Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've used payslip, passport, driving licence, still can't identify me, everything is upto date address etc, 1 attempt left then it blocks me H
    • Thanks for the replies and sorry, as it seems I haven't communicated my question clearly. I'm not after advice about how to deal with the situation I'm in. I'm on top of that and sent a SAR to Scottish Widows the day before I sent one to the FOS. My query was around the FOS interpretation of personal data and the extent of their obligations under GDPR, hence the original title They have said that "personal data is defined as any information relating to an [...] identifiable natural person (‘data subject’)" They then define an identifiable natural person as "one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as [...] an identification number. My view is that I have a complaint reference number, which identifies a complaint raised by me about the administration of my pension so it therefore indirectly identifies me If I'm right, then I believe that all the data related to my complaint is personal data about me, including the screen shot that purportedly establishes that I received my statements. I was hoping there might be someone with better knowledge of GDPR that can clarify whether I'm right or wrong before I react to the FOS's failure to disclose  
    • Please bear with me here i shall try and make this short but with all the detail, but i need help ASAP as there is limited time allowed for this process. I have been with my company 4 years and have advanced through the technical ranks to my current position,  we have an annual report which goes from 0-4 and for three years i have never scored lower than a 3. I was promoted to the role i am in now as an area quality assurance lead and the location was for the NE ( i live in the NW) eventually a similar role became available for another role in the NW. I asked my line manager if he minded me applying for it and he had no issues, i applied sat the multi stage interview and was given the role. My role is now classed as "at risk" of redundancy as we are moving from 4 regions to two which means they are also moving from 4 roles to two roles in my position. Two people are considered safe and myself and another at risk, my question is what is the criteria to separate safe from at risk . In the documentation received from my company it is below, i have zero issues and i know cv against cv mine wins, i was even selected by the company as a company mentor because of my experience in engineering and leadership. This is a closed group of maybe ten people and i am the only non senior executive included.    ·         Performance and Behaviour : I have zero behaviour issues, no issues with performance from my current line manager.  ·         Performance Improvement/ Disciplinary Records   : Zero disciplinary's and no performance issues, in fact my line manager on record has said I'm forthcoming ·         End Of Year Rating : Issues explained below Now my line manager was leaving the company and he did tell me "there was some politics involved with you getting that role, the city build manager and head of area build had promised it to their lead engineer (something they had no right to promise as it has to go though the process ) anyway from day 1 it became very clear that i would not be accepted for this reason within their community although i did just try to help them achieve quality and specification as that was my role. After a few weeks it became very apparent as to why the role had been promised to their man, i found issues where properties had been signed off as ready to accept subscribers when they were not ready (for bonus and stat reasons) and several quality issues i discovered which we could remedy and improve our productivity (unfortunately this would highlight that these issues had been there and not dealt with) My new head of area build (part of this trilogy of him, city build manager and lead engineer)  clearly did not want me there (for the reasons stated) but paid lip service, i had highlighted that i needed to walk off some structured with our canter of excellence counterparts ( as this was part of my role to link in with them for national issues) and he responded by saying i am not to walk them off, and that we have sufficient engineers to do that task (by saying this he could make sure that the engineers would take them round to structures that are A not the ones i have highlighted, and B would have very minor issues) This battle went back and forth over the months where i tried my best to build up the relationship with  them, my attitude was ok you have made some mistakes here, but we are all a team and even though you have hidden issues i can help you remedy them and hopefully we can do so and keep them off the radar,  but they just never did, So moving forward to October last year (2023) this is getting near to annual review time, now i had helped the company out massively by working a substantial amount of weekends and nights to fix issues, and i said i would take most of the time as TOIL ( as agreed with by my previous head of area build) this was 30 days. My current head of area build said i needed to put my leave in as it had been flagged as having a large amount. When i did input the leave (it would result in me taking all of December off) he was unhappy with me and was extremely curt in his responses as he could find nothing on the system for my TOIL , i explained the situation, my line manager would ask if i could work the hours, i would, and when i wanted leave he would authorise (we had an good working relationship, he was an excellent manager) he ended up going to HR to ask their advice and a teams call was set up with myself, head of area build and HR, it was confirmed by HR that it was a company error, when you want to input TOIL there should be a dropdown option in the leave menu and one of the options would be TOIL, this had not been setup on mine. So the company authorised the leave explaining that this should have been done and hadn't, i did say that this is the way it had always been and pretty much everyone on my team then operated this way, TOIL had never been discussed and none of had this option available. So i entered my leave from 4th December - 2nd January,  My line manager was an outside contractor and was leaving the company on the 15th December. On my return i found that we had a new head of area build, it would be a temporary position as they were not going to fill the position permanently and he would be covering his role (Scotland) and this role (NW). I contacted him to say that i had not received my end of year report yet and when would this happen as i had not sat with my line manager tor mine. A little over a week later my HoAB and i had a teams call, it was a introduction meeting and end of year report, he said that he had received feedback from the outgoing manager and he had given me a 2 (i have as explained before never scored lower than a 3) he asked hoe long i had been in the current role (just over a year) as this grade can mean you are new to the role and need a little supervision, haven't built up relationships with stakeholders etc. So he explained what my grade and bonus would be and if i had any feedback, i explained that this was unfair, i had proof that i had not met my targets (i say targets as there were never really any set, but going from emails and conversation we have had, and the job description) i had even created Powerpoint presentations which were very complex into how our network works from beginning to end  as there was distinct lack of knowledge here and i am a lead trainer / assessor (this btw he was extremely impressed with) He did say he had spoken to people in the centre of excellence which o believe was the head of operations, and he did look confused as to the disparity in feedback from them and the original manager that wrote my report. I contacted HR to raising my concerns that i had not sat with my line manager to go through my report,  had i had the chance to do so, i could have rebutted anything said as i had proof of my achievements even though he had set no defined targets, i could prove that i had been extremely active in identifying and remedying issues, HR did come back to me and these are their comments  1) "Your rating was submitted by your manager at the time xxx xxxxxx and he should have carried out an EOY review with you. The rating would not have been provided in this review but feedback should have been shared" [this never happened] 2)  Initial ratings where then discussed and reviewed during a calibration process (for your team) this will have included HOABs and RDs. During this session ratings can be challenged and changed. I can confirm that your rating was not changed as a result of this session and it remained at the rating that xxx submitted. 3) xxx did provide thorough feedback to xxx xxx in a handover so if not already done so it may be worth speaking with him to understand that feedback further.   4) In terms of reputation and the concern you share – ratings are not made public and are private to each individual. 5) And this first line obviously is incorrect " As far as i can see this would be the only separator they could have measured me on to separate safe from not safe, and if so the company did not follow its own procedure. My current line manager said " an error had occurred as you had not received the option to  sir with your manager for your review, and the company needs to make sure this error does not happen again) Well then they are admitting there was an issue and it needs remedying not sweeping under the carpet. All of this is documented. To remind the rating of a 2 is not a concerning grade. Please see descriptor below Generally, needs little supervision but does on occasion require direction/supervision. Does not always anticipate changes to the work environment and could adapt more quickly. May be seen as a strong performer in certain situations or by some audiences but may not perform at that level in all situations. May need some development or guidance to carry out some elements of role. May not consistently demonstrate the right behaviours. May have been on Performance Improvement during the year but has since shown strong improvement        
    • Also, what is the value of the dress and have you refunded the purchaser?
    • Simon Case was at the Covid inquiry yesterday. Finally. ‘Eat out to help out’ launched without telling official in charge, Covid inquiry hears | Covid inquiry | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Simon Case, who was responsible for Covid policy at time, calls Boris Johnson’s Downing Street the ‘worst governing ever seen’  
  • 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

