Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The incident was 03rd March 2024 - and that was the only letter that I have received from MET 15th April 2024 The charge I paid was at the Stansted Airport exit gate (No real relevance now - I thought this charge was for that!!).   Here is the content of email to them (Yes I know I said I was the driver !!!!) as said above -  I thought this charge was for that!! "Stansted Airport" Dear “To whom it may concern” My name is ??  PCN:  ?? Veh Reg: Date of Incident: 03rd March 2024 I have just received a parking charge final reminder letter, dated 10th April 2024 - for an overstay.  This is the first to my knowledge of any overstay. I am aware that I am out of the 28 days, I don’t mean to be rude, this feels like it is a scam My movements on this day in question are, I pulled into what looked like a service station on my way to pick my daughter and family up from Stansted airport. The reason for me pulling into this area was to use a toilet, so I found Starbucks, and when into there, after the above, I then purchased a coffee. After which I then continued with my journey to pick my daughter up. (however after I sent this email I remember that Starbucks was closed so I then I walked over to Macdonalds) There was no signs about parking or any tickets machines to explains about the parking rules. Once at Stansted, I entered and then paid on exit.  So Im not show where I overstayed my welcome.. With gratitude    
    • Just to enlarge on Dave's great rundown of your case under Penalty. In the oft quoted case often seen on PCNs,  viz PE v Beavis while to Judges said there was a case for claiming that £100 was a penalty, this was overruled in this case because PE had a legitimate interest in keeping the car park free for other motorists which outweighed the penalty. Here there is no legitimate interest since the premises were closed. Therefore the charge is a penalty and the case should be thrown out for that reason alone.   The Appeals dept need informing about what and what isn't a valid PCN. Dummies. You should also mention that you were unable to pay by Iphone as there was no internet connection and there was a long  queue to pay on a very busy day . There was no facility for us to pay from the time of our arrival only the time from when we paid at the machine so we felt that was a bit of a scam since we were not parked until we paid. On top of that we had two children to load and unload in the car which should be taken into account since Consideration periods and Grace periods are minimum time. If you weren't the driver and PoFA isn't compliant you are off scot free since only the driver is liable and they are saying it was you. 
    • Thank you dx. I consider myself well and truly told :) x Thank you dx. I consider myself well and truly told :) x
    • Doubt the uneconomic write off would be registered, unless you agreed to accept write off settlement of the claim. It is just cosmetic damage. All that has happened, is that the car has been looked at and they realised the repair costs are going to exceed the value of the car. If the car is perfectly driveable with no upcoming normal work required to pass next MOT, your current Insurers will continue Insurance and you can accept an amount from third party Insurers to go towards you repairing the scratched bodywork.    
    • Peter McCormack says the huge investment by the twins will help Real Bedford build a new ground.View the full article
  • 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

APPEAL PENDING FOR PCN DUE TO UNSEEN ROAD WORK SIGNAGE


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 925 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

I received a visit yesterday from Newlyn and handed a letter of intent on taking goods Stating that a notice of enforcement for £513 was issued 16/9/21 and were representing Camden council.

 

This was for a parking offence on the 8 March 2021 at 08:36. The contravention was code 21 which is namely that my car was parked wholly or partly in a suspended bay.

 

I’m parking the car I did notice there was some placards on the picture signpost I noticed that one head stated that the suspension was lifted at the end of the 5th of March 2021. I have parked the night before, a Sunday night around 10pm In my attention was yours focused on what was immediately in front of me rather than what was all around me down the street as the counsellor pointed out in his response to my appeal.

 

So much so that I was conscious that the parking charges will recommence on the Monday morning and indeed paid via the Ringo app £17.34 for a parking session commencing 8 March 2021 08:05 a.m. and completed at 12:30 pm - the ticket was issued on the 8 March 2021 at 08:36.

 

My appeal was sent on the 19th of March 2021 and I received a response on the 31st of March 2021 attach a copy of the redacted version.

 

The truth is I had thought I referred the matter to the London Tribunal within 28 days of the rejection but I can’t find any record of it.

 

I have submitted a TE9 to the TEC and held off Newlyn for a day or two.

 

Of note however is the climb of the demand of money from them. At the stage of the order For recovery of unpaid penalty charge the amount was for £203 pounds dated 10th of August 2021 and then on the 7th of September 2021 notice from Newlands races the amount owed to £278 with a £75 compliant stage fee. A hand delivered letter on 30 September 2021  from Newlyn states the outstanding amount to be £513.

 

LBC_PCN858A 08-03-21 REDACTED_compressed.pdf

Edited by dx100uk
formatting/spacing only - no issue
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a local authority case so I've moved to the appropriate forum.

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

So, the bay was still suspended when you parked there - according to their reply.

 

You appealed, they rejected the appeal. So you either needed to pay or refer to adjudication and it looks like neither happened for whatever reason. You received a charge certificate and an Order for Recovery, but I assume you took no further action until the bailiff caught up with you. Is that correct?

 

Now you are submitting a TE9 it is out of time, so you need to also submit a TE7 explaining why it is out of time, or it will likely just get rejected. I would advise you do that ASAP, along with a new copy of the TE7, but unless you have a reason why it's run on to this late stage without being dealt with, I'm not sure you will have any luck.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, due to both my parents who reside in Cyprus being unwell I wasn’t in the country from 18 July - 12 September 2021 which is the period when the notices were issued, I’ll submit the TE7/9 forms as advised. 
 

If as you say the enforcement order stands is is the level of the fee that  jumps from £203 to £513 from the 7-20 September 2021 correct? The sudden step up isn’t broken down to explain the nature of this addition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you submit the TE7, which you definitely must do, make sure you explain fully and convicingly why you were unable to deal with this sooner. You can also attach proof - plane tickets or similar evidence to show when you were out of the country. Whether it gets accepted will be at the council's discretion, so try to be as clear as you can on the details.

 

The additional costs are bailiff fees for chasing the case. You are entitled to a breakdown I believe, but for now, you need to try and get the whole bailiff thing revoked, so there's no point in looking into that as of now. Just get the TE9/TE7 filled out and sent off soon as you can.

Edited by Jamberson
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...