Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I disagree with the charge and also the statements sent. Firstly I have not received any correspondence from DVLA especially a statutory notice dated 2/5/2024 or a notice 16/5/2024 voiding my licence if I had I would have responded within this timeframe. The only letter received was the single justice procedure notice dated the 29.5.2024 this was received on 4.6.2024. I also disagree with the statement that tax was dishonoured through invalid indemnity claim. I disagree that the licence be voided I purchased the vehicle in Jan 2024 from RDA car sales Pontefract with agreement to collect the car on the 28.1.2024. The garage taxed the vehicle on the 25.1.24 for eleven payments on direct debit  using my debit card on my behalf. £62.18 was the initial payment on 8.2.24  and £31 per month thereafter the second payment was 1.3.24.This would run from Jan 24 to Dec 24 and a total of £372.75, therefore the car was clearly taxed before  I took the car away After checking one of my vehicle apps  I could see the vehicle was showing as untaxed it later transpired that DVLA had cancelled my tax , without reason and I did not receive any correspondence from DVLA to state why it was cancelled or when. The original payment of £62.18 had gone through and verified by my bank Lloyds so this payment was not declined. I then set up the direct debit again straight away at my local post office branch on 15.2.2024 the first payment was £31 on 1.3.2024 and subsequent payments up to Feb 2025 with a total of £372.75 which was the same total as the original DD that was set up in Jan, Therefore I claimed the £62.18 back from my bank as an indemnity claim as this payment was from the original cancelled tax from DVLA and had been cancelled . I have checked my bank account at Lloyds and every payment since Jan 24  up to date has been taken with none rejected as follows: 8.2.24 - £62.15 1.3.24 - £31.09 2.4.24 - £31.06 1.5.24 - £31.06 3.6.23-£31.06 I have paper copies of the original DD set up conformation plus a breakdown of payments per month , and a paper copy of the second DD setup with breakdown of payments plus a receipt from the post office.I can also provide bank statements showing each payment to DVLA I also ask that my licence be reinstated due to the above  
    • You know hes had it when they call out those willing to say anything even claiming tories have reduced taxes on live tv AS Salmonella says: The Conservative Party must embrace Nigel Farage to “unite the right”, Suella Braverman has urged, following a disastrous few days for Rishi Sunak. The former home secretary told The Times there was “not much difference” between the new Reform UK leader’s policies and those of the Tories, as senior Conservatives start debating the future of the party. hers.   AND Goves replacement gets caught booking in an airbnb to claim he lives locally .. as of yesterday you can rent it yourself in late July - as he'll either be gone or claiming taxpayer funded expenses for a house - So whens farage getting around to renting (and subletting) a clacton beach hut?   Gove’s replacement caught out on constituency house claim as home found on Airbnb WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Social media users quickly pointed out house Ed McGuinness had posted photos in was available to rent     As Douglas Ross says he'll stand down in scotland - if he wins in Westminster - such devotion.
    • I've completed a draft copy to defend and will post up here for review.  Looking over the dates and payments this all stemmed from DVLA cancelling in Feb , whereby I set up a new DD in Feb hence the overlap, why they cancelled when I paid originally in Jan I have no idea. Anyway now stuck with pending court action and a suspended licence . I am also firing off a letter to DVLa recorded disputing the licence revoke
    • Thank you both for your expert knowledge and understanding. You're fighting the good fight by standing up for people like me and others with limited knowledge of this stuff. I thank you. I know all my DVLA details are good. I recently (last year) renewed my license, and my car's V5 is current with the correct details; the same is valid for my partner. I'll continue to ignore the love letters 😂 and won't let it bother either me or my partner.  I'll revisit this post if/when I get a letter of claim.  F**k ém.
    • Please check back later on today for a fuller response and some edits
  • 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

Dangerous Dogs Act dogs attacked a cat ? did they - discussion posts moved here


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 447 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

On the day of 28th of January my dogs were being exercised off the lead and supervised on a public path which is not illegal and they did not enter your property.

 

 It is very much illegal if you cannot keep a dog under reasonable control. That means a leash in public.

 

 

They amended the Dangerous Dogs Act, which includes your own property to protect people such as the postman who deliver

 

WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK

An Act to prohibit persons from having in their possession or custody dogs belonging to types bred for fighting; to impose restrictions in respect of such dogs pending the coming into force of the prohibition; to enable...

 

Edited by whitelist
Link to post
Share on other sites

i can keep my dog under more than reasonable control

- ive been breeding dogs and caring for dogs for over 40 years.

i have probably a lot more experience than the regular dog owner.


even the best dog owner cannot override a force of nature that is the dogs instinct. ie from bankfodders explanation: "apparently attracted the interest of my dogs".


also ive researched this already...it is not illegal to walk my dog off the lead and I think your assuming my dog is one on the dangerous dog breed list...which is is not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, whitelist said:

 It is very much illegal if you cannot keep a dog under reasonable control. That means a leash in public.

 

I would certainly take issue with my dog being branded 'out of control' if it followed its natural instinct and chased a cat. The dogs that don't chase cats are in the tiny minority.

 

That's a very different proposition to a dog being allowed off the leash that might otherwise attack and adult or child.

 

EDIT: Apologies @danyboy72, it appears we cross-posted and you'd already made the point I was making.

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

48 minutes ago, whitelist said:

On the day of 28th of January my dogs were being exercised off the lead and supervised on a public path which is not illegal and they did not enter your property.

