Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Agree it is not a modification that needs to be disclosed to Insurers as changing the seats has not changed the risk.  
    • Frpm David Frost and Robert Jenrick: 'Conservatives must show we respect the votes in 2016 and 2019 and not give the Opposition the chance to undo the benefits of leaving the EU'   Sweep away the Brexit gloom – or Labour will unravel a huge gain ARCHIVE.PH archived 22 Apr 2024 05:47:50 UTC  
    • Please please help we were miss sold full fibre by EE July 22  Install couldn’t go ahead no equipment sent and no. Survey it was hell  foind out no full fibre in road so we had to go back to cooper no choice we involved. Ceo and they put in a man from customer resolution s  he was vile he told me I had to go to engineers  something very odd about the ex resolution s in bt basically they took my drive up said they Would put ducting in ready for full fibre we have got £ 40 for a hours upon hours phones stress and more told to go to ombudsman  then bill was £35 we called twice told it was that price as they had treated us appalling two weeks later all sky package gets pulled we call again our bill goes to 165 the next two weeks was hell trying to get yo bottom why it’s off our package it was all on in the end I spent a day on the phone  341 mins was the call anyway I got to the bottom it was this resolution man coveting up the other issue another deadlock  to cover it all up  they hide data  ee did so couldn’t get the miss sell in writing I have now only from sept  Basically now we tried getting full fibre and they have found my drive had to be taken up again which has sunk .  The engineer has placed the wrong ducting again under my drive and need s to be taken to again apparently and the pipe sticks up middle of the drive near gate not behind look so odd it’s a big as a drain pipe open to water and it’s below touching the electrical cables to hot tub . I was sent a letter from the ex resolution to say I had stopped the work  I haven’t  it’s so sadistic she covering up for her mate in that team as the orginal install he didn’t check it had been done correctly  I took to Twitter and posted on open reach they ignored me then after 3 calls of two weeks they sent a engineer bt ignored me ceo emails blocked tag on Twitter unanswered then we get someone from twitter send a engineer he written report to say it’s dangerous since we have  had a  letter to say our problem can not be resolved  then a email to say sorry we are leaving and we can’t get into our account Bt will not talk to us ofcom tells us nothing they can do Citzens advice said go to the police  we can’t go back to virgin due so mass issue with them only option is sky  but point is they make out we have canceled we haven’t we have this mess on our drive dangeous work we are in hell  it’s like she covering up for this collegue it’s all very odd I am disabled and they like played mentaly with me open reach say bt resolved the issue no they have not  I recon they have terminated us making our we have  to hide it from mgt  Help it’s hell I don’t sleep we have 29 may we have tried  calling they just ignore me  at first they are so lovely as they say I am then they go to nnamager and say we can’t say anything to you end call  Scared police are rubbish I need help even typing is so painfull  Thankyou  anyone hello be so grateful     
    • There's a thread somewhere about someone sending the baillifs against Wizzair that is quite hilarious. I would love to see someone do the same to Ryanair. Question is, should you be the one to take that role. You are entitled to the £220, if your flight was from the UK. If it was TO the UK I suppose it is more of a grey area... though the airlines I know have been using £220 as standard. Not that surprising for Ryanair, the worst cheapskates in the universe, to go for the lower amount, and if you forward this to the CEO he will probably have a jolly good laugh and give his accountants a verbal bonus. After all he's the one who said and I paraphrase "F*** our customers, they'll fly with us again anyway". While we would all love to see Ryanair get wooped in court again, I have to join my fellow posters in thinking it's not worth the hassle for (hypothetically) £7 and not sure it will expedite the payment either. It's already an achievement that you got them to accept to pay.
    • The US competition watchdog has taken legal action to stop Tapestry's $8.5bn takeover of rival Capri.View the full article
  • 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

Speeding fine with no site details available - Opened mail too late to submit nomination


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1203 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

Hello,

 

I have received a speeding fine from Lincolnshire police for doing 35mph in a 30mph zone, back in late September.

