Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi, I have an old outstanding debt from 1994 due to MBNA for £20,000. The debt has been passed to various DCAs and is currently with PRA Group.  I sent them a CCA letter in January 2024. They acknowledged this letter and stated they would come back when they had more information, however the information did not arrive within the 12 working day scenario.. I have just received a copy of the agreement which goes back to 1994 from them. In their response letter they have stated " Please find enclosed documentation received to date: we are waiting further documents in order to complete your request. We have currently deemed this debt as unenforceable which means we are not able to take court or further action against you to recover the outstanding balance". They then go on to state "we are still legally entitled to:  1.Contact you to ask and repay what you owe 2.Pass your details onto a third party collection agency 3. Continue to report your account with the credit reference bureaux (as appropriate)". I'm at a loss as to what I should do next and would appreciate any guidance on this matter. I am currently paying £5.00 pcm. TIA      
    • A sinister tactic known as shoulder surfing is on the rise in the UK. Fraudsters are watching unwitting people log in to their mobile banking apps over their shoulder.View the full article
    • My understanding is that they won't provide the name to me whether the investigation is Live or Closed, & I have no legal rep as I didn't have P.I. Cover on my policy, & am intending to claim using OIC.org.uk, but remain completely stuck as they 100% cannot open a claim on the portal without both the Reg. No. & Name of the other driver.  
    • thanks again ftmdave, your words are verey encouraging and i do appreciate them. i have taken about 2 hours to think of a letter to write to the ceo...i will paste it below...also how would i address a ceo? do i just put his name? or put dear sir? do you think its ok?  i would appreciate feedback/input from anybody if anything needs to be added/taken away, removed if incorrect etc. i am writing it on behalf of my friend..she is the named driver  - im the one with the blue badge and owner of the car - just for clarification. thanks in adavance to everyone.       My friend and I are both disabled and have been a victim of disability discrimination on the part of your agents.   I have been incorrectly 'charged' by your agent 'excel parking' for overstaying in your car park, but there was no overstay. The letter I recieved said the duration of stay was 15 minutes but there is a 10 minute grace period and also 5 minutes consideration time, hence there was no duration of stay of 15 minutes.   I would like to take this oppertunity to clarify what happend at your Gravesend store. We are struggling finacially due to the 'cost of living crisis' and not being able to work because we are both disabled, we was attracted to your store for the 10 items for £10 offer. I suffer dyslexia and depression and my friend who I take shopping has a mobility disability. We went to buy some shopping at your Gravesend branch of Iceland on 28th of December 2023, we entered your car park, tried to read and understand the parking signs and realised we had to pay for parking. We then realised we didnt have any change for the parking machine so went back to look for coins in the car and when we couldnt find any we left. As my friend has mobility issues it takes some time for me to help him out of the car, as you probably understand this takes more time than it would a normal able bodied person. As I suffer dyslexia I am sure you'll agree that it took me more time than a normal person to read and understand the large amount of information at the pay & display machine. After this, it took more time than an able bodied person to leave the car park especially as I have to help my friend on his crutches etc get back into the car due to his mobility disability. All this took us 15 minutes.   I was the driver of my friends car and he has a blue badge. He then received a 'notice to keeper' for a 'failure to purchase a parking tariff'. On the letter it asked to name the driver if you wasnt the driver at the time, so as he wasnt the driver he named me. I appealed the charge and told them we are disabled and explained the situation as above. The appeal was denied, and even more so was totally ignored regarding our disabilities and that we take longer than an able bodied person to access the car and read the signs and understand them. As our disabilities were ignored and disregarded for the time taken I believe this is discrimination against us. I cannot afford any unfair charges of this kind as I am severely struggling financially. I cannot work and am a carer for my disabled Son who also has a mental and mobility disability. I obviously do not have any disposable income and am in debt with my bills. So its an absolute impossibility for me to pay this incorrect charge.     After being discriminated by your agent my friend decided to contact 'iceland customer care team' on my behalf and again explained the situation and also sent photos of his disabled blue badge and proof of disability. He asked the care team to cancel the charge as ultimately its Iceland's land/property and you have the power over excel parking to cancel it. Again we was met with no mention or consideration for our disability and no direct response regarding the cancellation, all we was told was to contact excel parking. He has replied over 20 times to try to get the 'care team' to understand and cancel this but its pointless as we are just ignored every time. I believe that Ignoring our disability is discrimination which is why I am now contacting you.     I have noticed on your website that you are 'acting' to ease the 'cost of living crisis' : https://about.iceland.co.uk/2022/04/05/iceland-acts-to-ease-the-cost-of-living-crisis/   If you really are commited to helping people in this time of crisis ..and especially two struggling disabled people, can you please cancel this charge as it will only cause more damage to our mental health if you do not.  
    • I've also been in touch via the online portal to the Police's GDPR team, to request the name of the other Driver. Got this response:   Dear Mr. ---------   Our Ref: ----------   Thank you for your request which has been forwarded to the Data Protection Team for consideration.   The data you are requesting is third party, we would not give this information directly to you.   Your solicitor or legal team acting on our behalf would approach us directly with your signed (wet) consent allowing us to consider the request further.   I note the investigation is showing as ‘live’ at this time, we would not considered sharing data for suggested injury until the investigation has been closed.   If you wish to pursue a claim once the investigation has been closed please signpost your legal team to [email protected]   Kind regards   ----------------- Data Protection Assistant    
  • 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

