Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi, we are looking to get some opinions on weather or not to bother fighting this PCN. This comes from a very big retail park parking where there are restaurants, hotel, amongst other businesses. The parking is free but I suppose there must be a time limit on it that I am not aware of. We were in the area for around 4 hours. Makes us wonder how they deal with people staying in the hotel as the ANPR is on what appears to be a publicly maintained street (where london buses run) which leads to the different parking areas including the hotel.  1 Date of the infringement 26/05/2024 2 Date on the NTK  31/05/2024 3 Date received 07/06/2024 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?]  YES 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Entry and exit photos however, based on the photographs we are almost sure the photos are taken on public street. This is the location I believe photos are taken from.  https://maps.app.goo.gl/eii8zSmFFhVZDRpbA 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? UKPA. UK Parking Administration LTD 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] The Colonnades, Croydon, CR0 4RQ For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. British Parking Association (BPA) Thanks in advance for any assistance.  UKPA PCN The Collonades-redacted.pdf
    • Thank you for posting their WS. If we start with the actual WS made by the director one would have doubts that they had even read PoFA let alone understood it. Point 10  we only have the word of the director that the contract has been extended. I should have had the corroboration of the Client. Point 12 The Judge HHJ Simkiss was not the usual Judge on motoring cases and his decisions on the necessity of contracts did not align with PoFA. In Schedule 4 [1[ it is quite clearly spelt out- “relevant contract” means a contract (including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land) between the driver and a person who is—(a)the owner or occupier of the land; or (b authorised, under or  by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land; And the laughable piece of paper from the land owners cannot be described as a contract. I respectfully ask that the case be dismissed as there is no contract. WE do not even know what the parking regulations are which is really basic. It is respectfully asked that without a valid contract the case cannot continue. One would imagine that were there a valid contract it would have been produced.  So the contract that Bank has with the motorist must come from the landowner. Bank on their own cannot impose their own contract. How could a director of a parking company sign a Statement of Truth which included Point 11. Point 14. There is no offer of a contract at the entrance to the car park. Doubtful if it is even an offer to treat. The entrance sign sign does not comply with the IPC Code of Conduct nor is there any indication that ANPR cameras are in force. A major fault and breach of GDPR. Despite the lack of being offered a contract at the entrance [and how anyone could see what was offered by way of a contract in the car park is impossible owing to none of the signs in the WS being at all legible] payment was made for the car to park. A young person in the car made the payment. But before they did that, they helped an elderly lady to make her payment as she was having difficulty. After arranging payment for the lady the young lad made his payment right behind. Unfortunately he entered the old lady's number again rather than paying .for the car he was in. This can be confirmed by looking at the Allow List print out on page 25. The defendant's car arrived at 12.49 and at 12.51 and 12.52  there are two payments for the same vrm. This was also remarked on by the IPC adjudicator when the PCN was appealed.  So it is quite disgraceful that Bank have continued to pursue the Defendant knowing that it was a question of  entering the wrong vrm.  Point 21 The Defendant is not obliged to name the driver, they are only invited to do so under S9[2][e]. Also it is unreasonable to assume that the keeper is the driver. The Courts do not do that for good reason. The keeper in this case does not have a driving licence. Point 22. The Defendant DID make a further appeal which though it was also turned down their reply was very telling and should have led to the charge being dropped were the company not greedy and willing to pursue the Defendant regardless of the evidence they had in their own hands. Point 23 [111] it's a bit rich asking the Defendant to act justly and at proportionate cost while acting completely unjustly themselves and then adding an unlawful 70% on to the invoice. This  is despite PoFA S4[5] (5)The maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper by virtue of the right conferred by this paragraph is the amount specified in the notice to keeper under paragraph 9[2][d].  Point 23 [1v] the Director can deny all he wants but the PCN does not comply with PoFA. S9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN only quotes the ANPR arrival and departure times which obviously includes a fair amount of driving between the two cameras. Plus the driver and passengers are a mixture of disabled and aged persons who require more time than just a young fit single driver to exit the car and later re enter. So the ANPR times cannot be the same as the required parking period as stipulated in the ACT. Moreover in S9[2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; You will note that in the PCN the words in parentheses are not included but at the start of Section 9 the word "must" is included. As there are two faults in the PCN it follows that Bank cannot pursue the keeper . And as the driver does not have a driving licence their case must fail on that alone. And that is not even taking into consideration that the payment was made. Point 23 [v] your company is wrong a payment was made. very difficult to prove a cash payment two weeks later when the PCN arrives. However the evidence was in your print out for anyone to see had they actually done due diligence prior to writing to the DVLA. Indeed as the Defendant had paid there was no reasonable cause to have applied for the keeper details. Point 24 the Defendant did not breach the contract. The PCN claimed the Defendant failed to make a payment when they had made a payment.   I haven't finished yet but that is something to start with
    • You don't appeal to anyone. You haven't' received a demand from a statutory body like the council, the police or the courts. It's just a dodgy cowboy company trying it on. You simply don't pay.  In the vast majority of these cases the company deforest the Amazon with threats about how they are going to divert a drone from Ukraine and make it land on your home - but in the end they do nothing.
    • honestly you sound like you work the claimant yes affixed dont appeal to anyone no cant be “argued either way”  
    • Because of the tsunami of cases we are having for this scam site, over the weekend I had a look at MET cases we have here stretching back to June 2014.  Yes, ten years. MET have not once had the guts to put a case in front of a judge. In about 5% of cases they have issued court papers in the hope that the motorist will be terrified of going to court and will give in.  However, when the motorist defended, it was MET who bottled it.  Every time.
  • 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 
        • 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

