Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • We need to see the actual document from the IAS where it is written - "The Operator's evidence shows no payment for the Appellant's vehicle, or anything similar. It does show two payments for the same registration in quick succession. I would take a reasonable guess, based on the circumstances described, that the person paying has paid for the registration of the person they assisted again." You can't just type it up yourself. At the hearing in July or August or whenever the judge will have two Witness Statements. One from Bank's director says you never made a second appeal. You say you did make a second appeal and the IAS concluded that payment was made. The judge will immediately twig that either you or the director is lying.  But who? Fail to show the documentation form the IAS and instead just produce something you've typed yourself will make it look like you just made up the appeal and you are lying and you will lose the case. Please let us see what the IAS adjudicator sent.
    • I used to have a retail outlet in London selling my husband's photography.  We also had a co-op with staff so they weren't directly employed by me, but I paid for the other overheads etc.  When my husband died, I carried on as usual for a while but then I became ill and moved quite far away so logistically was becoming very difficult.  I came to an arrangement (verbal) with one of the guys I trusted, that I would send him the images to print and sell as normal, and I wouldn't take any money, as a short term solution until I got back on my feet and worked out the best way to do things. He would pay all the  rent, insurance etc... Over a year later, not able to give things away for free anymore,  I drew up a contract as a wholesale agreement, so I would get everything printed and sent to him and I would invoice his for what he ordered. I noticed form the beginning that he wasn't ordering enough or frequently enough to be making any money, and was suspicious he was doing his own orders on the sly and ordering just enough from me to keep my happy.  I checked with my printer, which I've been with for 20 years, and he sad he wasn't getting orders for my images from anyone else. I emailed a few other printers to ask them to keep a look out for some images but I soon realised this would be impossible to police.  The only option really would be to buy a print from him and check the stamp on the back of it.  I finally managed to get hold of on the prints on sale, and sure enough, he did not order it through me.   In the contract he signed in 2022 it explicitly states that he must destroy all files I had previously sent him etc etc so e is in breach of that.  When I drew up the contract, I was careful to make sure it was legally binding, but before I let rip at him, I need to know where I stand.  The contract is here: PARTIES This WHOLESALE AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made effective as of 30th June, 2022, by and between ############################## The Supplier and the Client, collectively referred to as the "Parties," hereby agree to the following terms: TERMS AND CONDITIONS SALES OF GOODS The Supplier agrees to provide the following goods to the Client (“Goods”): Description of Goods ################################# Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b BOTH PARTIES AGREE: The Client purchases the Goods through the Supplier directly, and agrees to delete/destroy any previously held digital images (Goods) owned by the Supplier, and agrees not to use any such files for monetary gain, outside of this agreement, either directly or through a third party from immediate effect of this agreement. The Client purchases the other materials necessary for resale of the Goods independently of this agreement. The Client shall have exclusive rights for resale of Goods at ###########, and also with permission, as a retailer of the Goods elsewhere, provided that there is no conflict of interest between the Supplier and the Client. The Client is free to decide their own retail prices, for the Goods. The Supplier shall use #####  to provide the printed Goods on Fujifilm Crystal Archive paper, with Lustre finish, and will not use any other Printer unless #### cease to trade, without prior approval from the Client. The Supplier shall not impose restrictions on size or frequency of orders made by the Client. The prices provided by the Supplier shall not increase for a minimum of 3 years, unless the prices of the raw materials rise, in which case the client will be informed immediately. Any discounts/promotional prices of raw materials shall be passed on to the Client by the Supplier, and the invoice will show adjustments for this, as well as credit for return postage of any damaged goods. This agreement can be terminated by the Client without notice; the Supplier must give notice of no less than 90 days, unless the terms of the agreement are breached, in which case, the agreement can be terminated with immediate effect. PAYMENT Orders must be paid for upon receipt of invoice, via Bank transfer: ######### Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b DELIVERY AND INSPECTIONS All orders received by 12.00am (midnight) shall be processed by the Supplier the following working day and delivery of order shall arrive in accordance with the Royal Mail schedule, or DPD, should express delivery be requested. The Client shall be liable for the delivery charge which shall be added to the invoice. The Goods will be delivered to the address specified by the Client. The Client shall be provided with order tracking, and should any problems arise with the ordering system or the couriers (Royal Mail, DPD), the Client shall be informed without delay of any such issues. The Client will inspect the Goods and report any defects or damage to the Goods in transit as soon as possible upon receipt of Goods, and will retain damaged Goods for return to Supplier for refund/replacement. GENERAL PROVISIONS CONFIDENTIALITY The prices of the Goods and other information contained in this Agreement is confidential and will not be disclosed by either party unless with prior written consent of the other party. INDEMNIFICATION The Client indemnifies the Supplier from any claims, liabilities, and expenses made by any third party vendors or customers of the Client. GOVERNING LAW This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with UK Law. ACCEPTANCE Both parties understand and accept the wholesale arrangement stipulated under this Agreement. Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the Parties has executed this Wholesale Agreement as of the day and year set forth above.   Signed by us both electronically.   I haven't broached any of this yet, and I am looking for some advice about what action to take.  The main issue I've got is that he has still go those images.  If I terminate the contract, I will need to know that he no longer has those images and I can't think of a bulletproof way to do this. I'm thinking I might tell him I will continue with the contract but ask for a  sum in damages and say that if I find out he's still doing it down the line I will terminate the contract and sue him for damages. The damages side of things I'm not sure how it would work as he is self employed, and I'm positive he doesn't declare all of his earnings to HMRC, in order to find out how much I have lost, would the court demand to go through his tax self assessments?  I'm not sure how to proceed with this, I don't want to lose that place as an outlet as it is in a prime spot in London, which is why I let him have those images in the first place as I would have had to pull out altogether at that point.  I am regretting it somewhat now though.  Please help.
    • I cannot locate anything in my paper work that states 2 payments were made? Perhaps you could point this out? In reply from IAS it states "The ticketing data has been attached" nothing was sent to me. I made a response to the IAS all this was done online
    • Thanks again for your responses. The concern I have here, is that freeholder of the land (a company, who presumably would have been the ones to have initially instructed PPM to manage the parking here), will have proof of exactly how long the vehicle was on site for, as the driver was meeting operatives from that company on a separate matter. On this basis, if the matter was to get to court, I feel all the other technicalities about signage, size of signage/font, lack of start/finish times, will not be enough to have any case dropped? This PCN was brought up to the freeholder but they have advised that PPM will not waive this charge. 
  • 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

