Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Unless you have already sent it – which I don't think it's clear – how about this as an alternative:    
    • You mention covid holiday in your title.. did you have one and missed or deferred payments?   tell us the story please though a mortgage company rarely refuses for one default.there must be another reason   DX
    • Vodafone have a reputation for doing this although it hasn't happened for a while. There an appalling company and I think they are the most complained about company and have been find quite a lot of money in the past by the so-called regulator. Frankly I thought that they had started to sort themselves out. Sent them an SAR. They may try to impose some kind of obstacle such as a special former something or other to fill in. This is unlawful as long as they have no reason to be dissatisfied with your identity details. Separately – because they are capable of understanding to issues in the same letter – separately send them a letter of complaint and ask them what's going on. You might also want to try and deal with this on the telephone – but if you do then read our customer services guide first and implement the advice there because anything that is said on the telephone could be of use. However, don't expect this to go away quickly. They are incompetent and once they make a mistake they tend to dig themselves in rather than dig themselves out. Sent they SAR – and separately the letter of complaint.
    • Nobody here can say for sure whether you should challenge this penalty or just pay it because nobody knows if a court would consider your reason(s) for not wearing a mask a reasonable excuse or not.   But... my view would be that if you can get a letter from your doctor saying that because of your medical conditions (acne and anxiety) that wearing a mask causes you such distress (and/or discomfort and/or pain) that you have a medically based reasonable excuse for not wearing a mask, then that should do it for you - in my view.   You can then use that letter to challenge the police as to the validity of the fixed penalty, and if they don't back down you can let it go to court - if you want to do that.  I would expect the court to accept your doctor's letter at face value and quash the penalty - but nothing is certain!   Have you given your doctor/your practice notice of what you want and why you need it?  Have you explained that you have already received a fixed penalty for not wearing a mask, that you want to challenge it and that you need a letter explaining your reasonable excuse for not wearing a mask so that this does not happen again?  At my GP surgery I could either have phoned them up to explain all this in advance, or emailed them explaining it.  It might not be a good idea just to turn up for an appointment without letting the GP know in advance why you are there.   If your GP won't give you a "reasonable excuse" letter - and they may refuse to do so - then you need to think again.   First thing to consider if they don't is that you need to decide if you really have a reasonable excuse or not.  If you still think you do, then you need to decide if you want to challenge the penalty further or if you just want to pay it.  But if you do that, what happens next time* you are caught without a mask?  If you don't think you have a reasonable excuse, then you'd better start wearing a mask.   *If you can't get a GP's letter I have a few other thoughts but will have to post those later - I'm just going out.
    • It will be very helpful if you could space your posts a bit more. Well space makes it much easier for people to engage with – especially when they are looking at it on a small screen. I'm not sure how long ago was that curries could ever have been considered an excellent retailer. They've always been curmudgeonly about their customer support. All I can say is that there were times when they were maybe a better retailer because at the moment things are very bad with them. If you used have an account here then maybe we can merge them if you still have access to the old email address that you used. We weren't around in the eighties. We started in 2006. I don't see why you think that your previous history with curries should influence their standard of customer-dealing with you. Big Fail. Also, yes – failure to use a credit card – Big Fail.   I've had a look at your letter of claim. I can't believe that this is the standard of stuff provided by Which magazine. It really is verbose and goes into all sorts of irrelevant details – and in case you haven't understood it yet, Currys don't care about the problems they have caused you, whether or not their behaviour is unacceptable, your level of exasperation – you attempt to be reasonable to them by proposing some kind of negotiation (what on earth is there to negotiate here? You paid 100% of the money and you want 100% of what you paid for. Is there a problem with that?) Have you sent this letter of claim yet? You better let us see your proposed particulars of claim before you click them off. I have no idea why you went to Which – when you know that we exist and you've been here before.     Also, I have just noticed that you have given them 28 days to respond. Bless!
  • 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

Bank Park ANPR PCN Claimform - Blue Car Park 2 Merry Hill Brierley DY5 1QX


Recommended Posts

Thankyou Dx100

 

Phew what a relief I dont have to do the CPR stuff. thankyou

 

I am employed but as a trust bank. meaning i work in the hospital, but only go when they need me and fill in a timesheet. Once timesheet is filled, I get paid PAYE as an employee

 

 

Re Skype

 

 

I refer to post by Ericbrother  post #133 dated August 6/20202 on link 

 

https://  www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/410445-ukcpmgladstones-windscreen-pcn-claimform-vista-centre-salisbury-rd-hounslow-tw4-6jq-claim-dismissed/page/6/#comments

 

 

Post #133 ericsbrother august 6,2020

Ok new position is that many cases are heard with one side actually attending and the other by video link or skype. you want to be the one turning up so if you dotn ahve skype or the like let the court know soon so they pencil you in for a real chair.

 

So according to EB, is that still correct or have things change. of course I will call Gloucetser court to ask but wondered if you knew more

 

 

Finally, as raised in my post #73, can I use Appenidx instead of Exhibit , to avoid confusion?