TRAVEL UP Cancelled flights told me ba can cancel flights any time without compensation


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 563 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

I booked flights to Scotland and return from City airport to go to a funeral through travelup £149.49 return.

 

The day of departure BA cancelled the flight and offered a flight next morning which was no good as I would miss the funeral.

 

I checked the flight times and found another that day an hour later so changed to that and BA then cancelled that flight too and again rebooked me on a flight the following day.

 

I had to quickly book a train ticket and it cost £112.50.

 

I tried to contact BA and Travelup but due to dubious internet connections while travelling I could not contact them until the morning of the unwanted flight.

I phoned BA and informed them I was going to a funeral and the flight they had rebooked was of no use. This was an hour before was due to leave. The BA rep said that was fine but I had to contact travelup to get refund. My prime concern was the return flight, I said I still wanted that as I had to fly back, she assured me it would be available.

 

I then phoned travelup and the call was said to be recorded for some purposes. I explained what had occurred and they said they would sort the refund. I again made it clear I needed the return flight and was told that was no problem and it would be available. A couple of other calls later and they were reassuring me again and again the return flight would still be available.

 

Needless to say the day of return I tried to book my boarding pass and nothing showed up. I phoned BA who told me travelup had cancelled it. I phoned travelup three times, each time they waffled on, told me to hang on then hung up, these calls were around 20 mins each. I now had to book the train again to get home.

 

Travelup say I am not due any compensation and will not even refund the entire amount paid to them. They deny saying the return flight was still available which is a complete lie. I have told them I will go to the small claims court and demand they provide the recordings of the phone calls. They said the day before that they were sending an email that I should sign. I believed it to be compensation for cancelled flights at 5pm and 6pm  and replied telling them to get my money. Now it seems they want to keep half the money I paid.

 

I believe the two outbound flights cancelled were due to fog but the return was cancelled by travelup without telling me, in fact they told me my return flight would still go ahead. I have had nothing but lies including claiming the flight was closed before I contacted travelup so BA had me as a no show.

 

He didn't know my phone call to BA  showed him to be lying.

I know BA returned over £150 to travelup.

I have told travelup I will be going to small claims court.

 

Am I entitled to compensation for them cancelling flight and my extra expenditure.

 

Your help is much appreciated.

 

I have quite a few messages from them making lurid claims. the recorded calls will prove conclusively they lied.

 

Any help and advice will be much appreciated.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i've spaced your post as 3 screen of block text will get no reads.

 

how did you pay travelup?

 

 

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

You are entitled to a full refund AND to 250Euros under EC 261. Those are 2 separate claims.

