Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • You can be sure that pardoning himself, stopping the other prosecutions and vengeance will be his first priorities if he wins. i dont think he will win, but no surety on that
    • The other cases aren't going to happen before November though, are they? Reporters are saying he can't pardon himself for a state conviction. He would have to lean on the governor of New York state, as I understand it.
    • I am requesting your assistance to how I should go about a serious breach of my privacy that occurred during my stay at one of IHG’s hotel on Ma 2023. Having previously had items taken from my hotel room elsewhere I take the added precaution of using a security camera app on my device whenever I stay in a hotel room. The recordings are date and time stamped and it cannot be adjusted by the end user.   On this particular occasion I discovered evidence from my personal security camera recordings of a spy camera had been placed underneath my door, and can be seen moving along the base of the door for approximately 15 seconds.   The spy camera is in fact marketed as an inspection device of drains primarily but is known to be used in observing spaces difficult to enter. It is a usb endoscopic camera that has a length flexible cable that is semi rigid and can negotiate any obstruction by bending. The operator can be up to 3-4 metres away.   Infuriated as I had previously stayed with them in 2022 for 3 months at £260 per night that they would seek to question my honesty and invade my privacy. I immediately called reception and asked why they would do such a thing and if they had any concerns they were welcome to inspect my room and go through my personal belongings and ask me anything they wanted to. I was sleeping for the best part of my stay and was alone throughout.   I sent the recordings to the receptionist within the hour of finding them and I asked to speak to the manager of the hotel who I was told wasn’t present. I tried to have face to face meetings with him but he instead wrote to me denying the recordings were made at their hotel stating that they didn’t observe anyone in the corridor at the time of the recordings and that they don’t have a metal bar at the interface of the tile and carpet which corresponds to the overlying door. I rejected that statement on the grounds the video doesn’t show a bar but a reflection of light on the tile and you wouldn’t see a person outside my door because the cable is black and runs along the floor. If you don’t look for this you won’t see it. The matter was passed up to the area manager and he also denied the allegation. This is where the matter ends as far as IHG are concerned. Leading a busy work and family life I let the matter go but I found myself back at the same hotel a year later. I booked for  2 nights and was given a room facing the lobby door that led to the lifts. Unfortunately, from the hours of 3am I was woken up by the noise of the door opening and closing but also noticed shadows of a person standing in front of my door. At first I took no notice and put this down to a guest waiting for someone but the person or persons returned several times, standing outside my door for up to several minutes. I called the hotel reception and asked if there was an issue  on my floor and they said they would come up to check. They never said they would check the CCTV and as the incidents continued to happen up to 8am I called them 6 times. Given my past experience I didn’t think they took security as serious a# her establishments and made them observe the Cctv and let me know. The explanation I was given was that they could see residents there but they were heading down to breakfast. The time that I had noticed these feet by door was from 3am and breakfast started at 6.30am. It also didn’t explain why they would stand by my door for anything longer than 10seconds and if they were waiting for someone how likely is it that this scenario is played out 6 times when there was only 12 rooms per floor. Later that morning when I went down for breakfast the manager said he would move me to a room at the end of the corridor and asked me what my plans were for the day, essentially when would I be in the hotel. I stated that for the day I was out. He then said that all his staff were uncomfortable about me being a guest and said that I was not welcome there anymore. I had paid for the two nights but when it came to the end of the day I didn’t feel that I would be able to rest at the hotel given the hostility so I returned the next day to collect my remaining belongings, namely items of clothing, an iPhone charging cable and plug, and toiletries. Checkout was at 2pm and I was at the hotel at 3pm. All my belongings were gone and they couldn’t locate the items.  I plan to report the incident of the spy camera to the police, as well as the theft, and write to the hotel emphasising that this breach of privacy is unacceptable and the hotel's failure to properly investigate and address the issue is deeply concerning. The fact that I requested security checks to ensure my safety in the early hours was reasonable, yet their response to ban from the premises was excessive and even possibly discriminatory as I had revealed to them that I had been a victim of a hate crime given my sexuality. . I am seeking compensation for the infringement of my privacy, the lack of proper investigation, and the being humiliated and made to feel like an undesirable. I will request a full refund of my two-night stay totaling £390. Additionally, I will request compensation for the cost of my previous stay when the infringement occurred, which was £220. I am also considering damages for the infringement of my privacy but at a loss as to what this would equate to. I will close the letter giving them a 14 day timeframe to respond.    Is there anything you feel i need to consider here? Many thanks   
    • oF course, this is all just the start. trump is dragging it out as much as possible hoping to pardon himself, but the barrier the yanks had about admitting that a pres could be such a piece of err work has been broken and there is many more to come. His current criminal charges are extremely unlikely to result in jail time or anything other than fines  - but with some of the other charges - jail is pretty much mandatory - especially for one not only not on a first offense - but with others stacked up
  • 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

