Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • In both versions the three references to "your clients" near the end need to be changed to "you" or "your" as Alliance are not using solicitors, they have sent the LoC themselves. Personally I'd change "Dear ALLIANCE PARKING Litigation Dept" to "Dear Kev".  It would show you'd done your homework, looked up the company, and seen it's a pathetic one-man band rather than having any departments.  The PPCs love to pretend they have some official power and so you should be scared of them - showing you've sussed their sordid games and you're confident about fighting them undermines all this.  In fact that's the whole point of a snotty letter - to show you'd be big trouble for them if they did do court so better to drop you like a hot potato and go and pursue mugs who just give in instead. In the very, very, very, very unlikely case of Kev doing court, it'd be better that he didn't know in advance all the legal arguments you'd be using, so I'd heavily reduce the number of cards being played.
    • Thanx Londoneill get on to it this evening having a read around these forums I can’t seem to find many success stories using your methods. So how successful are these methods or am I just buying time for him  and a ccj will be inevitable in the end. Thanks another question is, will he have to appear at court..? I am not sure he has got it in him
    • Here's a suggested modified version for consideration by the team. (Not sure whether it still gives too much away?)   RE: PCN 4xxxxx Dear ALLIANCE PARKING Litigation Dept, Thank you for your dubious Letter Of Claim (dated 29th April 2024) of £100 for just 2 minutes of overstay. The family rolled around on the floor in amazement of the idea you actually think they’d accept this nonsense, let alone being confused over the extra unlawful £70 you added. Shall we raise the related VAT issue with HMRC, or perhaps the custodians of the unicorn grain silos? Apart from the serious GDPR breach you’ve made with the DVLA and your complete failure in identifying the driver, we’re dumbfounded that the PCN is still not compliant with the PoFA (2012 Schedule 4 Under Section 9.2.f) even after 12 years of pathetic trial and error. We also doubt a judge would be very impressed at your bone idleness and lack of due diligence regarding parking periods. Especially with no consideration of section 13 in your own trade association's code of practice and the topological nature of the Cornish landscape versus a traditional multi-storey. And don’t even get us started on the invisible signage during the ultra busy bank holiday carnage, that is otherwise known as the random parking chaos in the several unmarked, unmanaged over-spill fields, or indeed the tedious “frustration of contract” attempting to get a data connection to Justpark.  We suggest your clients drop this extreme foolishness or get an absolute hammering in court. We are more than ready to raise the above issues and more, with a fair minded judge, who will most likely laugh your clients out in less time than it takes to capture a couple of useless ANPR photos. If you insist on continuing this stupid, money grabbing quest, after having all of the above pointed out, we will of course show this letter to the Judge and request “an unreasonable costs order” under CPR 27.14.2.g and put it toward future taxis to Harlyn Bay instead.  We all look forward to your clients' deafening silence. Signed, "Spot". (Vehicle Keeper's pet Dalmation).
    • Paying DCA's one penny, never mind £50 per month is a mugs game, they have really been milking him as a cash cow   See where received a claim form is underlined in your post, you need to click, on that and read carefully, then answer the questions, then copy and paste into a post on this thread Forget the CAB ,  their advice is sometimes weird. Is it worth defending? Lowell brought these debts for 10 p in the pound , years ago, because they are flawed. Think about it! if it was such an easy win, Capital one could have taken it to court and crushed him.  It could be an invalid agreement, default notice, or many other things. In a nutshell , yes, and we can help you.
    • Origin moved to EA App... I know this all too well.  Reach out to Customer Services I would to see what they can do. 
  • 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

NCP/BW PCN PAPLOC now claimform - New Gatwick Drop Off Zone - I thought I had paid for both visits? ***Claim Dismissed***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 186 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

OK, I get it now.

 

As you say, you have lots of other evidence so the absence of the phone records is hardly fatal to your case.

 

However, if you can keep pushing EE without it eating up all your time and becoming a massive stress, then you might as well do so.  You have the complaint to the CEO running.  I'm wondering if it might be worth (a) sending them a general SAR to see if you can get evidence of their 29 September/19 October balls-up, or (b) a complaint to whatever complaints department they have outlining the mess they've caused and mentioning that if you lose the court case you will be after them for negligence, or (c) both.

 

I'm not at all convinced that the data doesn't exist any more, I might be totally wrong of course, or the data could be there but they can't be pestered to look for it.

  • Like 1

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

I devoted yesterday to researching your feed of parking cases. But may not get much time today and over the weekend as I am working solidly. But, I will pursue EE as I can't help thinking I am being palmed off. 

 

Obviously if they have genuinely deleted my data then there is no breach of statutory duty. But how do you prove this? Also, do they not have a virtual trash that you can retrieve data from? Probably not. Who knows. I think that's the difficult thing here.