Smart ANPR PCN - overstay of 45mins free time - ANGOULEME WAY RETAIL PARK, BURY


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 624 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

Hi,

 

This is my first post so apologies I've missed something amongst the other threads i've read today regarding the same 'creditor' at the same location, The questionnaire is below:

 

1 Date of the infringement 03/09/2022

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 16/09/2022

 

3 Date received Today, 26/09/2022
 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] NO

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? YES
 

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

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up N/A
 

7 Who is the parking company? SMART PARKING

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] ANGOULEME WAY RETAIL PARK, BURY
 

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under IAS is mentioned on the back of the notice
 

 

I have a few queries regarding this having read some of the threads on this site:

 

1 - It has taken 23 days from the date of contravention for me to receive this comms - this is the first comms I have received regarding these matters;

 

my under standing there is 14 days for them to issue this notice, with the date detailed being 13 days, so no problem there. I have read there is then a 2 day allowance for post, so 16 days in total, meaning I should have had this by 19th September 22 - is my understanding correct?

does this invalidate this invoice?

is the Bank Holiday a mitigating circumstance for them? even then that is only 1 day - there hasn't been Postal Strikes in the period between date of issue (16/09/22) and date of receipt (26/09/22)

 

2 - the charge is for £100, reduced to £60 within the 14 day period (of which there is only 4 remaining) - I note a thread about these charges being capped at £50 now - is this a legitimate charge?

