Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX 2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. 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.   Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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

Scott’s of leeds - purchased car by HP with Close Brothers, told we could change to a cheaper Finance company the next day without issue - now ignoring us


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1176 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

Quote

 

Hi, I’m new here so please forgive me if this is in the wrong place. 
 

my 21 year old  son is a key worker and his old car recently failed it’s MOT so he had to buy a car urgently. 
he found a car an hour from home at Scott’s of leeds which is a small car dealership. His only day available to view and collect a car due to work was a Sunday so I took him up there. He liked the car and the salesman was ok. However, we told him that there was a 95% chance the next day that my son would be able to access a better finance deal via an online company than the one the garage was offering. This online company car finance 247 was unavailable on the Sunday. The car salesman clearly and repeatedly said don’t worry about it sign our finance deal today on the Sunday so you can take the car away and you can simply switch it to the better rate finance on the Monday. My son did this as he needed a car and it was an hour from our house. We felt fully assured by the salesman it was a simple quick process. We rang back Monday to try to swap the finance as agreed and now neither the garage or the original finance company close brothers will assist us in doing this. The finance company are saying it’s upto the garage to return the funds they’ve been paid but the garage are refusing to do this now as they’ve done nothing wrong and as far as they’re concerned the deal is done end of story. This will now stop my son saving £915 in interest over 4 years. The garage are refusing to speak to us now. Pls can anyone help or give me proper advice rather than just a finger in the air opinion. He paid £5150 for the car plus £99 admin fee and he paid £500 deposit on his debit card. TIA 

 

 

 

Hi, I’m new here so please forgive me if this is in the wrong place. 
 

my 21 year old  son is a key worker and his old car recently failed it’s MOT so he had to buy a car urgently. 

he found a car an hour from home at Scott’s of leeds which is a small car dealership.  https://www.scottsofleeds.co.uk/
His only day available to view and collect a car due to work was a Sunday so I took him up there. He liked the car and the salesman was ok.
However, we told him that there was a 95% chance the next day that my son would be able to access a better finance deal via an online company than the one the garage was offering.

This online company car finance 247 was unavailable on the Sunday.
The car salesman clearly and repeatedly said don’t worry about it sign our finance deal today on the Sunday so you can take the car away and you can simply switch it to the better rate finance on the Monday.
My son did this as he needed a car and it was an hour from our house.

We felt fully assured by the salesman it was a simple quick process.

We rang back Monday to try to swap the finance as agreed and now neither the garage or the original finance company close brothers will assist us in doing this.

The finance company are saying it’s upto the garage to return the funds they’ve been paid but the garage are refusing to do this now as they’ve done nothing wrong and as far as they’re concerned the deal is done end of story.

This will now stop my son saving £915 in interest over 4 years.

The garage are refusing to speak to us now.

Pls can anyone help or give me proper advice rather than just a finger in the air opinion.

He paid £5150 for the car plus £99 admin fee and he paid £500 deposit on his debit card. TIA 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to the forum.

You posted your story in a long solid block of text and that makes it very difficult for people to follow especially when they are using the small screen such as a telephone.

Please will you help us in future by presenting your story and any responses properly spaced and punctuated.

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Presumably the loan agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act? Please check.

And I gather this happened just this week.

Your son is entitled to a 14 day cooling off period and he should assert this right now in writing to cancel all agreements.

They won't be happy and they may will start changing their mind about letting you make a different decision but frankly after this episode I would suggest that you walk away

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • BankFodder changed the title to Mis sold car finance - Scott’s of leeds
  • dx100uk changed the title to Scott’s of leeds - purchased car by HP with Close Brothers, told we could change to a cheaper Finance company the next day without issue - now ignoring us

did you son sign this close brothers HP agreement on Scotts premises?

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

My understanding is that agreements which are regulated by the Consumer Credit Act are subject to a 14 day cooling off period regardless whether they are on-premises or off-premises contracts. They do not come under the usual regime of distance selling rules.
I asked you whether this had happened just this week but you haven't addressed this question.
Has the letter which I suggested been written yet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

have you the agreement?

scan it up to one multipage PDF

read upload Carefully.

 

be careful many close brothers vehicle finance HP agreements signed on premises have a line at the top that states signed on premises no right to cancel.

that however does not negate your rights under CPR for the goods, but those are not faulty and you viewed in the showroom so no old DSR like right to return for no reason even within 14 days.?

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...