Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Calm Down please.... there is only one way to deal with this and that is - PROPERLY. Being surrounded by 'lawyers' who deal with 'disputes', just like going to the likes of CAB, in this instance has, most probably, to date,  sadly not helping you here. Such people always project an Aura of confidence, when the truth is they don't actually have the vast successful experience of the members here in dealing with the likes BMW. there are over 350 threads here . as far i gather this is the situation, In April, a car was purchased by your son from BMW. Finance taken out to purchase it has since been paid in full, as well as full payment for an annual Insurance policy. within 6 weeks, it was discovered and confirmed in writing, via a report from a local garage, that the car indeed had numerous performance modifications undertaken. Namely being remapped and with modifications to the exhaust system. having contacted his ins co, they require a further £5k to uprate his policy, without it renders the existing insurance policy invalid, thus the car is not being driven.  again within this 6 weeks, you wrote to BMW rejecting the car (we need to see this letter please. scan it up to PDF, please read our UPLOAD guide). at first BMW were onboard, even sending their own inspector, confirming the mods etc. but in the last 9 days since said inspection, comms have now gone dead. .................. you have 2 options - 1 - allow BMW to sort the car FOC and without hassle to him, but probably within their own snails pace timeframe. 2- EVENTUALLY bring legal action - this would most probably be under contract law, not a claim under the consumer rights act . (as financially you would lose out big time) to do 2. which is not easy and rather complex to calculate the financial sum involved...... we need all the info @BankFodder has requested. of many, but one good reason for this is say for this new mot, show the old one was suspect, good bargaining chip against 2500mls usage deductions... your call but you need to do this properly or not at all...............    
    • Hi, I've been reading through many of the stories in the sub-forum and I understand the process to be to send a Letter of Claim to the EVRi - in the post and to their customer support email and to sign up for MCOL.  I have looked at the various Letters of Claim and the MCOL claim forms - particulars of claim and I have gone through all of the screens on MCOL website to put in the final details so it is ready to go after the 14 days from when I send the Letter of Claim (of course assuming that EVRi dismisses my Letter of Claim to pay me in full!).  I also see the advise is to decline any mediation particularly because I have specified the parcel contents and value to EVRi when shipping it. I have put both the Letter of Claim and the forms from the MCOL particulars of claim into a single PDF for review.  The stories in the sub-forum often indicate people shipping with EVRi but some purchase through or have involved such companies as Parcel2Go and so I wasn't sure about the statement I made in the Letter of Claim if it was totally accurate to say "I am applying my third party rights under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999"? I just wanted to confirm the correct wording.  In my case the parcel shipment was paid for on the EVRi website and sent at the Tesco EVRi Parcelshop.  On the MCOL claim form I have referenced Section 57 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 in response to EVRi customer service hiding behind their lack of ability to insure delivery of laptops and their bogus non-compensated and prohibited items as a means to avoid any responsibility for them losing such items. Thank you for taking a look to see if there are any inaccuracies or amendments to the Letter of Claim - when it is looking good I will send via email and post it to EVRi.  Having drafted the particulars of the claim on MCOL, I shall be ready to submit the claim on the MCOL site when the 14 day period has elapsed and proceed from there.   Thanks for everyone's help! Letter of claim and MCOL Particulars of Claim.pdf
    • Wow quite surprised by your response in all honesty as I can’t see where you have requested details of the car. The car is insured and that was budgeted for and paid in full, the increase of £5k is because of the modifications, which no we didn’t budget for as we didn’t plan to buy a modified car, so no that doesn’t form any part of wanting to return the car, perhaps you don’t understand the impact modifications have on insurance premiums? Thanks for your help so far but feel going the legal route probably suits us better.
    • new thread created for the court claims. please complete this twice and i'll make another thread from the 2nd PDL Claimform we need to keep them sep.  
    • Most banks do not have any customer service staff available to support those opening a new current or savings account, according to research for Investec Bank.View the full article
  • 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

PCN Date served beyond 28 days..tottenham court rd bus lane contravention.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 479 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

Hello,

I'd very much appreciate your help with this.

I had a courtesy car provided recorded on a camera in Camden on 20/12/22.

 

The courtesy claims management company have forwarded me the PCN, but the dates indicated seem to be beyond the 28 day window. Can I contest on this basis?

 

Secondly, whilst Camden have regularly reset road layouts and directions of travel in central London, I saw no sign indicating I couldn't travel down this road as I have done on many occasions.

 

If the PCN is not valid, are there further grounds for me to challenge.

 

I haven't viewed the footage or checked signage in the area since receiving this.

 

Thank you

 

PCN 1.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to PCN Date served beyond 28 days..tottenham court rd bus lane contravention.

i dont think that is what should happen .

the keeper the hire co. should inform the council you were the driver

then you get one in your name

 

it even says so on the pcn!!

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

To the hire company who wrote the following.

