Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi Bankfodder thank you for your interest and your comments.   There are issues with ground rents AND service charges. In my case, non residential, not eligeable for Tier 1 tribunal so there is no possibility of holding the leaseholder to account for unreasonable service charges because of the loophole below. Even if it is residential see Richard Barclay and others quoted in the article above. You win the case about unreasonable costs yet have to pay the leaseholders court fees for loosing their case! Criminal!!!   From the article I quoted above.  'The Times reported that last year leasehold owner Richard Barclay successfully recovered £1,200 of a £10,100 service charge from the management company in respect of his central London Flat. But the victory soon turned sour when Barclay was hit with a bill for £61,300 in legal fees by Quadrant Property Management who takes care of the building.   The loophole is contained in the majority of leases which typically allow freeholders to recoup their legal costs from leaseholders, even if the freeholder loses the case. There is no parallel right for leaseholders to claim costs back.    
    • The online retailer wants to buy the brands, not their shops, suggesting any deal would cost jobs. View the full article
    • I have gone through nearly the whole sar return, it is very large. I am confident to say there is no mention of a default notice within it. 
    • Change Zoom to Online as Zoom is only one platform, and they might use another, it has become the accepted terminology, but best not to refer to a specific platform.  Otherwise looks good The rteal devil of Simon's claim is that he is trying to imply a contract that depends on a Prohibition for Consideration, And its one sided as the person he is binding has no benefit from the contract, apart from paying £100 for the privilege of stopping however briefly.  a nanosecond, a minute 30 minutes kerching that'll be £100 or else.  Simon has also invoiced cars stopped at a Zebra crossing with people crossing at an airport.
    • When she rang BT did she just "mention" about cancelling her Bb contract or did she actually tell them to cancel it?   I've just renegotiated my Bb contract with BT (I know they're useless but I can't be bothered doing too much work to look at any other provider) and I've managed to save money plus they are meant to record 'phone calls and I know (because I spoke to several different call handlers over two weeks) thatthey take very accurate notes of their conversations with customers.   She needs to find out if she actually did cancel the contract.  (I'm sure others will suggest doing a SAR).   Also what sort of contract did she have with BT?  Presumably it included Bb, mobile phone and Sky?  If the contract had just renewed, BT should have emailed her confirming contract details including duration, how to cancel and cancelation fees.  They've just done this for me for the contract I renegotiated two days ago.   EDIT:  It's not clear, but are you saying she's been charged £800 cancelation for Bb or are you saying shae hasn't paid them £800 she owes on her phone?   She ought to be able to look at her BT account online to see what she owes and how her bills are made up.  
  • Our picks

    • 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
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Does this notice comply with the POFA?


Recommended Posts

we cant tell you sadly

as you removed just about everything that plays a part in pofa.

 

please complete the relevant section of this sticky.

Have you received a Parking Ticket? - Private Land Parking Enforcement - Consumer Action Group

 

and post up to one multipage PDF  bothsides of the PCN/NTK

 

the only things you need to redacted are

your pers details,

barcodes,

reg numbers

ref numbers

 

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

all i have redacted are the personal details, photos of the car, parking charge details and then entrance and exit time

i have left the entire wording, however i have uploaded the back of pcn and front of it again

So now the whole document is up

please can someone tell if this complies with POFa or not

frontofpcn.pdf backofpcn.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

questionnaire please.

we still done know where this happened.

 

there is not such thing as a limit of 0 mins or even 30mins free parking time

the council will never have stipulated such a short parking period when granting planning permission.

 

that makes the issue of POFA immaterial even if there was an issue , which appears not.

but you most certainly do not appeal anyway even if there were one.

 

 

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

Ok let me put it another way

 

I haven't asked about the parking event or anything that happened during the event

 

What I am simply asking here is this particular notice POFA Compliant or not ,

does it meet the conditions for keeper liability or not?

 

( i should i wasnt the driver  -hence why i am asking about the wording)

Link to post
Share on other sites

to what end is this useful if it's not pofa compliant?

 

53 minutes ago, dx100uk said:

that makes the issue of POFA immaterial even if there was an issue , which appears not.

