Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

Parking Control Management invoice for moving house


Recommended Posts

You are right if it was a windscreen ticket. It looks as if they didn't think it was a w/s ticket which is why they sent their first one within fourteen days. This would have been correct if it had been taken by a camera and mailed to you.

But with them either way was wrong since they gave it to you on a main road. And if it is a w/s ticjet it has to be affixed before you drive away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LookforInfo thank you for help.

 

They can't have it both ways, she photographed the car but then when challenged about as I was loading chattels into van and car I moved the car

 

she crossed to the other side of the street to try and hand me the invoice.

 

I refused to take it so at no time was anything affixed to windscreen.

 

As to the NTK I've only got one I believe

 

Alleged parking was 12.12.20

 

NTK was posted 13.01.21 and give 15.01.21

 

Second letter is the Debt recovery letter dated 17.03.21. That's all so far.

 

Edited by lordloz
Link to post
Share on other sites

If there was no windscreen ticket then the NTK should have arrived within 14 days to be PoFA compliant. If there was a w/s PCN then the NTK should arrive after 25 days which yours did. So they are acting on the pretext that there was a w/s ticket despite the fact that you refused to accept it and you had driven off the relevant land before the ticket could be attached.

OK I understand it. And ihe way it was done  is still wrong.

 

 

Edited by lookinforinfo
Link to post
Share on other sites

not much to go on there really, if you equate this to how council wardens can operate , once the ticket is written, service does not need to be completed.

if the NTK did arrive after day 29 then pofa is met

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

The pcns are compliant but the rule on w/s tickets is that they must be placed on the w/s at the time or handed to the driver when the vehicle is parked. And of course this ticket was not even placed on the w/s  nor was the attempt to hand it over even be on relevant land. But the difficulty is whether the parking attendant will admit to that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

not sure if that's ever been tested in court regarding a speculative invoice.

 

and if it ever was, i would expect it to be adjudged the same as Penalty Charge Notices, an existing benchmark. the ticket does not have to be attached nor handed, merely the process of one being 'produced' had gone beyond some point, that point i'm unsure of.

 

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

lookforinfo, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that just related to official civil enforcement officers, i.e.  Council Traffic Wardens,  who are employed by an enforcement authority. That is local councils for instance or a private company employed by a council.

 

PCM are a private company trying to obtain payment from a speculative invoice and have no authority to issue PCN's.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've unapproved your previous post  lookinforinfo ......save any confusion to users reading this topic.

 

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 OTHER

 

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

I've had another demand letter last week which is their standard nonsense from Trace so won't bother posting it up, however today's development was interesting when I received a text from them......

 

Looking at other posts on here with these clowns that's getting into bordering into data protection/harassment area..... 

 

will keep posting until/if i get the letter to claim but just deciding whether to block or not, my feeling is to leave it open, screenshot all messages and keep if necessary if I have to answer the LTC...... thoughts welcomed 

Link to post
Share on other sites

that's interesting isn't it......I haven't provided them with anything, no replies at all ....my real life name is unusual so I expect it's not a huge task to find me...but....I find that intriguing that they have started to text me when never entered into any conversations or correspondence with them...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

further update on my text message from TRACE.... I got one, I now have two.....

I'm glad I haven't blocked them yet....

from a very quick cursory google which I'll look into further, it seems one is annoying but no issue......a second one however, well that begins to go into harrassment. 

One was 26.04.21 the second 07.05.21

 

So a report to the Police and OfCoM as any cause of distress is possible. Suspect little help from Police but OfCoM maybe useful and anyways it all helps to disorient them a bit.

 

I do hope they send another this Friday too......FINAL DEMAND and apparently CASE under review for potential legal action against me.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardly harassment if you hope that they send you another one on Friday !

My time as a Police Officer and subsequently time working within the Motor Trade gives me certain insights into the problems that consumers may encounter.

I have no legal qualifications.