NCP/BW ANPR PCN PAPLOC Now Claimform - appealed refused- Gatwick Airport dropoff zone **CLAIM DISCONTINUED**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 241 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

Well the fleecers have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory through presumably being too lazy to read e-mails properly.

 

Great news!

 

They are suing the wrong person.

 

This is not just the usual case here where they haven't bothered to use POFA correctly, they have been told the name of the person driving and have instead sued someone else.

  • 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

@lookinforinfomy apologies for not replying! The address on the NTK and the one on BW Legal's letters are exactly the same and are our current address (and has been for many years)

 

Also, my husband did indeed respond. He wrote a long letter to them authorising them to speak to me on his behalf, AFTER I sent them the email telling them I was the driver. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

at some point soon email comms must be stopped and they need to be told so,

 

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

That is a shame he sent that confirmation.

 

You responded as the driver but under the Protection of Freedoms Act  2012 it is the keeper who must inform the parking company the name and address of the driver.

 

Had he not done so, both of you would have been in the clear. The PCN is not compliant with the requirements of PoFA 2012 which means that the keeper is not responsible for the debt and had he not confirmed you as driver that would have been the end of it. Westlondonmum 1 NCP  0.

 

We can but hope that NCP continue to pursue your husband so please do not tell them where  they are going wrong.