UKPC ANPR PCN PAPLOC Now Claimform - vehicle on site during restricted no parking period - Rom Valley Retail Park, Romford, RM7 0AF


Recommended Posts

It's difficult to advise what to do because there are so many ifs and buts.

In the majority of cases where a PPC start a court claim they go all the way to the final hearing.

However, in a minority of cases, and by no means a tiny minority, they have no real intention of going all the way to a final hearing. They know their case is rubbish and they know it will cost them a hefty wad to send a solicitor to court (remember solicitors' costs are capped at £50 at small claims).  They pretend they are going all the way to court to intimidate the motorist into giving in.  Yes, the pretence often includes paying the hearing fee.  Yes, UKPC often do this.  And no, they haven't produced a WS (so far).

I suppose it depends on how much you have spent on flights (and accommodation?) and if this is refundable v the approx £250 at stake if you lose the case.

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

I am sorry about getting your status mixed up. 

I have noticed one thing in your excellent WS. On their claim they are only pursuing you as the keeper-I think it is  in their Point C that  states along the lines of -the driver did not pay , so the keeper is liable.

So on your No keeper Liability section 

You may prefer  to alter 13 to 

  . It is trite Law that the driver and the keeper cannot be regarded  as the same person and the claimant has failed to offer any proof who was driving.  BY  only pursuing the keeper  when the PCN does not comply with PoFA must mean that their claim fails.

See what the Site team thinks as it should  stop the Judge from looking at who was driving as your statement preempts them from even thinking about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With LFI's change your WS is good to go.

E-mail the court theirs.  In the subject field put the claim number, the names of the parties, the hearing date and "Witness Statement".  Click on Return Receipt.

Send UKPC theirs by 2nd class post - all they are worth - and get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.

  • I agree 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

Don't do anything hasty re the travel plans.  I'm at work now but have a break in an hour and a half's time so will scribble then.

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

1 hour ago, wv600 said:

If PPC decide not to go to the final hearing, will I only find out on the day?

We can never be 100% certain, as we're outguessing the other side, but it's highly likely that over the next couple of days something will pop through your letter box.  Either -

1.  their Witness Statement, and you'll know you'll be in court on 16 May, or

2.  their Notice of Discontinuance.

If you able to I would hang on a couple of days before changing your travel plans.

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

Thanks FTMDave, I'll hang on for now and post any updates.  

WS has been posted to UKPC, 2nd class with certificate of posting.  

Will email the court now.  Do I also need to post a copy to the court?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry about getting your status mixed up. 

I have noticed one thing. On their claim they are only pursuing you as the keeper-I think it is  on their Point C that the driver did not pay , so the keeper is liable.