 

Thankyou

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Thanks FTM   Did a search on dudley council site for the postcode of the shopping centre. Didnt find anything but Im not really sure if i did everything correctly.    I called the

Firstly, even if they get away with this, it doesn't mean you won't win.  The solicitor can eloquently waffle on as long as they like that the signage isn't carp.  I'm afraid the signage is carp and t

17 minutes ago, Andy711351 said:

Finally, as raised in my post #73, can I use Appenidx instead of Exhibit , to avoid confusion?

 

Sorry, missed that question.  Yes, use whatever term you want, it just has to be clear to the judge.

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

Just called Gloucester court

 

Spoke to one of the admin

 

she said you can email us, explaining why you prefer to attend in person and the Judge will consider that

 

the hearing is on the 8th of April

 

My reason would be that my internet is not that reliable, and its true, I am relying on hotspot provided by my phone rather than a dedicated separate broadband

 

also, Im better at presenting my case in person face to face

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry to have come to your thread rather late. But a couple of observations. The Defence statement that you sent them way back was in fact in everything but name a WS. And a pretty comprehensive one. But of course not having seen their WS first some things have changed. 

 

One of the things that was picked out on the first submission and rejected by DCBL was their signage being to small. But this is confirmed by them in their bundle by sneakily increasing the font size in their photos so that it appears much larger than on their signs. If the signs were the correct size why would they enhance them?  Signage is a very important part of the contract and if the signage is not clear then the contract fails.

 

Also on none of their signs, apart from the one by the payment meter does it stipulate that not paying or not paying sufficient leads to a charge at all. As you appear to have moved from car park to car park with different rules then you can stipulate which ones you want to apply to you. I have ust realised that as you parked in several

different places within the car park then Schedule 4 section 9 [3] applies

(3)The notice must relate only to a single period of parking specified under sub-paragraph (2)(a) (but this does not prevent the giving of separate notices which each specify different parts of a single period of parking).

what they should have done is broken your parking times into the sections wherin you stayed. As they have not done so they cannot state with any accuracy where your parking complied with their rules and where it didn't. They can't even say if you were parked all the time within their stipualted rules.

 

In other words if their ANPR cannot pick out movement of cars within all their car parks, then the ANPR is not fit for its purpose.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou Lookiforino

 

Its ok lol I dont expect everyone to focus on my case but thanks so much for the feedback

 

The initial defence was prepared by Private parking appeals for a fee of £20, but after that there was no trace of them.

 

The initial Defence I think maybe was a bit generic , rather than specific.

 

I have now summitted the final draft as today was the due date

 

 

The attached draft has been submitted . i have redacted it.

 

 

To avoid wasting anyone's time, as it is submitted I cant make any changes to it now.

 

final paginated WS redacted and submitted to court.docxr Thankyou to ALL of those who contributed. I am truly indebted to all of you, whether I win lor lose. Main thing is you all tried your best

 

 

BIG THANKYOU

 

Stay SAfe

 

xxxx

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Question Please

 

1. The Caimants solicitors emailed me their Bundle on Friday 15/1/2021 at 2 pm. The deadline for my filing to court and serving them is today. Thats naughty

 

Lets say the deadline was in the middle of the week, like the 20th of January 2021. Does that mean the Claimants could potentially leave it till the 19th Jan 2021 4.59 pm to email me, as it wont give me any time to reply. 

 

Whats the courts veiws on theses?

 

2. i still dont understand why there was ever 2 deadlines from  court, the 18th Jan 2021 ( today) and 1st Feb 2021. Anyone knows why?

 

Thanks again for all your advice. 

 

lets now wait and see. 

 

Hearing 8/4/2021

Link to post
Share on other sites

its not usual with but covid changes..

typically what the court has done since covid is say hey you two, get together, exchange WS's by xx date, see if you can narrow issues is the real reason, the court hopes one or the other gives in. less hassle 

 

if you don't they usually have stated a date a few weeks later whereby the claimants solicitors forwards both WS's to the court.

in your case the court appears to have requested to poke their nose in earlier than usual which is of no use to them, as the judge wont see them till the hearing anyway...so:noidea:

 

although not regarding PNC cases, bar one i think, what we see here is the claimants solicitor ignore the earlier date and simply file theres by the last due date without earlier involving the defendant at all. what i will guess because BCD(L) is rather new to the game, they've not yet found out they can all but ignore the earlier date.

 

this has ofcourse give you a huge advantage.

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

what i will guess because BCD(L) is rather new to the game, they've not yet found out they can all but ignore the earlier date.

 

this has ofcourse give you a huge advantage.'

 

 

Thankyou.

 

Lol, lets hope thats the case. Unless they are much smarter than all of us and called a bluff.

 

In their email they say please find attached our bundle, a cop which has been filed at the court.