 

Still strange though about so many of the mail intended for your house didn't arrive.

 

Does your postman not like you or did the parking crooks not send them. Or did they send them to the wrong address then rectified it by altering the original address to your correct one.

 

Might be an idea to see who asked for your address, when they did and the reason for asking from the DVLA in case they sent different address.

 

Of course even if the DVLA sent the right one, NCP could still have got it wrong. And of course if they never sent it you cannot appeal within the right time and you lose the right to pay the lower amount.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@lookinforinfo we are very friendly with our postman.

 

At the time of the first BW letter I even asked him if he'd seen any letters that looked like they came from NCP and he said he didn't recall, but it was a while ago so he couldn't be sure.

 

I doubt they even sent them at all - and have doctored the letter to update the address as it's very strange that the BW letters reached us, but the original PCN and follow ups from NCP didn't...

Link to post
Share on other sites

This gets worse and worse - for the fleecers.

 

They were told they were pursuing the wrong person and were given the identity of the right person - so proceeded to sue the wrong person.  Partner in the clear.

 

If they try to lie and say they never received the e-mail or they didn't consider it due to some legal technicality - well, OK, the PCN was sent out too late in any case to establish keeper liability.  Partner in the clear.

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

ive hidden you and written note

 

you need to redact ref and reg number

 

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

You will certainly need to file a defence.

 

We see absolutely hopeless court claims started by private parking companies all the time.  It only costs them £35 to issue a claim.  They misuse the court system to try to intimidate motorists into paying.  As they continue to do it, presumably sadly it works.  People have visions of judges in long wigs and hundreds of quid in costs and wet themselves and give in. 

 

We have a case at the moment - I kid you not - where a taxi driver stopped in a no-stopping area of an airport because someone had jumped out in front of him, and the only alternative to not stopping would have been to murder the pedestrian.  Really!  I'm not making it up.

 

The fleecers don't care.  Pay £35 for the claim.  Most give in.  Now & then they have to discontinue a case and lose £35.  It doesn't matter because those who give in pay the £35 plus £70 Unicorn Food Tax which finances two more claims, and so the cycle of fleecing continues.

 

I'm afraid you will have to be patient and be in for the long haul.

  • 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

you file our generic defence, no amendments

its further down in the sticky thread you used for post 1 whereby you filed out our questionnaire

 

post it up here FIRST..

 

 

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

And remember, strictly speaking it isn't YOUR defence.😉

Keep it in mind when answering / completing any paperwork.

Keep playing the game and don't let on...

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

45 minutes ago, westlondonmum said:

@FTMDave but presumably actually going to court for a case will cost them more??

Indeed.  Even if they were to beat you - won't happen - they would spend more than the court judgement amount on preparation costs.

 

But it's a numbers game to them.

 

Most people, sadly, aren't like you.  When the PCN turns up, most people think it's a fine and pay up.  The few that resist then wet themselves when the court claim arrives with visions of stern judges in wigs and thousands of pounds in costs and cough up.  There aren't many westlondonmums about.

 

Now & again the PPCs come across a westlondonmum and take a hit.

 

Another disgusting tactic the PPCs sometimes use is to begin a court case, knowing from the start it's hopeless.  They predict that the motorist will give in.  If that doesn't happen, they discontinue the case.  Now I'm not saying that will happen in your case, don't get your hopes up, it's always better to prepare too much than too little, but it's a possibility.

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

Thank you all! The defence looks fine as it is so here it is: 

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4.  The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

1.  The Defendant is the recorded keeper of motor vehicle registration number XXX.

 

2.  It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant.

 

3.  As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance.  The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner.  Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 

 

4.  In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant.

 

5.  The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 

 

6.  The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety.  It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I suggest that WestLondonMum submits an SAR to NCP to see if they had indeed posted previous letters to her address or not? Otherwise this all seems to have escalated very quickly. Has it not?

 

The 'grace' period mention further up this thread is also something that should be focused on. As the contract cannot be fair and binding if there has not been reasonable time given to consider the Ts&Cs of the contract. As this is regarding a drop off zone where technically drivers are not permitted to park and leave their vehicles, nor stop approaching DOZs to consider any contract before signing it can't be a fair contract.

 

Please have a look at this twitter feed for a barrister who has been in a similar pickle as us. He has pinned his thread on DOZs contract issues. He did not get a chance to test his argument as the fleecers backed off and dropped all charges. Probably once they realised they were dealing with a legal professional. It's worth a look

 

https://tinyurl.com/y9c4rauh

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Received this letter from BW Legal yesterday - text pasted below:

 

Good morning,


Thank you for completing the required security questions.