 

 It is very much illegal if you cannot keep a dog under reasonable control. That means a leash in public.

 

 

They amended the Dangerous Dogs Act, which includes your own property to protect people such as the postman who deliver

 

WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK

An Act to prohibit persons from having in their possession or custody dogs belonging to types bred for fighting; to impose restrictions in respect of such dogs pending the coming into force of the prohibition; to enable...

 

 

i also rang the police after the incident and told them the whole incident in detail and they told me ive done nothing illegal with my dogs and nothing illegal afterwards and in the encounter with the angry so called 'policeman'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In reality, people's experience with keeping dogs means squat.

 

The Law treats everybody with equal contempt

 

Have posted the legislation for reference rather than personal opinions

 

The legislation specically references reasonable control. Being off the lead you have no control

Edited by whitelist
Link to post
Share on other sites

WWW.THETELEGRAPHANDARGUS.CO.UK

Royal Mail have warned dog owners to make their letterboxes ‘no-go zones’ for their pets following a High Court ruling in the company’s…

 

The High Court ruling states that dog owners could spend up to five years in prison under the Dangerous Dog Act, if they fail to take preventative measures

Link to post
Share on other sites

That article is referencing a High Court case so sets a legal precedent that is in addition to primary legislation and reasonable control.

 

Will now retire from this debate

 

A dog shall be regarded as dangerously out of control on any occasion on which there are grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will injure any person or assistance dog, whether or not it actually does so, (section 10(3) Dangerous Dogs Act 1991).

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes...but section 3 states :

If a dog is dangerously out of control in [F1any place [F2in England or Wales] (whether or not a public place)])—

(a)the owner; and

(b)if different, the person for the time being in charge of the dog,

is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog while so out of control injures any person [F3or assistance dog], an aggravated offence, under this subsection.

 

And because you wasnt there whitelist, i'll tell you from the horses mouth (and you can read the cat owners letter for further verification) that my dogs are not a dangerous breed, they was not dangerously out of control (as they came to me when recalled), were not doing anything illegal.


exactely as I was just about to say theberengersniper.... thank you :)

it mentions nothing about cats ...only people...and just to let you know whitelist whether your interested or not....my dog didnt bite anyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point being made is that the OP said it was not illegal to exercise your dog in public and not keep the animal under reasonable control

 

The legislation referenced states different if a person was injured.

 

In the OP's case and the Cat, if they proved it on the balance of probability the OP is responsible, he will be liable for Civil Redress with any quantified loss

Edited by whitelist
Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, theberengersniper said:

EDIT: Apologies , it appears we cross-posted and you'd already made the point I was making.

no need to apologise to me mate - thanks :)

 

6 minutes ago, whitelist said:

The point being made is that the OP said it was not illegal to exercise your dog in public and not keep the animal under reasonable control

 

 

whitelist please help....well im loosing my marbles then if i said "it was not illegal to keep the animal under reasonable control" as i cant remember saying or typing that...especially when I did keep my dogs under control...or does it mean if i recall them and they come back to me that they are out of control and dangerous ...like in an opposite alternate universe????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you name another way of keeping the dog under reasonable control?

 

Remember you need to think how a Judge will look at this and the reasonable man test.

Edited by whitelist
Link to post
Share on other sites

whitelist your opinions dont mean anything to me until you tell me where does it state in law that keeping a dog on a leash is the only way you can reasonably control it?

 

And as you said previously "In reality, people's experience with keeping dogs means squat." so if i did tell you another way of keeping the dog under reasonable control you wouldnt believe me anyway because you think peoples experience in keeping dogs mean squat 😆

tell me whitelist...

what are your thought on unsupervised, uncontrolled cats being allowed to roam freely anywhere outside their home by their irresponsible owners who dont have a second thought when they kill rodents and birds?


And they are irresponsible owners as ive never seen a cat in a bloody long while wearing a bell on their collar to warn birds of their presence so they dont get killed...yes killed let alone injured!

 

whitelist ive just noticed you've edited your comment...so when reading my reply above just remember it was in reply to your original comment..not your edited one!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@BankFodder im going up the post office in a bit 😀

 

2 hours ago, whitelist said:

In Tort law, they classed a dog as property and you maintain that property so you do not cause an act or omission that causes harm to another.

who? another what?

 

can you reply directly to my other questions and also it would be nice to hear your thoughts on the killer cats roaming my neighbour hood killing innocent mice and canaries.....is their any law for these cat owners that are not even trying to control their killer pets.

 

P.S. my dogs have never killed another pet. animal or human..come to think of it theyve never bit another human...but does that still make them dangerous and are the killer cats classed as dangerous?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your dog causes an accident such as running out in front of a car, then it has to be reported to the police.

 

There is no such legal obligation with a cat

Edited by whitelist
Link to post
Share on other sites

whats that got to do with what i asked above? would the cat be driving the car?

 

2 hours ago, whitelist said:

There is no such legal obligation with a cat

yeah - proves my point about irresponsible cat owners - they allow theyre cat to cause an accident and dont have to answer to anyone.

 

and saying about dogs running out in front of cars is totally off topic and nothing to do with my scenario...pointless and time wasting!

Link to post
Share on other sites

it is time wasting as im reading your rubbish about a different scenario that doesnt help me.....therefore wasting my time.

 

also you're wasting my time as i reply to your posts but you dont answer the majority of mine....you pick and choose...not helpful at all.

 

i politely request that if you cant help and are not on topic then dont answer at all...like you said you would do but contradicted yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...