Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Everyone knows the tories were hiding the costs - and even added 4 billion quid to the taxpayers high interest credit card to fund a chunk of the NI tax reduction - prime example - look at how much cost was hidden re the Rwanda dogwhistle -10 Billion quid     and re the handful of rebels on the benefit limit If the disasters (like the Rwanda rubbish) of Tory dogs being wagged by the extremist minority ERG tail doesn't highlight the issues .. Enlighten yourself here .. (fat chance) Sir Keir Starmer is right to show Labour rebels the door WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Editorial: Suspending seven MPs following their rebellion over the two-child benefit cap is more than a prime minister flexing his political muscle. It is a...  
    • Trump instigated that didnt he @theoldrouge despite losing the election - and Biden mitigated as much as he could within his boundaries?   "President Donald Trump ordered a rapid withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Afghanistan and Somalia in the wake of his 2020 election loss"   “The order was for an immediate withdrawal, and it would have been catastrophic,” said Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., one of two Republican members of the special panel. “And yet President Trump signed the order.”   Trump ordered rapid withdrawal from Afghanistan after election loss WWW.MILITARYTIMES.COM The memo was among the latest revelations from the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol building.   Although i agree that Biden should have done more to mitigate Trump driven disasters
    • ok your WS is wrong. Paragraph 16 and 17 says  you did not contract with evri but this is not true - see below  Furthermore to the eBay Powered By Packlink T&Cs that Evri is referring to, Clauses 3b and c of the T&Cs states:  (b)   Packlink is a package dispatch search engine that acts as an intermediary between its Users and Transport Agencies. Through the Website, Users can check the prices that different Transport Agencies offer for shipments and contract with the Transport Agency that best suits their needs on-line. (c)  Each User shall then enter into its own contract with the chosen Transport Agency. Packlink does not have any control over, and disclaims all liability that may arise in contracts between a User and a Transport Agency post 251 of occy thread - £844 lost    you should also add a paragraph on donough v Stevenson talking about the fact that even without contract there is still duty of care to goods and by failing to deliver this duty has been breached.   Make those changes and post it back up here and I'll check over things again
    • no we cant add the occy thing because leicster are being difficult people so we're just going to go without it for now
    • no you can email it dont worry about that. take out the index of statement of truth, just not needed
  • 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
      • 162 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

Council PCN - traffic contravention 52JM - failing to comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicle.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 455 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 received a PCN from Ealing Council today (27/04/2023). The letter is dated 26/04/2023. The alleged infringement was on 10th of April.

 

I have been given a fine of £130 for "traffic contravention 52JM - failing to comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicle". 

 

The car was not driven by myself, and in any case, the person driving was delivering urgent antibiotics to a disabled elderly man. I can get a copy of the prescription as proof.

 

I have gone to google maps and there is a little sign at the start of the road that only allows permit holders onto the road 24/7. Seems like a typical council money-making scam.

 

Is it worth appealing or should I cut my losses and just pay?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • honeybee13 changed the title to Fine for unknowingly driving on a road for permit holders only.

I received a PCN from Ealing Council today (27/04/2023). The letter is dated 26/04/2023.

The alleged infringement was on 10th of April.

I have been given a fine of £130 for "traffic contravention 52JM - failing to comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicle". 

The car was not driven by myself, and in any case, the person driving was delivering urgent antibiotics to a disabled elderly man. I can get a copy of the prescription as proof.

I have gone to google maps and there is a little sign at the start of the road that only allows permit holders onto the road 24/7. Seems like a typical council money-making scam.

Is it worth appealing or should I cut my losses and just pay?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Council PCN - traffic contravention 52JM - failing to comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicle.

Could you possibly post up a google maps street view link so we can see the signage at the road entrance?  Is that view up to date do you know?

 

Once others have seen the site of the contravention, see what they advise.

 

(In the circumstances of this case you could always ask* the council to exercise their disctretion not to enforce, but the liklihood is they want your money too much - especially Ealing.)

 

 

*Obviously you'd need to gather as much evidence as you could to justify the urgent delivery of medicine to put forward as strong a case as possible

Link to post
Share on other sites

The view on tre link is dated September 2022.

 

On the sign it says only holders of SS1 permits can use the streets. The SS means 'school streets', and you can see Perivale Primary School in the street view.

 

Now the idea of these School Streets was that they were closed to traffic other than SS1 holders (ie residents) at the start and finish of the school day, and at other times were open to all cars. If that's what Ealing have set up then here's a thing, 10th April, the infringement date, was in the school's Easter holidays so it wasn't open at all!  Term Dates - Perivale School

 

 

But don't get your hopes up too much as the sign appears to say the restriction to SS1 permit holders operates 24/7.  Something you could explore though.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your input.

I cant see any sign that specifically states that it operates 24/7 however there are no restriction times either so it can be inferred that the restrictions are 24/7.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps deliveries/ post office etc have exemptions... not sure but the rules here, the only sure thing is that Ealing council want to screw me (and you) out of our hard-earned money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But, how would any "exemption" be actioned with an unmarked white van doing deliveries? (Quite a common scenario.)

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

2 hours ago, Nicky Boy said:

What about delivery vehicles?

Like the Royal mail van further down on the same street view...

 

Sorry, but where are you seeing the RM van?

 

AIUI traffic isn't prevented from accessing Federal Road on either side of the restriction on Federal Road just to the south of the junction with Perimeade Road, but motor vehicles can't go through the restriction 24/7

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...