Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well we can't predict what the judge will believe. PE will say that they responded in the deadline and you will say they don't. Nobody can tell what a random DJ will decide. However if you go for an OOC settlement you should still be able to get some money
    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
  • 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

Hx Parking/gladstones CCJ - Exceeded 1hrs Free - McDonald's Alma Leisure Park Chesterfield CCJ issued thanks to useless parking fines ltd ***Claim Dismissed***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 532 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

!!! Update !!!

 

Hi guys 

 

Received N24 form today which confirms that default judgment be set aside.

 

Please see the attached document i need little bit advice regarding the point 5 where it says defendant file directions questionnaire by 14 days 

 

Thank you

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n24 form.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

3 copies

yes to mediation (unless you filed our Statute Barred Defence OR this is a claim for a Private Parking Ticket)

1 wit you

the rest is obv

1 to the court

1 to sols (omit phone/sig/email)

1 for your file

 

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

Yep

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

See the 1st few posts and their pdf's.

 

Dx

  • Thanks 1

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

Sorry to say that Is an extremely weak version of the MSE template defence document.

 

Point 3 is the only part which appears to have been added in and IMHO a defence like that without alteration wont win.

 

Its a shame the court have not allowed a new defence to be logged.

Maybe you can rescue it with a good witness statement.

 

Time will tell.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@happyparker its unfortunate that they not offered new defence to be filed but i am preparing a good witness statement,  photo and video evidence as a proof been the car park recently to capture the vids and pics

 

@dx100uk is there anyway if i can request the court a new defence to file ?

  • I agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry HP

my internet is playing up

 

here is the link to the original thread

 

 

44 minutes ago, happyparker said:

Sorry to say that Is an extremely weak version of the MSE template defence document.

 

Point 3 is the only part which appears to have been added in and IMHO a defence like that without alteration wont win.

 

Its a shame the court have not allowed a new defence to be logged.

Maybe you can rescue it with a good witness statement.

 

Time will tell.

yep 

should never have filed that and the scammer from MSE charged for it too!!

 

@Digital_2012  you dont need too.

 

stop getting sidetracked by interlopers....

 

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

Have you still got their WS for last years hearing. If so please post it up so we can have a laugh and advise you how to respond. it sounds as if they want to clobber you for more money this time round. They have more chance winning the Grand National without a horse than getting more money even if they did win which seems to be more unlikely than they think.

 

For a start their PCN does not comply with the Act so they cannot transfer the debt from the driver to you the keeper. And it is much more difficult to win when the driver is not known-they cannot assume in Law that the driver and the keeper are the same person.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys

 

Received directions questionnaire in email

 

Here is there email

 

We act for the Claimant and have notified the Court of the Claimant’s intention to proceed with the Claim. 

 

 

 

Please find enclosed a copy of the Claimant’s completed Directions Questionnaire, which has also been filed with the Court.  

 

 

 

You will note the Claimant has elected to mediate in an attempt to settle this matter amicably, without the need for further Court intervention. Should you agree to mediation, please inform the Court who will contact both parties to arrange a mediation appointment.

 

 

 

Yours sincerely

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for posting their WS. It appears that they are pursuing you as the keeper  [re their point 19]. That is great for you as their NotIce to keeper is not compliant for two reasons. 

1] they have used the cameras recording your arrival and exit as the period of parking as required in PoFA. However the new Act clarifies that the ANPR times are not the same as the parking period which is when your car comes to rest in a parking bay which can sometimes be several minutes after arrival. Likewise the period of parking ends when you leave the parking bay not when you exit the carpark. {the fact that you might still have exceeded their time is irrelevant since it is the period of parking that is incorrect thus negating their ability to pursue you as the driver.

 

They then compound it by getting a second thing wrong

 

2] In Schedule 4 s9 [2][f] they have missed out some key words (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)

 

The sign at the entrance does not advise that there is only 1 hour parking after midnight so as not all their T&Cs are present at the entrance  there is no contract formed merely the sign offers an invitation to treat.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@lookin4info i have been to the car park again and looked closely as view from a car they not even clearly visible in day time, the pcn i received was for the night and there is no way that you can see any clear instructions with naked eyes. I am pretty confident that i can prepare very strong ws with actual photographic evidence

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 04/04/2022 at 13:16, lookinforinfo said:

Thank you for posting their WS. It appears that they are pursuing you as the keeper  [re their point 19]. That is great for you as their NotIce to keeper is not compliant for two reasons. 

1] they have used the cameras recording your arrival and exit as the period of parking as required in PoFA. However the new Act clarifies that the ANPR times are not the same as the parking period which is when your car comes to rest in a parking bay which can sometimes be several minutes after arrival. Likewise the period of parking ends when you leave the parking bay not when you exit the carpark. {the fact that you might still have exceeded their time is irrelevant since it is the period of parking that is incorrect thus negating their ability to pursue you as the driver.

 

They then compound it by getting a second thing wrong

 

2] In Schedule 4 s9 [2][f] they have missed out some key words (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)

 

The sign at the entrance does not advise that there is only 1 hour parking after midnight so as not all their T&Cs are present at the entrance  there is no contract formed merely the sign offers an invitation to treat.

 

 

that would be great if it had been mentioned in their defence, however apart from the template MSE stuff the only actual defence to this claim is that it wasn't clear signage so they cant go down the road now of denying being the driver and then it being defended as being the keeper.  So they would have to (and by the sounds of it) have a good defence on poor signage.  I had to double take but the defence said no clean signage!

Edited by happyparker
Link to post
Share on other sites

@happyparker yes that defence prepared by Parking Fine LTD guy. Unfortunately i was not that good in reading and understanding the points of the defence.

 

Someone from MSE also pointed it out the same typo mistake in defence. 

 

Anyways now its been filed so now i have to focus on WS

Edited by Digital_2012
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

no just std court practice in a claim... an N157 which you must abide by, by doing a witness statement 14 days before the date specified.

 

 

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 it says that quite clearly.

 

lots of ws's here to base yours on.

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...