CEL B2B ANPR PCN Claimform - defended but court errored - going for set aside - Greyfriars Car Park Priory Road Bedford MK40 1BY ***Claim Discontinued***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 236 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

Thank you!  I'm struggling with the technology side.  The illegible scans- actually are more clear than the originals! 

The background is, the claimants put the wrong address on the correspondences, so the paperwork initially went to the wrong address, which just happened to be a vacant unit at the time,

 *months* later, when the agent visited, he scanned in the documents to email them to us... which makes these scans,

scans of scans of documents that had been sitting on an oily floor for months! 

I intended to rewrite the content of the first letter (which I can read with difficulty) but first, I was doing battle with the tech system, which I'm renaming the lawnmower man!  

Link to post
Share on other sites

get the originals then.

they are not attending so you'll get the set aside 100%

dont agree to the £135 as the RK is not responsible , sadly you wont get your £275 back if it doesnt goto a hearing, you can ask but i bet the judge refuses. do it on the day, not mention it before hand.

that n244 statement is a bit jumbled up and unclear, whomever wrote it wants shooting, lots of unnecessary crap in there that did not need that much explaining.

 

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

Yes, the N244 isn't a disaster but it could easily have been so much better and I'm bemused as to why you didn't come here earlier. 

I'm at work now but will have a careful read through everything later and be back on the forum this evening. 

Right, it's there in black & white that you told the fleecers the identity of the driver on 24 November 2022 but they ignored you and sued the wrong person.

The judge will need to be convinced of two things.

1.  Why you didn't defend when you had the chance.

2.  That you have a reasonable chance of defending the claim during a full hearing.

Your chances of winning were already high, but the fleecers' non-attendance just about guarantees it, as dx says.

A set aside hearing normally takes about 15 minutes, so just be very brief and to the point.  No waffle.

Tell the judge that you would like to briefly explain (1) how the default judgement came about, and (2) also to explain that you have a good defence.  (1) Explain briefly about the defence mess-up.  (2) Then say you were not the driver, you have cooperated with the claimant and supplied details of the driver, but the claimant insists on suing the wrong person.

Assuming that goes well, ask for your £275 costs against CEL because of their unreasonable conduct in deliberately suing the wrong person.  This should have been in your WS, but, oh well.  The judge is highly unlikely to agree, but nothing ventured ...

  • 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

Thanks, the judge has allocated 45 minutes (should I be worried?)  We didn't initially get the paperwork because the claimant put the wrong address - it went to a vacant building.  Also, the claimants have listed this against (directors name) (business name) as if they are one entity, so... I was thinking of asking that the case gets struck because... who are they suing?? 

That'd be me that wrote that, trying to limit the words but get all.points in.... (so consider me shot!)   What questions need answering? 

Regarding the fee, the Court have said that if they agree, either

1) that the first statement submitted should have been accepted as its a firm not an individual... the firm is named on the claim...  or

2) that the resubmitted statement was submitted *before* the claimants applied for Judgement but processing was delayed by court backlog... which it seems it was, or

3) that the CCJ should not have been issued in the same day as the statement was accepted, so admin error by the Court

Then we get the £275 back.   I think we satisfy all three of these criteria.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

the allocated time means NOTHING. dont forget NO-ONE inc the judge has read ANYTHING until moments before they enter.

you'll be out there in <10mins smiling with every chance you'll get £275 back if the wind is blowing you way.

 

  • Thanks 1

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

dx is spot on so keep your arguments as succinct as possible as explained three posts above.

The judge's "default" position will be to grant the set aside but to deny the £275.

