.

3. Copies of the notice to driver, notice to keeper and any other correspondence from Vehicle Control Services Limited & Elms Legal Limited to the defendant that they intend to rely upon in court.

4. Elms Response with Docs_Redac.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/03/2021 at 13:37, dx100uk said:

no, i expect it says CPR doesn't apply to a fast track claim. however as this claim has not even been allocated by the court yet , how can they 'guess' it IS a high value claim and will be fast track, .. it wont anyway its too small.. so CPR does apply ..usual twaddle designed to confuse.

 

so scan up everything they have sent after redacting as JPG's to ONE multipage PDF please

read upload carefully

 

dx

 

 

below is the exact wording of their response.

 

I am writing to you with regards to t he above reference number.

 

Upon review of your letter dated 19/03/ 2021making a request under CPR 31.14, I would like to refer you to CPR 31 .1(2) where it states: "This Part applies to all claims except a claim on the small claims track”

 

As this matter will be part of the Small Claims Track as the amount claimed is less than £10,000.00, CPR 31 does not apply to this claim; however, please find enclosed an evidence pack for your perusal.

 

Please be advised that as you have filed an acknowledgement of service, you now have until 15/04/ 2021 to file and serve a defence or a County Court Judgment may be entered against you. Please be further advised that if this matter proceeds to a Small Claims hearing, we will be filing and serving a full witness statement setting out all of the evidence that we wish to rely upon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have looked around and compiled below points for my defence so far. 

As Elms have not provided any contract with EMA or any planning permission so I'm not too sure if i can assert whether claimant had any contract in place with the landowner at the time of alleged contravention.

Please have a look and advise further. 

 

 

1.  The Defendant is the recorded OR registered keeper of *******

2.  The land is covered by its own byelaws so not "relevant land" under the POFA and that the byelaws create a supremacy of contract over VCS signage so no liability created.
3. The signage is prohibitive in nature and not a genuine offer of a contract for consideration. In any case it is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant. 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've edited your post as the registration number was showing.

 

Forum regular dx always emphasises not to play your cards too early against the other side.  The reason was shown recently where a Cagger filed a long defence full of excellent legal reasons why he/she was in the right - which gave the PPC's solicitors months to think up lies to counter those points.

 

You are of course right about bye-laws and prohibition but I'm thinking maybe it's best not to tell Simon you know this information.  If you simply file now that you didn't enter a contract with VCS then later in the WS that can be fleshed out to state WHY you didn't' enter a contract - bye-laws and prohibition.

  • 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

absolutely agree with you Dave. I have edited the defence for now. what you reckon?

 

1.     The Defendant is the recorded OR registered keeper of ........

2.     The signage is prohibitive in nature and not a genuine offer of a contract for consideration. In any case it is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant. 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

stop putting up your registration number!

 

edited out for the 2nd time.

 

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
1 hour ago, Alaska101 said:

As this matter will be part of the Small Claims Track as the amount claimed is less than £10,000.00, CPR 31 does not apply to this claim

as i said they can't guess until it is actually allocated to track by a court.

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 split point 2 so you both keep prohibition but have a catch-all point about anything that stopped a contract being formed.  So

 

1.  The Defendant is the recorded OR registered keeper of *****

2.  The signage is prohibitive in nature and not a genuine offer of a contract for consideration. 

3.  In any case it is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant. 

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

 

You have some time yet.  See if anyone else comments, and if not file it after the Easter weekend.

 

 

 

  • 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
21 hours ago, dx100uk said:

stop putting up your registration number!

 

edited out for the 2nd time.

 

dx

 

oooops so sorry 🤭

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, FTMDave said:

I would split point 2 so you both keep prohibition but have a catch-all point about anything that stopped a contract being formed.  So

 

1.  The Defendant is the recorded OR registered keeper of *****

2.  The signage is prohibitive in nature and not a genuine offer of a contract for consideration. 

3.  In any case it is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant. 

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

 

You have some time yet.  See if anyone else comments, and if not file it after the Easter weekend.

 

 

 

Top Man! will do 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once they do send their contract and witness statement please post it up so that we can point out their weaknesses which strengthen your case.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

So I have received a "Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track" from Northampton County court. I have attached a redacted copy. It puts a lot of emphasis on mediation. I believe we are not going to mediate? any help would be appreciated. Thank You

5. Notice of Proposed Allocation to Small Claims Track_Redacted.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

thanks @Andyorch for this link about how to proceed on "small court claims allocation"  here 

 

But I have a couple of Questions if anyone can answer please:

1. Am I right to think that Form EX730 (which i have received from County court) is just for information and I do not have to send it back with N180?

2. NO to Mediation (A1) since its a parking claim?

3. YES to C1/Small claims Track I believe (not a question).

4. NO to Expert Evidence?

5. I am away from UK for work between 02-May-21 and 09-Jun-21, should I mention these dates in D4/Hearing? and If I do would this have any negative impact on my case?

6. I also have received another Form. There's no name or No it. But its attached to EX730 (before the first page of EX730) and requires some info. Please check my uploaded file in previous Post.

 

Thank You

Edited by Alaska101
Spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

1. Am I right to think that Form EX730 (which i have received from County court) is just for information and I do not have to send it back with N180? Correct

 

2. NO to Mediation (A1) since its a parking claim? Correct

 

3. YES to C1/Small claims Track I believe (not a question). Correct

 

4. NO to Expert Evidence? Correct

 

5. I am away from UK for work between 02-May-21 and 09-Jun-21, should I mention these dates in D4/Hearing? and If I do would this have any negative impact on my case? Yes and no

 

6. I also have received another Form. There's no name or No it. But its attached to EX730 (before the first page of EX730) and requires some info. Your not doing mediation so disregard.

 


Andy

  • 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 The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

So VCS has sent me a letter (Attached) saying Elms Legal are no longer representing them. They have requested I settle for £175 within 14 days or they would continue with the claim. 

My N180 response to Elms went out on 13th (a day before the attached letter was dated/typed) so I guess either I can ignore VCS request or be a little generous and send them a copy of N180 too as I am not negotiating?

7. Elms Service Termination - VCS_Redacted.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is Simple Simon's latest wheeze, he did exactly the same with another Cagger a few days ago.  We advised the other motorist to ignore it.  However, just to be sure that VCS have no excuses regarding not receiving the documentation, I would be tempted to send them a short letter

 

Dear Simple Simon,

 

Re: Claimform xxxxx, PCN xxxxx

 

enclosed is a copy of my N180 response to your former solicitors Elms Legal.

 

Yours,

 

However, there's no rush, hang on and see what the other regulars think during the day. 

 

BTW, hang on to this letter.  In their WS VCS will lie and try to justify the £60 Unicorn Food Tax they have made up by saying they do not normally deal with legal matters - yet here you have a letter from their Litigation Department!  The e-mail address  is [email protected]!  That said, given the quality & depth of legal knowledge that Jake has shown in the past he's probably the tea boy, but hey, hoisted by your own ...

  • 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

If no-one has other ideas, send it off on Saturday with a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.

 

Address it to Simon Renshaw-Smith, Vehicle Control Services, P1 Europa Link, Sheffield Business Park ...

  • 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

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...