 

This is a place where police vans often stakeout drivers as it's located just on the outskirts of town where the speed limit changes abruptly from 60, to 40, then 30 within 100 yards. (absolute jerks...) Even knowing this didn't help me not get caught 😩

 

As soon as I opened the letter I went online to check the details, and they are indeed very blurry pictures of me. However the site details are unavailable. (Presumably as this was taken from a van, rather than a fixed camera).

The pictures themselves feature no landmarks whatsoever, there are some road markings which I personally havn't been able to pin on google maps, and are only visible in the background.

 

I only opened the police letter today, when the original was sent on the 30th September. The reason for this is the letter had a "To the Company Secretary" in the header so I had dismissed it as commercial mail.... I also received a reminder dated Nov 9th which I opened at the same time.

 

The "nomination form" is unavailable to complete online as the date has expired. I'm getting worried that I'm going to get a court summons or a £100 fine now instead of the awareness course. (I didn't commit other offences within the last 5 years).

 

So my questions are as follows:

  • Is the lack of site details and clear landmarks in the pictures any grounds for appeal? I'm going to be honest and say that this was very most probably in the 30mph zone, but it would be nice to be able to verify, which I cannot do atm.
  • Regardless of the above, what is my best course of action now that I've fudged up the time limit to fill the form details in time. Should I send an email to the Lincs police traffic process team, mail the form back, do nothing and await further letters?

 

Thank you in advance for any help. 

 

 

Unrelated P.S. Exactly a year ago on the 24th of December, I received a parking fine. My thoughts always with Lincs police every Xmas :)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

street lamps should give it away.

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

First of all, you can't have received a "speeding fine" yet unless you have already replied to them previously naming yourself as the driver, and they are now making a conditional offer of a fixed penalty.  But I don't think that is what you mean. 

 

I think you have actually received a NIP/s172 request requiring you to identify the driver of a particular vehicle at a particular location on a particular date and time.  Failure to respond within, I think, 28 days is a separate more serious offence than speeding - it's failing to identify the driver and carries six points, a heavy fine and increased insurance premiums for years.

 

But are you the registered keeper (RK) of the vehicle?  If the request was addressed to somebody like "The company secretary... " I assume you are not the RK and that a company is.  Do you happen to be the "company secretary" or similar of the RK?  (Otherwise why is a notice sent to "The Company Secretary" being delivered to your address?  Have you received another in your own name?)

 

The NIP/s172 request can only be replied to by the "person" to whom it was addressed.  If it was addressed to "The Company Secretary of ..." and you are not the company secretary of..., then it needs to be passed on to that person to be completed and returned.

 

If you are "The Company Secretary" of the RK (or are the person who runs or owns the company yourself,) or if you have a request in your own name, I think I would return the form ASAP with an accompanying letter containing a grovelling apology for your late response and hoping that the offer of a course or fixed penalty is still available.  I'd probably try emailing and 'phoning them as well to explain that it's in the post and apologising again.  (Of course, you can only name yourself if you were the driver).

 

The issue about the photos is almost certainly irrelevant.  So long as you can identify the driver (or know who it was) they don't even need to give you any photos at this stage so long as the NIP/s172 request makes clear the location, date and time.  At this stage they are only asking who the driver was - they are not yet asking you to admit to speeding so the question as to what the limit was is irrelevant.

 

If you are unlucky enough to end up getting charged with BOTH speeding and failure to identify the driver, come back for more advice.

 

Just to add - I am no expert in this field but the above is what I would do in your position others may have better advice for you.  There are other posters here - Man in the Middle is one - who are more expert than me with speeding offences.  See what they advise.

 

Also, your situation might be a little more complicated than ususal because you have received a NIP/s172 addressed to the company secretary...  Those complications can't be clarified until you explain what your relationship to the company is and who the company secretary is.  (eg depending who the RK is, the NIP/s172 may be out of time)

 

 

Edited by Manxman in exile
clarification
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey I'm just the RK, it's not a company car. 

 

 

The "job title" was the reason I identified the mail as spam and put it to the side.