Your argument to get the £275 back makes sense but it's a real pity it's not included in the WS in a little section with COSTS as the title for clarity for the judge (rather than all the waffle that is included instead).

Indeed it's a pity you didn't come here from the start as you would never be at this stage, you would have defended on-line with MCOL like everyone else in every other PPC thread, and there would have been no question of rejected defence or CCJ.  Please learn from this for the future.

So - fingers crossed - when the judge grants set aside immediately pop up and say you ask for costs as the court made a mistake.  If the judge rejects your explanation say you request costs from the fleecers as they deliberately sued the wrong person.

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

  • 4 weeks later...

So, the Application was heard today.   The Court agreed that they had mistakenly issued a CCJ against us instead of sending it to Trial.  They admit that this was an administrational error on their part, but they're ordering Civil Enforcement to pay for it because it was caused by the mix up of the names.
Today's ruling states
1)  That the CCJ is wiped from the record
2 Civil Enforcement have 7 days to choose whether they were suing xxxxx OR xxxxxxxxxxxx - it can not be both, as it was on the original claim.
3) They must also justify why they were suing us rather than the driver (our customer), and if they don't do those things in 7 days, the case will be fully struck out.
4) If they *do* do that and want to continue the case, we will have 21 days to reply with an updated defence. 

If they do continue,  I'm thinking we should counter claim on the basis of them being annoying! 
5) They must, within 14 days of today, pay the court fees of £275.  

What do you think they'll do? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

That is an amazing result - well done!

I've been on this site for seven years, and I've never once seen a judge make the fleecers pay the set aside fee.

Brilliant result!

👏

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

21 minutes ago, Jenny21 said:

What do you think they'll do?

I think they'll pay the £275... Wouldn't want a CCJ themselves!

Will they pursue the original case?... Hmmm, if they take notice of how you've made them look stupid so far, they'd be even more stupid to carry on.

They have a nominated driver to sue, but I think that horse has well and truly bolted. Way out of time to start issuing a claim.

Oh, and congratulations!

(Don't forget, there's a donate button further down the page btw. 😉)

  • 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 The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

:cheer2:

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to CEL B2B ANPR PCN Claimform - defended but court errored - going for set aside - Greyfriars Car Park Priory Road Bedford MK40 1BY **WON Set Aside + fee!**

I'm just evilly reading the correspondence where the cheeky gets say they will consent to set aside if you pay them £135.  Well you didn't.  And they got stuck with the £275 costs.  Ho!  Ho!  Ho!

I see you're out for revenge, and breach of GDPR would be one avenue but ... they went after a company rather than a private individual and presumably used the business address rather than the director's home address, so that looks a non-starter.

You have indirectly got revenge by persuading the judge to make them pay £275. A first in all the years I've been here.  Well done!

Please come back and let us know the situation in 14 days' time.

If they don't pay you by then you can send the bailiffs round to them :-)

 

  • Haha 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

  • AndyOrch changed the title to CEL B2B ANPR PCN Claimform - defended but court errored - going for set aside - Greyfriars Car Park Priory Road Bedford MK40 1BY 
  • AndyOrch changed the title to CEL B2B ANPR PCN Claimform - defended but court errored - going for set aside - Greyfriars Car Park Priory Road Bedford MK40 1BY ***Claim Discontinued***

Good stuff topic title updated

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Jenny21 said:

I have just recieved a notification of discontinuance for this matter!

Sorry to be so cynical, but did this definitely come from the court?

 

Oh, and congratulations!

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

32 minutes ago, honeybee13 said:

Please consider a donation if you're able to so we can help other people in the future. 

Put your begging bowl away HB, already done further upthread😝

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

19 minutes ago, Nicky Boy said:

Sorry to be so cynical, but did this definitely come from the court?

 

Oh, and congratulations!

The claimant serves it on the defendant Nicky not the court

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ooops!😳

Thanks Andy.

I'll have to scribble that one in the notebook.

Ah well, a day without learning.....

  • Haha 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 The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

But, but, but - they said they would still continue with the case even if you got the set aside.  Theirs was not a "might".  They said they would definitely pursue you.

Take that saddos!

Remember they still owe you £275.  Please let us know if they pay, or if they don't pay come back here once the 14 days are up.

 

  • 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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...