Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • look at the pix on the NTK that show his car going in/out look at the drain covers .   now look at the picture in the PDF. same car park.     purley way carpark.pdf
    • https://completelyretail.co.uk/scheme/2418                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  I do think he is right about the car park.   This is the Purley Way Retail Park and the photos of the vehicle were taken in the other park.                           
    • That WS is appalling.   I got lost with all the "I", "he", there is only one person being sued.   You, personally, have been great at supporting your dad's mate, but as the mate is presumably retired I don't understand why he/she hasn't used the time to look up WSs that were successful on the forum.    
    • worthy to note on google earth that is the purley way carpark in their NTK pictures and if thats his car , the defence and that WS is not going to work.   he is looking at the WRONG carpark, in his statement, the caravan one with the bailff notice is not purley way !!
    • Having received a claim for a parking infringement in February 2020 my friend went to discover where the Purley Way Retail Park was.   He told me what the 6 shops within this complex were and I then knew that I had never been inside these shops or the car park that is situated in front of these stores.  Apparently, he had also spoken to a member of staff within one of the shops who confirmed that there was no time limit for parking in this car park.   I then replied to this with a defence claim stating the following.    "I have just received notification of a parking infringement which occurred 25/5/19." "Obviously, I can't remember where I was on that day but I have now visited the Purley Way Retail Park where the offence is alleged to have occurred and I can confirm that I have never shopped in any of these six shops in that retail park. also there doesn't appear to be any parking restrictions apart from caravans"     Perhaps I should have said that I had not parked there on that day in question 25/5/19 but that is what I meant.   I received a reply to this defence claim dated 5/3/20 rejecting my defence.   Mr then said he would help me in this matter and he returned to Purley Way Retail Park and took photographs of the entrance and the signs available at the entrance. He then emailed them to BW on the 20/4/20 as shown above after a phone conversation with them.   As requested, the 3 photos (numbered 1,2 and 3) of Purley Way Retail Park. The drive-in entrance is the only way into the units and although the 2 car parks either side of this unit only allow parking up to 3 hours, this car park has no parking restrictions which was confirmed to me by a member of staff about 2 months ago.   I suppose it's possible that a year ago parking restrictions were different and if so, can you please let me know when they changed. He received confirmation that they had been passed on to their client and would get back with a reply.   As he had not had a reply, he phoned on two more occasions but no reply had been received from TPS. Eventually he phoned on the 3/8/20 to be told that they now had a reply, after over 100 days and they would forward it on. On receiving that email, he immediately knew they were not photos of the Purley Way Retail Park (photo 4) as it was a much larger car park and he told that to BW.    On the following day further photographs were sent of my vehicle in the same car park as the previous days offering which is not the Purley Way Retail Park.   He was not completely sure what the car park was but on his return to this county he discovered they were photographs taken in the Lombard Retail Park (photo 5) which is situated over 3/4 mile (1.2km) from the Purley Way Retail Park. I have also enclosed photos of the same car park (numbered 6 and 7) in which you can clearly see the Matalan store and also the Range which replaced Homebase when it shut down.   Bearing in mind that you have shown a photo of my vehicle in this car park it could not be in the Purley Way Retail Park at the same time and I confirm it was not ever left in the Purley Way Retail Park.   I believe that the facts stated in this statement are true.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • Mediator point - Hermes lost my parcel and it is offering just a partial refund of the total amount requested. What's next?. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/434633-mediator-point-hermes-lost-my-parcel-and-it-is-offering-just-a-partial-refund-of-the-total-amount-requested-whats-next/&do=findComment&comment=5109422
      • 13 replies
    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 33 replies
    • 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
  • Recommended Topics

  • Recommended Topics

Letter from DWP - Fraud or genuine? - *** Resolved *** 'Or so I thought!' Here we go again....


Recommended Posts

Well done, that's great news. Thank you for updating us because there are bound to be other people with the same problem and this will help them. :D  I'll amend your thread title.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • honeybee13 changed the title to Letter from DWP - Fraud or genuine? - ** RESOLVED **

:cheer2:

funny how all these mystical debts disappear once you put them to strict proof.

 

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

Yes left hand often doesn't see what the right hand has done

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
  • Andyorch changed the title to Letter from DWP - Fraud or genuine? - *** Resolved ***
  • 11 months later...

Good Morning all, this has become a definite thorn in my eye!

 

For the background info I have used the original title for reference.

 

So originally I received a letter from the DWP, I was not sure if it was real or a scam, I came here and posted, I gained lots of info and advice, I followed guides, wrote letters, sent recorded delivery, SAR etc. etc.

Facts; The SAR showed there is no overpayment anywhere, I called the various departments still no justification of where this apparent overpayment came from, I received a letter to say it was cancelled, all good I thought...

 

Then, at the end of last year, my employer sends me a letter from the DWP, DEA has arrived and must be adhered to!

 

The amount in question is/was £200 approx, my employer without asking me, put the whole amount through on my next wages, at this stage, I am angry but none the less, I will send some more letters.

I sent another letter to the same named manager at the collections for HMRC and stated, 'why have you taken this money, without proof of me actually owing this, albeit I have proved it?' He wrote back back and said it was cancelled due to covid and I must pay it, albeit I stated in the letter 'YOU HAVE TAKEN IT OUT'.

 

Time has gone by, I have been busy and  have not challenged them for my refund of this payment, only to get another letter yesterday, stating 'they cannot get hold of my employer and other measures are being taken to recover this money.....'

 

In my original post of this a year ago, my point was, if it were £2000 and its incorrect, is this the process, just take it all and leave someone in trouble, you guys pointed me to the guide which states how much an employer should take, this was never adhered too either, This is almost gangster like in my opinion and leaves a distasteful note in my mouth and quite frankly has me beat as to what to do.

 

So is this how it goes? If every month they send me this letter saying overpayment with no justification for any amount and they can just keep using the DEA, EVEN THOUGH IT IS INCORRECT, I DID NOT OWE THIS MONEY ANYWAY, I PROVED IT, THEY STILL TOOK IT AND THEY STILL ARE TRYING TO RECOVER THE SAME AMOUNT WHILST ESCALATING IT TOO COLLECTION AGENCIES!

 

What do I do now?

 

Help much appreciated

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi.

 

I've merged your old and new threads. The previous one was automatically closed because nothing was posted on it for a while, but for future reference you can report an old thread and ask the team to reopen it so that updates can be added.

 

People should be along over the course of the day to advise.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Time four you to raise an official complaint with HMRC about this and if they don't respond to your satisfaction, take it up with your local MP.

 

https://www.gov.uk/complain-about-hmrc

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

Thanks Unclebulgaria67

 

I guess I will just have to suffer it until I get a definitive answer from someone within our government!

I do so hope this is not happening to anyone else for much larger amounts as this can and possibly will become exhausting and crippling to the pocket without recourse...

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi honeybee13, I am in the process of putting together my complaint with a timeline and all the info I have.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Surprise surprise.... Any one see Rip off Britain on TV now?

 

Hundreds have had the same issues I feared when I first posted, thousands have been taken from many in exactly the same way as me.

 

It apparently is a fraud situation they know about and are apparently looking into it.

 

I shall get my money back, I will make damn sure of that!

  • 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...