 

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
6 minutes ago, dx100uk said:

to what end is this useful if it's not pofa compliant?

 

 

simple

when Horizon are challenged  if its not POFA and I appeal as the keeper challenging non compliance they will withdraw

So can one of the knowledgeable people let me know if its POFA or NON POFA, much appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, horizonparking1 said:

simple

when Horizon are challenged  if its not POFA and I appeal as the keeper challenging non compliance they will withdraw

 

You're joking, aren't you?

 

Horizon and similar companies never, ever accept appeals - ever.

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
5 minutes ago, FTMDave said:

 

You're joking, aren't you?

 

Horizon and similar companies never, ever accept appeals - ever.

Sorry that simply isnt true, horizon have always cancelled their non pofa notices when ive appealed them in the past, but ive noticed a change in wording so wanted to check

Link to post
Share on other sites

save it for if or when they issue a letter of claim.

do fire any useful arrows earlier than is necessary if at all.

 

never appeal fullstop!

 

now start doing your homework on planning permission

 

i believe though you still refuse to tell us

this is a very famous carpark in southend?

 

 

 

 

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, dx100uk said:

that makes the issue of POFA immaterial even if there was an issue , which appears not.

 

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 as you claim, you have had success with these cowboys cancelling parking charges before when challenged on POFA, just do as you have done before with this one and see if they cancel it.

Do you have a letter from them you could share with the group, where they cancelled a previous charge, as it would be interesting to see. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

5th time...it appears to me it does.

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, you've pushed me to read all of the POFA sections on private parking, something I should have done before, and I agree with dx.

 

However, as miley_b ob says, examples of Horizon accepting appeals would be very useful to the forum, our experience is that the PPCs always refuse appeals.

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

well it looks like people are wrong here and i am confused as why i took so long to get a simple answer (and just beating around the bush) and as per PP they normally cancel on first appeal when challange.....

 

From PP forum

 

9 (2) (a) No period of parking. Moving in front of a camera, by definition, is not parking.

9 (2) (e) Invitation to keeper is not there in the required format

9 (2) (f) Notice of keeper liability is incorrect.

Here's POFA: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9...edule/4/enacted

Dear Sirs,

I have just received your Notice to Keeper No. xxxxx for vehicle VRM xxxx

You have failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, failing to give notice of keeper liability as prescribed by section 9 (2) (f) of the Act. You cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to me, the keeper.

There is no legal requirement to name the driver at the time and I will not be doing so.

I do not expect to hear from you again, or your debt collectors, except to confirm that no further action will be taken on this matter and my personal details have been removed from your records.

Yours etc




First class post with free certificate of posting from a post office.

The other POFA fails will go into the POFA appeal if required.

Link to post
Share on other sites

eh?

if 9 (2) (a) is wrong then so are all ANPR captures.

 

e and f are on the PCN

 

 

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 posted an example of a defence, and a not very good one.

 

Have you got an example of Horizon accepting an appeal?

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 would agree that the PCN fails. It is supposed to be a Notice to Keeper advising them that the driver breached the T&Cs and that if the driver does not pay  after 28 days then the keeper becomes liable for the alleged debt providing guidelines of PoFA have been adhered.

 

First the PCN has to state that they do not know the name of the driver and a current address for the service and invite the keeper to pay the charge or if they were not the driver to provide the driver details and pass on the PCN to the driver

 

So to my way of thinking, until the 28 days have elapsed the liability to pay lies with the driver.

Yet the PCN is asking before the 28 days for the name of the driver [though not invited] so that the liability can be transferred to the driver!

 

Then it doesn't make clear that any unpaid amount is due by the keeper. It is worded badly and it is misleading.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the timescales are rigid for POFA, if there is an NTK before expiry of that notice might be a GDPR issue if they did get Keeper details and driver  actually did pay before 28 days up, think Lookedinforinfo has good point

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

Well, another day passes, and despite requests in posts 16 & 20 & 23 the OP hasn't posted a single example of Horizon having accepted an appeal.

 

Now, I wonder why that should be 😆

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...