 

I haven’t received anything yet but would clearly like to have a reason not to pay. What are my options please?

 

I write in reference to the attached Penalty Charge Notice received on your behalf whilst you were in possession of our hire vehicle.

 

We have now sent representations to the authority to transfer liability from (car hire company). The authority will contact you in due course to arrange payments in respect of the fine.

 

You will note that signed the Car Hire Agreement, agreeing to pay for any Administration Fees received during your hire period. I have enclosed an invoice detailing these charges have attached all supporting documentation and request that you arrange to make payment within 14 days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Browne said:

No. Where a hire car co. transfers liability to the hirer the council are allowed to serve a second pcn to the hirer beyond 28days, but there is no excuse for the council not to have served the original pcn to the hire co. within 28 days

 

Sorry if I've missed it, but do we know that the original PCN was the one served on the hire company?  Isn't it at least possible that the RK is a finance company and not the hire company?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The original pcn was served on the claims management company that provided me with the car. 
irrespective is it not date of contravention and date of notice that are at issue within the stipulated timeframe?

Link to post
Share on other sites

nothing overrides a pcn being out of time as MB says.

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

11 hours ago, 1manteam said:

The original pcn was served on the claims management company that provided me with the car. 
 

What manxman is saying is that the claims management company might lease the vehicle and that the RK is a finance company and they would have received the original pcn.

 

They would have transferred liability to the claims management company, who in turn have transferred liability to you.  That would explain the extended timescale and the council would legitimatey be able to serve beyond the 28 day deadline.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 1manteam said:

Thanks. So I’m back to square 1. Next steps would be to review the footage and check for signs I may have missed?

 

Yes.

 

But I think you should also check who the registered keeper is and ask them to confirm when they received the original (ie first) PCN. 

 

Why don't you contact the car hire firm who alerted you to the PCN and ask them if they are the registered keeper?  If they are, fine and it might be out of time, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if they are not the RK and that the PCN they received and copied to you was not the first one.  [Edit:  If they just blithely say that they are the RK, politely ask them if they are sure they are, and ask them to confirm it is their name shown as RK on the car's V5C]

 

As others have said, it isn't technically your ticket to deal with until you receive one addressed to you.  You could then find out what the history of the ticket was and when it was first issued.

 

AIUI councils are meant to follow a prescribed procedure when re-issuing pcns in respect of hire cars, and they sometimes get this wrong, thus invalidating the ticket.  So come back to this thread when you get your own ticket.

Edited by Manxman in exile
Link to post
Share on other sites

My statement is factually correct .

 

I'd also doubt a financial institution funding hire/courtesy car to a company would be a registered keeper 

 

P'haps a quick call to the hire company to ensure they did receive a previous PCN in their name 

 

Then followed the guidelines by naming the driver to the issuer is in order simply to negate any recently introduced scepticism.

 

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

8 minutes ago, dx100uk said:

My statement is factually correct .

 

 

 

Sorry.  I read your post to be confirming to the OP that this PCN was out of date rather than just a comment about PCNs in general.

 

I think the OP would be best advised to check who the RK actually is and when they received their PCN before assuming it's out of date on the basis of what the hire company has sent him

 

Edited by Manxman in exile
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that's what happens when you join any thread, you 'think' and 'assume' this or that,  no matter where you go, you always introduce speculation and additional confusion or doubt .

 

It took me many years to learn not to do that here. I had to learn the golden rule, if you don't know the answer...don't post!!

 

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 weeks later...

 I now have my own ticket, which arrived yesterday.

 

I have attached this one below along with a couple of the screenshots.

 

On Google Maps the street is still marked for permitted travel through this section.

I had no idea of the changes and have travelled down that section of road many times before.

 

I'm not sure the signage is that helpful and it was 9:03am when traffic is apparently prohibited from 9:00am.

Unsurprisingly this feels like just another attempt to stitch up motorists.

Can anyone help please?

 

To respond to the earlier question about the RK,

the claims management company (previous PCN) are not the RK so would have had the originally submitted PCN forwarded to them from the RK.

 

 

new pcn + pix.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

I'd very much appreciate your help with this.

 

I had a courtesy car provided recorded on a camera in Camden on 20/12/22. The courtesy claims management company have forwarded me the PCN.

 

I now have my received my own ticket, which arrived yesterday.

 

On Google Maps the street is still marked for permitted travel through this section. I had no idea of the changes and have travelled down that section of road many times before.

 

I'm not sure the signage (indicated on screenshot) is that helpful and it was 9:03am when traffic is apparently prohibited from 9:00am. Unsurprisingly this feels like just another attempt to stitch up motorists.

Can anyone help please? I note the main signage is also beyond the junction, i.e. after the direction to turn, if that is of any consequence?

 

The claims management company (previous PCN) are not the RK so would have had the originally submitted PCN forwarded to them from the RK.

 

If the PCN is valid, are there further grounds for me to challenge?

 

Thank you

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...