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
      • 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

Park Watch - Lease Car ANPR PCN Claimform - No Waiting - CROSSGATES SHOPPING CENTRE-CENTRE MANAGEMENT SUITE, LEEDS LS15 8ET *** Claim Dismissed***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 454 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

That's far too short, isn't set out like a WS should be and doesn't include several of the legal arguments in your favour.

 

If you scroll up to the posts 8 and 9 posts above this one, there is an example of what a WS should look like and the legal arguments are set out.

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

@ShadesVFR "I have just noticed on the original PCN, which was sent late, they do mention that I am the hirer of the vehicle. Does this negate the Notice to Keeper / Notice to Hirer argument ?"

 

The PCN you received should be an updated version of the  one that would have been sent to the registered keeper. When the RK sent your information to Park Watch they  should have sent to you a Notice to Hirer  [even if it wasn't called that ] explained that they received your details from the RK , sent copies of all the paperwork sent by the RK and given you 21 days to pay the charge.

As they did not comply with PoFA with their Notice to Hirer partly because they gave you 28 days notice but also because when they sent you the PCN, they should have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent the RK complete with the relevant dates of the alleged offence and the date they sent the PCN to the RK. You should also have received  copies of the data sent by the RK in order to ascertain that what the RK said agrees with your understanding of the agreement that you have with the RK. This is important as it allows you to ensure that the RK has given  the right information to Park Watch.

 

One can only assume that the PCN sent to the RK was sent within the correct time and the wording complied with PoFA. Had it not been then  you would have had a reason to claim the Park had no claim against you as the original PCN was not compliant. These are all reasons why you should have received all the information necessary to comply with PoFA. As you didn't receive it Park have failed to comply with the Act.

According to PoFA the only way Park can pursue you as the hirer as if they comply with the stipulations within PoFA.  They haven't.

 

It is not a question of negating the NTK/NTH . It is they have failed to comply with PoFA by not sending the other paperwork from the RK and they have given you 28 days  time to pay as opposed to 21 days. So they have no right in Law to pursue you. Once you include that in your WS they really should not continue with your case. The sections of the Act they failed on have already been explained in my post 65 and which you should include in your WS so that the Judge is well clued up should it get to Court. 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you might as well have not bothered uploading Gladdy's bilge.  It basically says nothing except "He parked in a no waiting area".

 

The contract is rubbish with most of it redacted, and it doesn't give Park Watch the right to sue under their own name.

 

You say the sign is different too - the judge won't like that.

 

Time to produce a detailed WS that deals with all six of the legal points upthread.  Tick, tock.

 

 

Edited by FTMDave
Typo
  • 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

next time use the PDFMERGE website listed in UPLOAD and put everything in one mass pdf....:whistle:

  • Like 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

not all exhibits listed in that WS are in your upload?

 

 

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

Aye, took half the evening to download.

 

The upload guide does ask to put everything in one file and gives details of free software that can do the biz in a few seconds.

  • 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

Reading the fleecers pants Witness Statement (sworn to be the truth!)...

 

20. As a result of the above the Claimant obtained the details of the vehicles registered keeper from
the DVLA, under the terms of the KADOE. The Defendant was named as the Registered Keeper...
The Claimant issued a postal PCN to the Defendant as they were the Registered Keeper of the vehicle Exhibit GS5.

 

The Defendant is not, and never has been, the registered keeper of the vehicle.


21. The PCN gave the Registered Keeper three options:
i. To pay the PCN;
ii. If they were not the driver to provide the Claimant with the driver's full name and a
serviceable address, in order that liability could be transferred
; and
iii. To appeal the PCN initially via the Claimants internal appeals process and then if
dissatisfied by the outcome to appeal the PCN to the IAS.


22. No payment was made and no response was received, the Claimant therefore issued a liability notice Exhibit reference GS6.

 

If 21 and 22 are the truth (as sworn by the witness), the claimant should be pursuing the registered keeper... Not the defendant.

 

Any thoughts guys?

Edited by Nicky Boy

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

The contract looks awfully short and does not give Park permission to prosecute motorists who breach the terms. . The contract has redacted the signatories and it is apparently signed by managing agents. there should therefore be an authorisation from the land owner that they are allowed to sign on behalf of the landowner.  Not a clue what date the contract was signed.