 

We note your CPR 31.14 request as per your email dated 12 January 2023 on behalf of the defendant. Be advised that we are not pursuing yourself in this matter but the defendant, TXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXd.

 

CPR 31.14 Response

 

We note that many of the items you have requested under the CPR 31.14 requests are not relevant to this matter as they have not been mentioned in any statement of case. We refer to our full response below.

 

1.       Our Client is engaged by/on behalf of the landowner of the Car Park, and therefore authorised to manage and enforce the terms and conditions displayed in the signage, issue PCNs and enforce them. As the agreement covering this is commercially sensitive we will not be disclosing this document at this stage.

2.       Our Client is not aware of any challenge or enforcement action being taken (or contemplated) by the local authority.  In any event, such an issue would be a matter between Our Client and the local authority, and subject to the procedures set out in the relevant legislation, and therefore not for consideration between the parties and the court in relation to a simple contract claim.

3.       Please find attached a copy of the notices sent by Our Client to the defendant.

 

We note that the defendant has filed a defence with the County Court. We will await a copy of this and respond accordingly once received.

 

If you are in any doubt about the content of this email and/or require guidance/assistance on clearing the balance due to financial difficulties, we would advise you to seek free advice, details of which can be found on the reverse of any of our letters, alternatively you can obtain legal advice from a Solicitor.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Matthew McMahon

Paralegal
bwlegal®

Surely the case would centre around the defendant (my partner) not being liable as he was not the driver at the time of the incident? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's just a standard response.  Par for the course.  CPR is just a request, they're not obliged to answer.  They will have to produce this documentation later down the line though in their Witness Statement.

 

27 minutes ago, westlondonmum said:

Surely the case would centre around the defendant (my partner) not being liable as he was not the driver at the time of the incident? 

Indeed, that will be one of your aces in your own Witness Statement.

 

BTW, all this "on behalf of" stuff needs to stop.  The fleecers would have been quite entitled to refuse to answer as the wrong person contacted them.  Your partner is the one being sued.  If the wrong person fills in court papers then they will be rejected and he will lose the case by default.

 

Obviously there's nothing stopping you helping your partner with court paperwork.

 

About the best thing you can do is read this thread  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/406892-highview-parking-anpr-pcn-claimform-urban-exchange-manchester-claim-dismissed/#comments  You'll see someone go through all the stages of the court process and you'll see what will happen next.

 

 

  • 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

you should already have known this letter was coming and how to react or not by READING the numerous NCP/BW claimform threads already here .

 

simply because you have jumped through ONE hoop, doesn't mean you stop or don't do SELF HELP upon whats to come, how to react and what's next.

 

CAG is predominately a self help site, sometime our limited staff don't have the voluntary free time to spare on telling you things you should have already researched yourself. 

 

so your next question to answer is:

when do i stop worrying if they are going to court?

the court acknowledged your defence in a letter..what did it say - read it..., and what have you researched MIGHT be your next thing to lookout for?

 

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

  • 2 months later...

@dx100uk 

BW have filed a defence.

 

However, is it really necessary to take this all the way to a hearing?

 

With NCP in clear contravention of multiple sections of POFA 2012 could I not email BW legal laying out the key defences of (1) Wrong person being sued

(2) Notice to keeper sent too late.

 

Would they not drop the case as there is clear contravention of the overarching legislation namely POFA

Link to post
Share on other sites

a claimant does not file a defence you did - as the defendant.

but that was months ago. the claim is obviously well stayed now?

 

not sure what you are going on about above?

 

.

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

On 16/01/2023 at 00:51, FTMDave said:

We see absolutely hopeless court claims started by private parking companies all the time.  It only costs them £35 to issue a claim.  They misuse the court system to try to intimidate motorists into paying.  As they continue to do it, presumably sadly it works.  People have visions of judges in long wigs and hundreds of quid in costs and wet themselves and give in. 

 

We have a case at the moment - I kid you not - where a taxi driver stopped in a no-stopping area of an airport because someone had jumped out in front of him, and the only alternative to not stopping would have been to murder the pedestrian.  Really!  I'm not making it up.

 

The fleecers don't care.  Pay £35 for the claim.  Most give in.  Now & then they have to discontinue a case and lose £35.  It doesn't matter because those who give in pay the £35 plus £70 Unicorn Food Tax which finances two more claims, and so the cycle of fleecing continues.

 

I'm afraid you will have to be patient and be in for the long haul.

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...