 

The bluff could be that they haven't filed it at the court by the earlier date, but they hope hope that I submit mine by the first deadline, which I have now done. Gives them a chance to look at my WS, make any changes to theirs and then actually use the later date to file their papers at the court, having had the benefit of looking at my WS

 

 

Who knows, these solicitors maybe me smarter poker players than we thinkk lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Hello All

 

Update

 

As per post #83, I had mentioned that for some unusual  reason, there had been two deadlines from the court for responding, namely the 18th of January 2021 and 1st of Feb 2021.

 

With everyones great help I filed in the response by the18th of Jan 2021. I think I was bit concerned that the claimant, Mike Ashley may use the second deadline as a chance to add a supplementary statement in response to my defence. 

 

Well, Mike Ashely has in fact does exactly this. He has responded and filed a supplementary witness statement and has responded to all the defence points. He has addressed most the issues I had raised in my defence.

 

 

His Supplementary WS is dated 30 January 2021 and his solicitors emailed it to me on the 17th of February 2021.

 

Not sure what to do, but he seems to have amended everything which i could have used as a loophole leaving me with the thought of , should we have waited till the 2nd deadline ie 1ist Feb2021 and submitted the defence rather than the 18th January 2021. this would have deprived him of the chance to response with a supplementary WS. Thats what really had a worried me and I raised it a few times on this platform.

 

 

Not sure now because he has kind of amended a few things, removed the incorrect exhibit ( where the signages had belonged to a different site, and called it a clerical error).

 

Will post his redacted supplementary WS later as at work now.

 

Thanks all

Link to post
Share on other sites
If a witness wishes to deal with matters not dealt with in the original witness statement a supplementary witness statement should be prepared and served on the other parties, as soon as possible. Permission is required to adduce a supplementary witness statement at trial if any other party objects to it. This need not be sought before service; it can be sought at a case management conference if convenient or, if need be, at trial.

 

Andy

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

'The bluff could be that they haven't filed it at the court by the earlier date, but they hope hope that I submit mine by the first deadline, which I have now done. Gives them a chance to look at my WS, make any changes to theirs and then actually use the later date to file their papers at the court, having had the benefit of looking at my WS

 

 

Who knows, these solicitors maybe me smarter poker players than we thinkk lol'

 

 

It seems that the claimant solicitors actually outsmarted me. They submitted the first Bundle before on the 1st deadline of 18 of January. I submitted the defence before that date as per court orders.

 

They then sneaked in the supplementary WS before the second deadline of 1st feb 2021, having benefited from covering any loopholes that I had of them in my defence WS.

 

So in the supplementary WS, they have produced the contract, they have said that any extra irrelevant signages in their initial set of exhibits were clerical errors and have produced a much tidier crisper WS . I wish I had not now submitted my defence by the 18th of jan 2021, but rather waited till the 1st of Feb 2021. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Andyorch said:
If a witness wishes to deal with matters not dealt with in the original witness statement a supplementary witness statement should be prepared and served on the other parties, as soon as possible. Permission is required to adduce a supplementary witness statement at trial if any other party objects to it. This need not be sought before service; it can be sought at a case management conference if convenient or, if need be, at trial.

 

Andy

 

so object then..

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

Thankyou

 

I called the court today

 

I asked two specific questions

 

1. Why was there 2 deadlines, one of the 18 Jan 2021 and a further one 1 Feb 2021

2. When did the claimant submit their supplementary WS ( they have signed it as 30 Jan

 

 

The clerk replied

 

1. The first deadline of 18/1/2020 was for filing the DOCUMENTS upon which either party had wished to rely on, not the WS. the second deadline of 1/2/2021, was for the WS to be submitted by. 

 

2. The claimant filed submitted their supplementary WS to the court on 17/2/2021. In other words, they did not respect the deadline. I asked if that could invalidate. She said that you can put that in writing and it would be at the discretion of the judge. 

 

 

So any thoughts on the fact that the supplementary clamant WS was dated 30/1/2021 but in fact emailed to both  the court and myself on the 17/2/2021, 17 days after the due deadline?

 

Thankyou

 

:)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly, even if they get away with this, it doesn't mean you won't win.  The solicitor can eloquently waffle on as long as they like that the signage isn't carp.  I'm afraid the signage is carp and the photos show it is.

 

Virtually everyone who has beaten these companies in court was facing a solicitor, but still won.

 

So do what dx, Andy and the court woman said.  Write to the court now pointing out this is a supplementary WS and it was submitted to you & the court 17 days after the deadline albeit with a date on to pretend it was written before the deadline, and you invite the court not to accept it.

 

If you get nowhere, then challenge it on the day in court.

  • 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
1 hour ago, Andy711351 said:

1. The first deadline of 18/1/2020 was for filing the DOCUMENTS upon which either party had wished to rely on, not the WS. the second deadline of 1/2/2021, was for the WS to be submitted by. 

 

 

 

just because you didnt read the order properly

its quite usual for docs to be exchanged then you both file WS's later.

 

a SWS does not have to have any deadline

just that you can object at the hearing.

 

you got had..oldest trick in the book.

you fell for it

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

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...