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

OPS/DCB(L) 2xPCN's PAPLOC Now claimform - Machine said Not In Use - Llangrannog (Beach) car park, West Wales *** Claim Dismissed***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 238 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 have just found this on Trust Pilot

WWW.TRIPADVISOR.COM

Llangrannog Beach: AVOID BEACH FRONT PARKING nothin to do with the locals - See 362 traveler reviews, 191 candid photos, and great deals for Llangrannog, UK, at Tripadvisor.

There are over 70 complaints about your OPS in Llangrannog car park. Spread over several years with the machine not working and the phone coverage non existent the crooks are making money hand over fist.

 

However the Courts take a dim view of motorists being charged consistently when their apparatus is out of order and they know phone coverage is poor.

 

As they are making money this way there is no compulsion on them to get their ticket machine working. As such they will not be able to claim that their charges are justified.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

 In the contract 1a says that OPS will always adhere to the legislation. but they are breaking the Law by trying to charge you £182 despite PoFA 2012 schedule 4 s4[5] stating the maximum charge is the amount on the PCN.

 

Plus of course the Private Parking Code of Practice s9 "The parking operator must not levy additional costs over and above the level of a parking charge or parking tariff as originally issued."

 

Write to the land owner advising them that OPS are not observing the Law and massively overcharging and not just you.

 

As they are breaking their contract and giving the land owner a bad name at the same time,  could they please cancel your ticket and prevent others from being overcharged in future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
  • 9 months later...

ghedgehog in their Contract they say that they will abide by PoFA 2012 and then they don't. Under PoFA Schedule 4 S9[2] [a] it 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;

Nowhere on their PCN does it even mention Period of Parking. It does mention the arrival and departure times but as that involves driving to get to a parking spot and than later driving from where they were parked to the  exit it is impossible to consider those times as the "parking" period.

Had you not outed yourself as the driver that would have given you a clear win since as the PCN is not compliant with the Act the keeper is not responsible for the charge.

However the pay machine is out of use. The Just app and phone number rarely work as there is no mobile phone signal nor internet connection that appears to work. 

http://llangrannogwelfare.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/MS-Report-Llangrannog-Beach-PDF.pdf

As such this is an entrapment site and the scam has been going on for months if not longer. OPS make more money by not fixing the problem and the motorists are unable to pay even though they want to and have the means to pay. As they cannot there is a frustration of contract and the claim by OPS should fail. 

As far back as June 2nd I also said then that the PCN did not comply with PoFA because of them attempting to overcharge on the PCN. 

So twice they have not complied with PoFA yet they are taking you to court because they have failed to provide the necessary financial facilities to make payments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have been looking at the planning permission documents kindly supplied by Peter Parker for the car park.

I notice that the parking contract started in March 2019 yet planning permission for the ANPR was not granted until after the 6th May. So much for observing the Law. 

There is no mention in that application for permission for the signage. Peter Parker suggested that it was not necessary  because the signs were too small for pp to be required. However he figures he quoted for the signage was actually for the size of the payment machine and as I said there was no application for signage permission. And BPA recommend much larger signs should be provided and they would require planning permission. So does Llangrannog have pp for their signs?

I note too in the objections that it was pointed out then that the internet reception was insufficient to provide a service even before the application was granted, So OPS knew from the start that paying was going to be a problem. So two years after and they are still having the same problems but still charging motorists for some thing that is not the motorists fault 

should surely merit the Judge granting you exemplary damages as well as kicking their case out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hedhehog, I know it is a bit of a bind but I have included a case where the Judge ripped apart  the Unicorn extra charge  so much that he decided , to cancel the whole claim to teach OPS not to. overcharge again.

If you include the whole case and the reasoning behind it OPS might decide not to take you to Court since they are already on dodgy ground in some Courts.

file:///C:/Users/ThinkPad/Downloads/G4QZ465V%20Excel%20v%20Wilkinson.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...