So on your No keeper Liability section 

You may need to add 8a after 8.

 8a  . It is trite Law that the driver and the keeper cannot be regarded  as the same person and the claimant has failed to offer any proof who was driving.  BY  pursuing the keeper . when the PCN does not comply with PoFA must mean that their claim fails.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, just an update...

Received the WS pack from UKPC in the post on Friday, so looks like I'm going to court on 16 May.   I shall scan and attached the documents a bit later

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please see below for the Witness Statement from UKPC received in the post on Friday, 3 May.  The letter is dated 1 May 2024.

I am also including Exhibits 1, 2 and 3.   The remaining exhibits relate to the PCN's and other correspondence already posted on this thread.

The most glaring mistake for me is in Exhibit 2 (UKPC's OWN copy of their signage), NOT SHOWING that parking is not allowed between 22:00 and 08:00.  Note that this restriction IS showing on the draft sign approved in the contract between UKPC and their client.

Also, the site plan in Exhibit 1 shows signs against the wall of the building (depicted by a "W"); whereas the picture in my witness statement clearly shows no signs visible on that particular wall.

I look forward to hearing everyone's feedback on this!

 

 

Claimants WS.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, wv600 said:

The most glaring mistake for me is in Exhibit 2 (UKPC's OWN copy of their signage), NOT SHOWING that parking is not allowed between 22:00 and 08:00. 

That would be the sign for Rom Valley Reatil Park :-)

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

Bethany seems a new kid on the block, I hadn't read her stuff before.

I will applaud her for keeping her WS mercifully brief.  Generally we have to plough through pages & pages of waffle.

It all seems quite simple.  She says there were signs (para 7) yet your WS shows these signs were not there. 

Then her para 8 mentions your "offence" which is absent on the signs she produces.  One of these signs limits your stay to two hours, the other one to three hours, and you obeyed these regulations.

BTW, what have you decided about court attendance?

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

FTMDave, I have decided to go to court....was hoping I wouldn't have to but haven't come all this way to give up now....

The flights are costing a fortune to change, so holding off on that for now in the hope that UKPC may still withdraw.   Not holding my breath though....

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wv600 said:

The most glaring mistake for me is in Exhibit 2 (UKPC's OWN copy of their signage), NOT SHOWING that parking is not allowed between 22:00 and 08:00.  Note that this restriction IS showing on the draft sign approved in the contract between UKPC and their client.

"Draft" is spot on. They didn't actually manufacture that sign.

The pics of actual signage you posted from Google spyview earlier are exactly the same as their exhibit 2.

 

Depending on the OP's stamina and hate level, I can see a good GDPR claim looming.😆

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

54 minutes ago, wv600 said:

The flights are costing a fortune to change, so holding off on that for now in the hope that UKPC may still withdraw.   Not holding my breath though....

I forgot about this.^^^

Guys, I know it goes against the grain, but is it worth a letter to UKPC pointing out their lack of signage as a gentle nudge to discontinue?

It could save the OP some grief and expense...

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

Just thinking out loud.

You could e-mail a Supplemental Witness Statement to the court and to UKPC specifically ridiculing the signage and adding that you will request an unreasonable costs order including your preparation time at £19 for five hours.  In the hope they might throw in the towel.

Normally we would never advise such a thing as you would be playing your cards far too early.

But then, thinking about your flights ...

Just an idea.

 

  • I agree 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

I think playing cards early in this case is not a problem Dave.

The idiots have referred in their WS to a sign that does not have the out of hours restricion on it.

AND that signage is actually in place.

There is no way they can refute that evidence.

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

Another part is para 13 where they try to go behind Beavis as the £100 was judged to be inclusive of debt recovery and the extra £70 is a Penalty in all but name, but as stated by other's the signage is pants.

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Thank you all for your replies.

I am really interested in getting this claim thrown out due to my travel plans, so have drawn up the following supplementary WS in word format (personal details removed) for easy editing.

I would appreciate any advise/guidance on if/how it can be improved.

many thanks in advance

 

Supplementary WS.pdf

Edited by FTMDave
Personal details removed
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...