Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Not really. His claim will succeed simply because its a simple matter of a lost parcel and no insurance. Its not a complex case so I think he’ll be fine, especially as it is P2G who arent very good at defending claims but I ageee its not been handled at all well.   My only concern with withdrawing is that he loses £35 in the case of £240 but thats a matter for him   I dont think it has a reduced chance of success if OP actually replies and actions things but if not then ofcourse it will struggle.   My concern is if he starts again it’ll be just as sporadic.   Maybe close thread and let him make a new one if hes ready to engage?
    • Please will you start reading up on the stories on the some form especially the pinned post. I have to say that I'm concerned that you feel that a warning from P2G is going to affect your rights and is going to subvert statutory law. I think you've been here for a few months and I would have hoped that by now you would understand that terms and conditions must always be interpreted in the light of overriding statute. Also I suggested that once you have done the reading on the sub- forum then you would understand the information that we would need in order to give you the best help. The fact that you haven't told us what the item was suggested also that you haven't done the reading. Please give us full details including identity of the item, value, where these properly declared? Dates – blah blah blah. Not paying attention to P2G. Pay attention to us
    • P2G can make clear whatever they want frankly, the judge isnt going to sit there and go “they told you to buy their insurance and you didn’t” and then dismiss your claim.  I would say you should send a formal complaint then after 7 days sent a LOC. Day 21 from now submit your claim on OCMC.    
    • I thought i could just use ( copy and paste)  the terminology from my other post earlier in the year when i previously claimed against P2g .   The parcel hasnt been 'officially ' lost yet i have another 13 days before their 'investigation' ends and then theyll probably offer the postage back as i didnt take the 'insurance'   But to recap ,  The parcel was booked through P2g and sent with Evri. No Protective Insurance was taken out. The parcels value is only £48 plus postage of £3 and the value of the parcel was declared The parcels tracking says while it was in Evri's system it was sent to an 'incorrect' depot and tracking would be updated in 24 hrs which it didnt and the delivery date passed, i then had a live chat with P2g who opened an investigation and im waiting to hear what's happened. My only concern is,  last time i claimed P2g made it clear that in future i must take out their protective insurance which i gavent and im wondering whether this will ' complicate' things ...  
    • it is precisely for these reasons that the OP should withdraw the claim and begin again. Firstly, the case has been badly handled from the start. The OP hasn't come to us and stuck to it in a regular engaging way. Secondly, it seems that the OP is now being advised on the basis of it being a matter of principle rather than looking at a sensible and pragmatic outcome. We have a duty to the people who come to help us to try and get the best solution for them that we can. Secondary is that we want to notch up a further victory against the parcel delivery industry – and frankly it doesn't matter which company it is as long as we get a victory. If we simply urge someone to continue a case at their own expense in a claim which has a very reduced chance of success, simply because it gives us personal satisfaction, then this is really contrary to what we do and certainly contrary to the interests of the claimant. I'm now urging the OP (Original Poster) to withdraw and to start again and work with us very closely in order to get a much more certain victory. By continuing this claim, not only with the OP risk even more money, it will take more time in the sense of failure will be demoralising. Better to feel that one is in control by exercising one's own choices and taking the long view
  • 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

UKPCS PCN appealed - yellow box violation - Gateway House , Piccadilly


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 434 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 , I’ve recently been “charged” by UKCPS for stopping here on 21/9/22.

 

The truth of the matter is that I was dropping my wife off at Piccadilly and I don’t know Manchester so was following the sat nav.

 

It took me to behind piccadilly station so essentially a dead end. I stopped the car , checked the maps on the sat nav to see where I should be going and then set off again.

 

I was just lost and needed to see which way to go. I was there only a matter of minutes, no one got out of the vehicle.

 

I received this “charge” and appealed as I thought surely it’s a mistake. The appeal was rejected so I did the option of appealing with IAS ( independent right) and I’m still waiting on their response.

 

I’ve seen the images of me “ parking” and there can’t be 2 minutes between the 2 photos. 
 

I’ve only recently found this site and you all say don’t reply well I’m sorry I’ve responded once to them and once to the IAS, so there’s nothing more I can do about that.

 

I shall ignore anything else that comes through.  any and all advice welcome.

 

1.Date of infringement.     11/09/2022

2. Date on NTK.                   21/09/2022

3. Date received                  22/9/2022

 

4.Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of the protection of freedom act 2012.       Yes

 

5. Is there any photographic evidence of the event.                             Yes 

 

6. Have you appealed.         Yes 

 Have you had a response         Yes 

 

7. Who is the parking company     UKCPS Ltd

 

8. Where exactly        Gateway House, Piccadilly, Manchester  

 

9.  Appeals body.                    Independent Appeals Services ( www.ias.org)

 

 

thanks in advance 

 

Dreadloch 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for filling in the sticky and telling us what happened so succinctly - we wish everyone who came here would do that!

 

Live & learn and all that.  Yes, appealing was a mistake, the iAS is a total kangaroo court set up by the worst of the private parking companies to always side with the parking companies.  Your appeal will fail.

 

Did you out yourself as the driver?

 

 

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

OK, bad news, you have lost your POFA protection.

 

Good news, I've just done a search on the site, and we have 17 other cases for this place.  UKCPS haven't had the gonads to take any of the motorists to court.  Of course they threaten they will drop a nuclear missile on your house but when it comes to it they have shied away from court (at least so far).

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to UKPCS PCN - yellow box violation - Gateway House , Piccadilly

Cause they can't enforce yellow box violations...

 

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

No evidence here of otherwise, you can search threads as well as we can ...there are 10's of threads on this place 

 

But don't ignore a letter of claim if if if one ever comes 

 

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

1 last thought , as and when debt collects start the letters , it in no way affects my credit rating , I won’t be black listed? Can’t see anything in any other threads ( thank you all in advance)

Link to post
Share on other sites

No such thing as a blacklist, urbanmyth.

 

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

Can confirm I have three separate debt collection agencies after me for these and my credit rating is as immaculate as ever. 

 

There's no need to stress at all, but if you get a letter of claim (or similar wording) post here for advice. 

 

From what I've learnt from the experienced people here: the threat of court is 99.999% of the time just that. They don't want to risk the cost of court for a small financial win. And if they do eventually make you go through with it, there's a decent chance you'll win as the company will have screwed something up at some point. 

  • Like 1
  • I agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

about time you blocked emails...

 

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

where does it say it's a FINE please?

 

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

Time people and the Media stopped calling these Speculative Invoices FINES, and call them what they are a Speculative Invoice that might not have any foundation.

 

Calling them Fines gives them a false impression of legitimacy, and a criminal connection when they are purely Civil founded in Contract law. With no legal requirement for a Keeper to name the driver unlike a police speeding ticket.  In fact the courts have indicated to PPC's that using Criminal cases  like Elliott v Loake in a witness statement to infer a keeper is driver is a no no

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

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...