No photos of your car and where it was parked. No map  of the land that the contract refers to nor any photos of the signage in the car park.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In light of the above outright lies in the witness statement, I think you should also require their witness to appear in person for clarification.

 

How do you know they aren't going to attend?

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

Quote

So Gladstones Solicitors are not appearing in court and have sent the attached witness statement. 

 

Have they served notice on you and the court pursuant to section 27.9 CPR ?

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

More on their witness statement...

 

6. The Claimant is and was at all material times a member of an Accredited Trade Association
(ATA) as evidenced by the logo displayed on the signage at the site and the Claimants
correspondence.

 

Forgive me if I'm blind, but I can't see them listed as a member of the BPA "as evidenced by the displayed logo"...

 

WWW.BRITISHPARKING.CO.UK

 

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

There is enough in that WS to use against them Now didn't Will & John have a falling out with the BPA and started the IPA up?

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

Well spotted Nicky Boy.

 

They are a member of the IPC  https://www.parkwatch.tech/

 

Dear, dear, dear, putting the wrong trade association logo on their signs.

  • 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 only went looking because of the vague way it was written in the witness statement. He knows exactly what he's doing and should be compelled to attend court, even if it means an adjournment to get him there...

  • 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

They have served pursuant to CPR 27.9.

 

The other exhibits are already posted up earlier in the thread. Only attached new ones.

 

The Court has been notified of the Claimants non attendance and the court has been asked to deal with the claim in the claimants absence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shades are you sure you didn't receive the missing documents I outlined on post 85. i note that the sheets were numbered and there were no more after that?

If not I cannot imagine that Park will be happy bunnies. Ok they have lost the case anyway but it's just the incompetence of the whole WS. I mean Walli and Ambreen are very long winded and do come up with some very fanciful reasons for motorists breaching the T&Cs but Gladstones have really blown it bigly  here as Trump might have said.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Craig Hood a new name on witness statements and more importantly, is he Robin's brother?😂

  • Haha 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 The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

Their WS is a total pigs ear.

Gladstones have failed to identify that the defendant's vehicle was on hire despite it being mentioned on the Notice to Driver. As a result they have not included a copy of the original Notice to Keeper that would have been sent to the Registered Keeper.  The Paralegal continues to refer to the Defendant as the Registered keeper when they are not. The hire/lease company is the Registered keeper.

There are many reasons why the Notice to Driver fails to comply with PoFA. including no Period of parking mentioned-not even on the photos; the Defendant is given 28 days to pay the charge when according to PoFA a Notice to Hirer is only entitled to 21 days. No Waiting signs cannot offer a contract as the sign is prohibitive; the required documents from the hire company plus a copy of the original PCN were not sent to the Defendant.  As a result Park Watch have failed to comply with POFA under Schedule 4 S14 [2]  so it would appear that it is the solicitors who have failed to understand the requirements of PoFA.

 

Further, on the contract itself there is no reference to Park Watch being permitted to take legal proceedings against motorists who are in breach of the Terms and Conditions which the Defendant denies being in breach in any case.

The  signatures on the contract  have been redacted so there is no way that the Defendant can verify them and which company signed they represented. It appears that one are managing agents but there is no authorisation from the land owner that the agents can sign on their behalf. The contract fails therefore to be proved to be validly executed.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Telephone eh?

That means "Robin Hood" has absolutely no reason for non-attendance. 

You might still get a chance to show him up in front of the judge yet.

Huh, "the defendant has no idea about POFA" indeed!

 

You can highlight his own lack of knowledge of POFA...

Edited by Nicky Boy

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

Yes, i saw that and the comment about "My Company would like the Court to note that the Defendant is using a generic defence which can be found on the internet".

 

I thought Shades should include a short paragraph in their WS : "The Defendant would like the Court to note that the Claimant's solicitor is using a generic Witness Statement of which 90% describes the Claimant's business and has no relevance to the dispute in question". 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 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

That response regarding the generic Cut 'n paste WS from the fleecer need to be part of any Defence WS also Good for the goose etc.......😀🤣

  • Like 1
  • I agree 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

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

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...