 

Travelup needs to process your refund. See article 8 You don't need to go all the way to SCC. Just get written evidence that they refuse to refund you for a flight that was cancelled. (Flight cancellations on the same day of flight automatically award you right to a refund regardless of what anyone says). Once you get this written confirmation do a chargeback on your debit card if you can (I'm not entirely sure how this works in the case of debit cards, someone else here might be more help)

 

Your EC261 needs to go straight to BA for the extra 250 Euros (equivalent in GBP). See article 7 They will need to prove the cancellation was due to an extreme and unforeseeable circumstance to deny it. They might try to feed you lies and tell you a snowflake was an extreme and unforseeable circumstance, as they often do, but don't let them.

 

 

Quote

 

Article 5

Cancellation

1. In case of cancellation of a flight, the passengers concerned shall:

(a) be offered assistance by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 8; and
(...)

(c) have the right to compensation by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 7, unless:

(...)

(iii) they are informed of the cancellation less than seven days before the scheduled time of departure and are offered re-routing, allowing them to depart no more than one hour before the scheduled time of departure and to reach their final destination less than two hours after the scheduled time of arrival.


 

Article 7

Right to compensation

1. Where reference is made to this Article, passengers shall receive compensation amounting to:

(a) EUR 250 for all flights of 1500 kilometres or less;


 

Article 8

Right to reimbursement or re-routing

1. Where reference is made to this Article, passengers shall be offered the choice between:

(a) - reimbursement within seven days, by the means provided for in Article 7(3), of the full cost of the ticket at the price at which it was bought, for the part or parts of the journey not made, and for the part or parts already made if the flight is no longer serving any purpose in relation to the passenger's original travel plan, together with, when relevant,

- a return flight to the first point of departure, at the earliest opportunity;

(b) re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at the earliest opportunity; or

(c) re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at a later date at the passenger's convenience, subject to availability of seats.

 

 

Edited by Kyosanto
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There was fog on the outbound day but travelup cancelled the return flight. They now claim they had to cancel the return flight to get the refund back of which they are keeping quite a lot of. BA and travelup both stated the return flight was fine and there would be no problem. Quite a few flights were cancelled on the 14th November and I am sure they will claim due to fog but BA did not cancel my return flight, Travelup took it upon themselves to cancel it without telling me. 

 

This is the first reply to my complaint............................ We have gone through the case and the reason it was processed as a full refund because there was an alternate option given to you.

As per British Airways policy if the airline offered an alternate option, then passenger has to take a decision before the closing of check-in and the time when you contacted us, at that time the flight was already departed (the alternate option) and once flight departed without re-issuing the ticket then unfortunately the only option left was to process the refund.................................

 

I had already contacted BA and informed them I was already in Scotland and the flight was of no use. I informed BA at 9.26am the outward flight was 10.20am so the flight had not departed nor had the gate closed, I never realised they were giving me a partial refund I thought Travelup were getting me compensation for two cancelled outbound flights

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the next claim they make in the next email................................................................................. We have mentioned not about the return flight but about the outbound.

As there was a schedule change so if passenger wish to proceed with return flight only and willing to take a refund of the outbound only then passenger has to get the ticket re-issued due to schedule change prior to check in closure however when you contacted us at that time the outbound was already departed.

That is the reason we were unable to re-issue the ticket as it was not possible at the time when you contacted us unfortunately. 

We do agree that return flight is operating for tonight at 20.25 and has not departed however as explain above we were unable to re-issue the ticket yesterday...............................................................................................................

 

I had informed BA at 9.26 that I required the return. I eventually found a contact number well hidden on travelup website and informed them at 9.53 that I still needed the return flight and the flight had not departed and was not due to depart until 10.20 They continually said my return flight was fine and there would be no problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's hard to make sense of the conversations you pasted, but I don't know why you even bother discussing with them, nor do I understand the moot point they are trying to make.

 

Your flight was cancelled on the day of the flight. You were not offered another flight which departed within 1 hour and arrived within 2 hours. Therefore under EC261 Article 5, you are demanding a full refund of your return ticket (as you will not use the inbound either), and there is no argument possible. If they do not refund you within 7 days they are in breach of EC261 and you will report them to the regulatory authorities, in addition of asking your card provider for a chargeback.

 

It's as easy as that.

 

Then, on the side, start writing to BA as well for your EC261 claim. If there was heavy fog and many flights were cancelled, it's possible that they will get away with not paying you the 250 Euros, but you should at least try, it's free.

Edited by Kyosanto
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...