 

Grovelling apology and posting the form sounds good for now. I'll come back if I get charged with something more serious.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry - but if you are the registered keeper, why was it addressed to "The Company Secretary ..." and not to "Mr Kyosanto"? 

 

If it was addressed to "The Company Secretary ..." and you are not the company secretary, then, strictly speaking, you can't reply to it because it was not addressed to you.  (You will see somewhere in the notes on the request you have that it says only the addressee can respond).

 

So who was it actually addressed to?  And have you actually checked the vehicle's V5C to make sure that you are correctly named as the RK and that your address is correct?  (And I mean physically checked - not just assumed)

 

This might be important for you because if a company is the RK, and the company secretary has simply passed the request on to you to reply to, they can't do that because they have to reply to it naming you.  And if it is addressed to the company secretary - not you - then it is the company that commits the offence of failing to identify the driver - not you..  Do you see what I mean?

 

So why would it have been addressed to "The Company Secretary" and not to you?  What is your relationship (if any) to both the company and the company secretary?

 

(NB - this is not about whether it's a company car - it's about who is the RK and who the request was addressed to)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's exactly how it was:

Quote

 

The Company Secretary (if a LTD Company)

Mr XXX Kyosanto

Address
Town

Postcode

 

 

I guess the (if a LTD Company) covers their back... Personally i just saw that and shrugged it off like I would have shrugged off a

 

His Excellency The Pope (if a member of the Clergy)

Mr XXX Kyosanto

 

I guess they are using a template that "works" for both individual and companies. What an absolutely garbage idea, hope it doesn't end up costing me dearly...

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As you say... a garbage idea!

 

Well, if nobody else has any further advice over the Xmas days off, I guess you send it back with the grovelling apology and 'phone and email them too.

 

If you do finally end up getting charged with failure to identify the driver you can usually do a plea bargain to plead guilty to speeding if they drop the failure to identify charge.  Here you could also perhaps argue that you were confused initially by the request as you didn't think it was addressed to you personally.

 

Anyway, come back here if they charge you with anything.  If you are still in time to be offered a course or a fixed penalty I think I'd take it

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm always surprised by the number of people who don't open their post. I love post. It is better though if you don't dismiss it as irrelevant until you have read it.

 

How big is your pile of post, or is it a static size and you just open the oldest first and put new irrelevant post at the bottom to open in three months time.

 

H

  • Like 1

44 years at the pointy end of the motor trade. :eek:

GARUDALINUX.ORG

Garuda Linux comes with a variety of desktop environments like KDE, GNOME, Cinnamon, XFCE, LXQt-kwin, Wayfire, Qtile, i3wm and Sway to choose from.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Manxman has got it right and I fear you may be in a bit of a pickle.

 

If the alleged offence was in late September you should have replied providing the driver's details by late October (you are given 28 days to respond).  By now there is every likelihood that proceedings have begun against you for "failing to provide the driver's details." So you need to concentrate on that rather than the speeding matter for the moment.

 

You seem to know almost precisely where this took place. How do you know that? I would imagine it is from the "Notice of Intended Prosecution" and the accompanying "Section 172" request for driver's details. If both those documents show the time and place where the offence is said to have occurred then that is the only obligation the police have. You are not entitled to any photographs at all and any you have received have been provided out of courtesy. Consequentially any deficiencies you may find with them do not help you.

 

Your suggestion to respond asap is your only realistic option at this stage but if court action has begun they are very unlikely to withdraw it. Come back and let us know what response you get.

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Thankfully they've accepted my admission without an argument, and have sent me an offer for the edutainment course, which I need to complete within 4 months of the infraction. Given that's not much time and given your above answers contesting the imprecise location doesn't seem like an option, I will just sign up immediately without trying to contest this further.

 

Also this time they addressed me normally 🤡

 

To reply to the slightly patronizing comment above about "ppl nowadays not opening post", please note that unlike you I do not love post. It is unreliable and murders trees. I deal with my bills electronically. Most of the post I get are unsolicited ads. However I will be more careful in the future with posts that aren't immediately identifiable as spam...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...