 

What I do know is that they are required by law to keep all phone records for 1 year for access should it be required by police or other agencies. And had they acted on the 29th September, my call data should've been intact by law. And if it wasn't, then EE have acted illegally by deleting it after 6 months.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I received the following from EE on the 7th November...

 

Nearly all the dates mentioned on the letter are wrong. I made an initial call on 29th September 2022 to request the proof for the call on the 20th October 2021, and then called again on 19th & 31st October

 

Am I to understand that the line "...due to the above reason this information is not available to you." means that it is available to them? Just not to me?

 

Also do they admit to no fulfilling their statutory duty here? "This agent did advise that they would complete a DSAR request for you, there is no record to show this was completed."

 

Anyway the whole thing smacks of BS... I am speaking to an old uni friend who works in the shady world of corporate cyber security this afternoon to see what he thinks. I really can't waste time going on wild goose chases. But if they are required to keep info for a min of 1year,  then I will issue a full SAR on them for all data & recordings they hold on me. To firstly evidence their incompetence in dealing with my complaint and to potentially evidence their failure to complete an SAR within 30days?? If I go for the latter should I send LoC? 

 

 

EEDisputeResponse04-11-22.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, MoaningCrusader said:

Am I to understand that the line "...due to the above reason this information is not available to you." means that it is available to them? Just not to me?

It seems to be, doesn't it?

 

At no point does she say the information doesn't exist.

 

In fact twice she says it's because you don't have the itemised bills service (which presumably costs more).

 

Didn't they originally say there would be no problem getting the info?

 

Was there ever a reply from the CEO or did the CEO pass the complaint to this person?

 

Good idea to run this past your friend today.

 

 

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

Very vague / strangely worded letter, and it looks suspiciously like they won't supply your data because they want you to pay for it first!

  • Like 1

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 The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

You won't believe this. But having just took a break from my home office, I have just received a letter from the Customer Data Disclosures Dept with a USB stick apparently containing the requested info?

 

However, the USB stick appears to be blank???? This may be due to the fact that I use Mac and not PC. If so, bloody daft supplying info not accessible to both formats!

 

I will get to the bottom of this and report back. 

 

Potentially I have been blatantly lied to by their Dispute Resolution Team! Who said the info was not accessible!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be encrypted. It must be by law .think about it.  ..

 

You should get a sep letter or email with details upon how to access it soon .

 

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

It's not Mac compatible.

 

I went to my local library where it prompted me for my password, which didn't happen when I put it into my MacBook. The letter told me to use my acc number as the password. Needless to say, it didn't work!

 

Still there's hope that they have included proof of the call. They seem to suggest they are happy to provide me with the personal information they hold on me as requested. However, something tells me that will only be billing records and customer service call recordings, not the itemised calls I requested. 

 

We can only wait and see. 

 

The good news is I also got sent confirmation that they are giving me £30 credit for my next bill as a goodwill gesture....

 

In other news, I spoke to my friend who works in cyber security. He says never mind for law enforcement, they'll keep all billing info for 6 years for purposes of auditing. He reckons that should include itemised call records of outgoing calls in case some of those calls are chargeable on my phone plan.

 

Basically, the big companies weigh up the expense and effort in getting the info, with the expense I could be them... So once an LoC arrives and then a MCOL Small Claim, they'd soon start to play ball.

 

He did suggest playing nicely and saying all you want is confirmation that call in question happened for presentation to the court, and that I don't require all the itemised calls from the requested date. The data extraction can be tricky, but writing a letter confirming the call took place would be easier for them to supply and suffice for my evidence to present to the court.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

How damn frustrating for you.

 

And what a song and dance when they could have sent you a single sheet of A4 with the calls on that one day.

 

I suppose all you can do is to get on to whichever department sent the USB pen and press them about the password.

 

EDIT: I wrote this before your last post.

Edited by FTMDave
Extra info added

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

Any luck with getting any sense from the Customer Data Disclosures Dept so you are able to read the USB stick?

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 for checking in FTMD.

 

Yes, they messaged me today on their secure server and provided the download to me.

 

Sadly, it didn't contain any proof of a phone call. Tbh as my plan includes calls & texts I kind of worked out that they probably don't keep the records for auditing as I am no longer charged by call, but by billing period.

 

The pack of recordings conveniently seems to be missing the original call on the 29th Sept and the follow up on the 19th Oct. I am going to have a good look through it all tomorrow, as I have had a pretty hectic day with work. So have only had a skim read through it all.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, MoaningCrusader said:

Sadly, it didn't contain any proof of a phone call. Tbh as my plan includes calls & texts I kind of worked out that they probably don't keep the records for auditing as I am no longer charged by call, but by billing period.

