Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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
      • 162 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

Parking Eye 2 x ANPR PCNs - two different vehicles - PAPLOC now claimforms - Kenwood House, Tunbridge Wells - one claim discontinued one ongoing

Recommended Posts

Hi dx

Sorry for the delay in replying but we have really have been up against it, it seems a never ending battle, we are mortgage prisoners, have been for past 15 years so really struggling with life atm tbh and its hard to focus on anything but thats another story.....

my husbands case was dropped back in Aug 23.

My mothers one is still proceeding in August 2024.

Can we use the fact that they dropped the other case - almost identical to this one - as evidence in our case as to why they are continuing with this knowing they dont have a solid case? otherwise they wouldnt have dropped the other one surely.

Not sure of your thoughts on this?

I really thought it would be dropped, my mother is nearly 80 years old and it will be a nightmare if we do have to attend the processing centre in Maidstone in August but will do if needs be. How soon before do we have to prepare witness statements etc please


Ill go to my other thread about my other ongoing case with group nexus who are proceeding to court in November 2024 at Hastings

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately as far as the law is concerned a claimant can drop a case for a myriad of reasons and the dropped case has no relevance at all to the continuing case.

The order from the court that fixed the hearing date in August will also have a deadline for filing of Witness Statements.  Can you please upload it?


We could do with some help from you.


 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

I know all about problems paying a mortgage too when I was much younger that I am now. 

We do have a section on problems with mortgage arrears in another section of the Forum....

I got out of mine by cashing in  or taking a lump sum from one of my pensions-can't remember which now.

I figured that although I would get a smaller pension it would be counter balanced perhaps by the increase in the value of my house should I still have it.

I then went on to pay of the mortgage  some years later and I could have made increased payments into my pension .

Hopgarden I have problems understanding your PCNs.

On Post 5 you said that you had received a PCN  dated  26th May 2021 received on the 1st June and was incurred on the 28th April.

On Post 7 you said you had received a PCN dated the 7th July , received on the 1st June and incurred on the 28th April. I assume the 7th July was a mistake and there is just 1 PCN.

On Post 47 you received from DCBL in response to your snotty letter a note from them saying that the PCN was dated the 23rd April.

So my question is do you have two PCN dated 23 April and the 28th April or is one of those related you parents PCN. DCBL seemed sure that the PCN they were responding to was t he one on the 23rd.

Also could you please check and confirm that the good news about the discontinuance on AUG 23RD 2023 was for a PCN dated the 23rd or the 28th? 

Could you please also confirm who is the keeper of your car and you are advising your parents how to handle Parking Eye by copying from how you handle your own PCN?

If that is the case is it possible to post up their PCN as it is possible that their times, dates and wording may differ from yours which might make a difference. I noted for instance that you said in an early post that your parents didn't even park in a bay. Possibly the time in the car park was shorter too. 

In any case, both of you were parked in a car park that only permit holders were supposed to park. This makes the signs prohibitive so cannot offer either of you a contract.

you cannot breach a contract that hasn't been offered despite what they seem to think. Or more importantly what they want you to think, so that makes you feel like you should pay them what they are asking.

When you don't actually owe them anything at all.


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 Date of the infringement 23/4/21

2 Date on the NTK 26/5/2021 

3 Date received 1/6/2021

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] NO - I cant see it anywhere

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? yes  2 x pictures, 1 entering and 1 exiting 

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] no

7 Who is the parking company? Parking Eye

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Kenwood House, Tunbridge Wells

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. BPA



Hi Lookinforinfo

Thank you for your words of encouragement re the mortgage. But sadly we have no pension to fall back on, we have always been self employed and never in the position to put extra money away into pension. But we are dealing with that. We are not in arrears but trapped by a dormant lender!

Anyway yes there were 2 separate NTK, date of infringement on one was 23/4/21 for my parents and the other was 28/4/21 to my husband (this is the one that was discontinued). They were both issued on 26/5/21, well after the 14 days.

Please see my parents NTK questionnaire below, I have uploaded this and pictures previously on this post. But if you look at the detail, this is why I say they are more or less identical in every way. Apart from I think my parents were in there for a minute less than my husbands car.  They entered at 16.58 and exited and 17.15.

I am waiting to see my parents this evening to get the court notice to allocation for her one in August 2024. Ill upload that as soon as I can

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that's right-Parking Eye are usually very good at getting their PCNs compliant with the Act. So both being out of time means that PE cannot transfer the liability for payment from the driver to the keeper. So only the driver is liable to pay the PCN not the keeper.

I understand from you that at least one of the keepers was not driving at the time which puts them in the clear providing PE are not told who was actually driving on that day.

However even if with the other car the keeper and the driver were the same person the driver can still successfully argue that they are not liable to pay. The arguments are that there  appears to be no entrance sign advising that the car park is now private. That no signs were there advising that this was a new car park as it was at that time. That the signs are prohibitory so even if PE do have a contract with the landowner, the contract cannot extend to the motorist as there is no  offer other than no parking for those without a permit. You cannot form a contract with motorists trying to park if you are not allowing them to park there because they do not have a permit. 

In those circumstance [parking without a permit ] you may be considered to be trespassing but only the landowner can sue for that not PE. And its not worth the landowner suing because the cost of suing would probably not outweigh the fine for trespassing.


PS  I sent you a private message-not about your case.



Link to post
Share on other sites

On 29/05/2024 at 23:14, FTMDave said:

The order from the court that fixed the hearing date in August will also have a deadline for filing of Witness Statements.  Can you please upload it?

We need to see this.

We could do with some help from you.


 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


The court has ordered that statements are filed seven days before the hearing, which is atypical as they usually state 14 days.

You will need to produce a Witness Statement.  The hearing is three months' away, but no harm in getting started now.


We could do with some help from you.


 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

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...