If you have found my post helpful, please enhance my reputation by clicking on the Heart. Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

perhaps you misunderstand, the word hope is not looking forward to it in an emotive anticipated sense, it's to consolidate any harassment report in a technical legal sense

 

it maybe but as i said a quick search shows that 2 texts can be enough to be considered harassment,  

 

A quick summary of Harassment from a law firm site is interesting, I've screenshot the texts & will keep them for future use.

 

Harassment:- in the context of emails and texts messages, a course of conduct in harassment must involve at least two emails or two texts being sent to you, as well as the harasser sending the same email to two people.

 

It doesn't need to be the same message on both occasions but they need to be related and not two isolated incidents. So, for example, if someone sends you a threatening email and later also a threatening text message, which are causing you anxiety, the sender is potentially committing a criminal offence of harassment.

 

source: Cohen Davis Solicitors 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference with your situation and the Solicitors example is that a debt collector is not an harasser they do have a legitimate reason to ask you to pay their client. Here is an article by Citizens Advice-they are not always on the ball but here I feel they are reflecting the attitude of most Judges.

What doesn't count as harassment by a creditor

Not all action that a creditor takes can be called harassment. Creditors are allowed to take reasonable steps to get back the money you owe them. These include:

  • sending reminders and demands for payment
  • telephoning you to ask for payment
  • calling at your home, as long as this is at a reasonable time of the day
  • taking court action.

 

You are probably wasting your time going down that road. Concentrate on the errors in PCMs actions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i didn't say i was actually going down that road i said it would be in the background for later if necessary.

As I owe them nothing then I'm not their creditor, in addition they have gleaned my number from somewhere & are now sending unsolicited text messages.

I include this for update information only at this time as i now have 3 of them & appears to be 1 a week,last one saying they are now taking legal action 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you made it clear to the PCM company that you find their repeated contact demanding payment for an unsubstantiated speculative invoice harassing, have you sent them notice to cease and desist contacting you in this way?

 

You're in a bit a of a bind with this one as generally speaking the advice from this site is not to contact them and ignore all communication.

 

By contacting them to order them to cease and desist their method of communication as you consider it harassment you will be confirming they have the right details.

 

What lookinforinfo writes above is interesting, but I wonder at this stage if the learned would consider this is a relationship between a creditor and a debtor?

 

Wouldn't the speculative invoice and thus the debt have to be substantiated perhaps by court judgement before the PCM can claim to be a creditor in this case and thus have their communcation methods considered as reasonable steps.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

i doubt any say WILL do anything, until/unless you get a letter of claim, then you must respond with a snotty letter.

 

as for a section 10 complaint of harassment, it's not, the creditor/debtor argument has already been addressed in several court cases.

 

if you are getting text msgs report them as spam to 7726.

  • 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

FruitSalad1010 the parking company is designated as the creditor in Schedule 4 of PoFA

2(1)In this Schedule—

  • “the appropriate national authority” means—(a)

    in relation to relevant land in England, the Secretary of State; and

    [b] in relation to relevant land in Wales, the Welsh Ministers;

  • “the creditor” means a person who is for the time being entitled to recover unpaid parking charges from the driver of the vehicle

  •  

  • I doubt those who drafted the Act envisaged that car parking companies would stretch the meaning of parking charges to the lengths that they have. So they are called creditors despite the fact that many of their spurious invoices do not have  any money owed in them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As has been pointed out in many of these cases, usually it is the landowner not the DCA (in this case PCM) that are entitled to recover unpaid parking charges unless the right is specifically passed on in contract.

 

So while the landowner fits the defintion of "creditor", should the PCM have no legal power to recover unpaid parking charges they are not deemed a creditor and therefore could be held liable under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

 

A rather protracted argument of little practicle value for the time being, but in my opinion noteworthy if it turns out later on PCM had no legal right to act as a creditor.

 

It could be stated that until PCM are proven to have a legal right to act as a creditor then their continued communication will be treated as harassment until indicated otherwise, or that the right is reserved to make a claim under the 1997 act if it later on turns out PCM had no right to act as a creditor.

Edited by FruitSalad1010
  • 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...