Aren't most people these days?  I certainly am.

 

All seems a bit strange to me.  I'm absolutely not a mobile phone person, I have a rubbish phone and a cheap plan, but all my calls are there going back to August 2018.

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

This must be damn frustrating.  All this runaround for something that should have been so simple to do.

 

As this Customer Data Disclosures Dept are being (relatively!) helpful, maybe go for your mate's suggestion of asking for confirmation that the call in question happened for presentation to the court.  That would be enough.

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

Currently researching further for my draft WS.... When I went to look at the government guidelines for private parking firms... It states the following:

 

This guidance was withdrawn on 7 June 2022

Private Parking Code of Practice is temporarily withdrawn pending review of the levels of private parking charges and additional fees.

 

As the guidance has been withdrawn (temporarily) can we use it against the PPCs in court?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will await further guidance. However, it certainly appears the area of 'double recovery' or escalating charges is the part withdrawn and under review. Does it not? I can only assume meaning it is not there for use against PPCs. 

 

Here's hoping this is not the case.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can use Beavis as a counter and rebuttal of Double Recovery, fleecer's misuse Beavis, as it states the cost of the PCN takes into account cost of debt recovery, and there is a case to quote on it Caernarfon County Court I think LFI or FTMDave might have the link.

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

It's true that the CoP has been withdrawn, and unfortunately it's also true that it's been withdrawn due to two challenges from the fleecers about (a) the amount of their charges and (b) the Unicorn Food Tax.

 

However, never fear!

 

Even before the CoP the Unicorn Food Tax was a nonsense. 

 

Have a look at the attachment in post 110 here  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421775-vcs-spycar-pcn-paploc-now-claimform-no-stopping-east-midlands-airport/page/5/#comments

 

If it's not in post 110 it'll be a couple of posts above or below, sometimes the post count goes wonky.

 

For DOUBLE RECOVERY and you can use (18) and then all of (20)-(27).  Obviously read the paragraphs and make sure the amounts match yours and remove anything which doesn't match yours.  There is case law in there.
 

 

 

  • Like 2

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

Hi Guys,

 

I am editing together my WS here

 

I have noticed that on both initial NCP NTKs and all the letters from BW Legal including the LoC do not use the word 'contract', only breach of 'terms & conditions'.

 

Only on the letter before the N1 Claim Form arrived states "you breached the Terms and Conditions of the contract which you entered into, by no payment"...

 

However in their PoC on the N1 Form, they revert to not using the word contract only "On 14/10/2021, the driver of a vehicle.... breached C's terms and conditions of parking..." no mention of breaching any contract, or that I am entered into one?

 

Is this normal.

 

I just noticed that the VCS PoCs specifically mention breach of 'contract'... It makes the wording for me a little tricky when I can't quote them saying I breached a 'contract' on T&Cs... which are not binding unless in the frame work of a contract, surely?

 

Thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Driver breached their imaginary contract (which must be detailed on a sep sign, along with it's full  T&C's) when they drove the car onto private property whereby the landowner has signed a contract with them to manage it's parking.

 

 

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

As for stuff specific to your case, there is bound to be something in the fleecers' trade association's CoP about (a) making sure equipment is in working order and (b) predatory practices  https://www.britishparking.co.uk/code-of-practice-and-compliance-monitoring  and the same two things will be in the government CoP  https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/private-parking-code-of-practice/private-parking-code-of-practice

 

Having scoured through the above codes of practice, I can't seem to find anything in regards to maintaining equipment, nor on online payment systems. Can anyone suggest where I am not looking?

 

WS is coming together nicely here. Nearly there.

 

Ok... Here's my 1st draft of my WS. I hope I have took out all personal details and any details that may pinpoint my case.

 

I have not compiled my list of evidence docs yet. Indeed it would be helpful if you could tell me where in the WS ref to evidence is required to support my case. I think I have a good idea what needs scanned. But it would be good have further suggestions.

 

I would like to get this pretty much sorted to have on file, if and when a court date comes. As my work schedule kicks off from now until the end December.

 

 

 

 

WSNCPBWLegalRedacted1strDraft.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

you carefully redact things

then you discover more and go back again redacting..

and then you put it up as a docx file with all your pers details in file info/propeties...:crazy:

 

now a PDF

 

 

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

Talking of work, apologies for lack of contribution here.

 

However, I have a long train journey tomorrow, and the time will be split three ways

   - dealing with work

   - watching a World Cup game

   - reading through your WS.

 

At a very quick first glance it looks excellent work.  I see you've headed two sections LOCUS STANDI and later DOUBLE RECOVERY.  That's a good move so the judge can instantly identify the legal arguments you're making.  The other parts should have headings too.  However, more tomorrow.

 

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...