Source - Private parking fines to be capped at £50 - BBC News

 

 

3 - The convention itself is for being 17 mins over a 45min 'free stay' period - 45 mins seems incredibly short and despite contacting the Landlord - CBRE, as well as the Planning Dept of the Local Authority, I've been unable to ascertain the legality of this enforcement. 5 of those minutes were spent queuing to exit the retail park, with the only exit leading onto a road that get congested due to volume of traffic looking to turn onto the A58 which runs perpendicular to the site. 

 

Any help or advise is greatly appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Smart ANPR PCN - overstay of 45mins free time - ANGOULEME WAY RETAIL PARK, BURY

well the reception delay is not of their doing.

you most certainly need to nail down this unlawful free 45mins limit, i bet the original planning perm said nothing of the sort!! and neither can anyone revise it to that without council approval.

 

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

Thanks so much for your reply! :)

 

So the whole 2 days post thing is just a bit of cobblers? I havent seen anything 'official' which quotes that tbf.

 

what about the charge? is the BBC article linked correct, and the maximum charge applied should be £50?

 

I have emailed Bury Planning department to try find out more, but it takes them 10 business days to reply, all while the clock is ticking on the discount being offered in the notice - am I best to challenge the notice with SMART? will this put a pause on the clock for the discount period? The letter says if I pay then I accept liability, which makes me think that even if I pay, and then the Council come back to say it should be more than 45 mins, I wouldn't be able to recoup my money.

 

what is the best way forward here?

 

 TIA

Edited by jaminbenj
Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember that unless a judge orders you to pay this money after you've lost a court case, you are under no obligation to pay.

 

There are no guarantees but in the seven years I've been on the site I've never seen Smart take court action and I've never seen a Cagger pay Smart a penny.  Sure, they threaten to drop a nuclear warhead on your house but ultimately do nothing.

 

There is a minimum 15-minute grace/consideration period and queuing to get our of the car park isn't parking.

 

Is the envelope franked?

 

The £50 cap in the government Code of Practice is currently being legally challenged by the the fleecers so can't be considered.

 

 

 

 

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

Could you please post up the PCN you received. Please redact your name, address and vrm as well as their ref.numbers and include front and back page.

Smart do, amazingly enough,  have planning permission for their signs and cameras  approved in July 2021 by Bury Council. The signage says the first 45 minutes are free and the motorists can then  pay to stay there for up to 3 hours [but not 45 minutes plus 3 hours.].

 

Under the new Private Parking Code of Practice, a consideration period of  a minimum of five minutes is allowed at the start of the parking period. This is followed by a minimum of ten minutes, described as the Grace period at the end of the parking period. As you were further delayed because of the traffic on the main road, and the fact that both periods were minimums , Smart have no chance of successfully winning in Court were they stupid enough to do so. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Similar in Llandudno at a retail park but they allow 2 hours free with no ticket required until, or unless intended stay is longer , in which case you buy a ticket first.  That 45 minutes is a point of challenge as LFI sdays.

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 done on not paying these utter charlatans.

 

Prepare for deforestation over the next few months - but nothing worse than that.  I've done a search on the forum and we have three others in your same position for this car park.  None of them paid.  None were taken to court.

 

Yes, please keep us updated.  Any info will be useful also for others in the future.

 

As you seem to use this place regularly, next time get photos of the signage and of any traffic queue at the exit.

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

In Desmond3178's thread  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/445048-smart-pcn-retail-park-angouleme-way-bury/#comment-5150270  it is stated that once the free stay period was two hours.

 

Of course they might have made a mistake.

 

Do you know @zydeco?

 

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

docx has all your pers details in file info/properties

and your reg is showing in text

 

please use PDF 

post hidden till you pop a PDF up to replace the docx

  • 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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...