Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've got some suggestions re Bizspace but can you fill in the sticky please.
    • 1 Date of the infringement 14th April 2024 2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 17th April 2024 [scan up BOTH SIDES as ONE PDF- follow the upload guide] please LEAVE IN LOCATION AND ALL DATES/TIMES/£'s 3 Date received 20th April 2024 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] N 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? ANPR photos of vehicle in and out (although as they were taken at night they don’t show much). 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] N Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up  N 7 Who is the parking company? MET Parking 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Southgate Park, Stansted CM24 1PY For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. Independent Appeals Service POPLA  - BPA Logo is on NTK If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here. N/A Hi, As keeper, I have received a PNC from MET Parking over the vehicle being parked in the infamous Stansted Starbucks/Mcdonald’s car park(s). The vehicle was parked outside Starbucks (at night, when it was closed) and the driver went into Mcdonalds. However, the driver wishes to appeal due to the poor and misleading unlit signage, and believes that this PNC is unfair. I am sure you are aware of this company/car park, and I would appreciate any advice on this matter. Kind regards PNC 14.04.2024.pdf
    • The PCN is one of the more compliant that I have seen. however it still fails. There is no period of parking mentioned as required by paragraph 9[2][a] . ANPR cameras only capture the arrival an departure times. It does not record the times you drove from the entrance to the parking place and then from the parking spot to the exit. That means that if you are the keeper then you are not liable to pay the PCN. Only the driver is so do not appeal as you may reveal who was actually driving.if you were not the keeper then as long as the driver is not identified CE will have difficulty on that fact alone. The majority of people with valid motor insurance are allowed to drive your car  and Courts do not accept tha that the driver and the keeper are the same person. On top of that your car was trespassing there since you didn't have a Permit and only the land owner can pursue you not the monkey they employ. The signage is prohibitory in that only permit holders can park there so no contract can be formed. The signage is new apparently so there must be some time allowance for motorists to adjust to the new signs which could mean that  they shouldn't even be issuing you with a PCN. For all those reasons I wouldn't be too much in a hurry to pay them a penny. And well done on posting up the PCN and that sign so quickly. 
    • Dear CAG Team   Given the above, and not knowing what the actual account name is, I will haver to stick with that same name but the Bailiff said that once the variation is done there wont be an issue getting the money off him. What i cannot get my head around is when i set up a new payee, if the name doesn't match the account name my bank wont allow the transfer. So how is it that it authorised and allowed the transfer? Also, given the dealer broike trading standard rules and tried to sell me a death trap, then keep my deposit, why is his bank and mine protecting him by not disclosing his account name or at least making a charge back as i first attempted?   Many thanks
  • 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

idealworld in administration goods not received but Moorcroft now asking for the money

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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

hello all 

at the end of june i  purchased an item from idealworld  ,  just   a week before they went out off air and now in administration 

  i had paid  the first payment  , but  of cause never received the goods   - and the only contact  you can now make with them is an email to  the administrators   and it bounces back saying due to high demand  they could be a delay in answering  

i had paid via debit card  - so  i told by bank who stopped any further payments and issued a chargeback  , so i thought that was the end of it.

well on Saturday  i got a debt collection letter from a company called Moorcroft   asking for a balance of  72 pounds  and to contact them   to now pay them 

and im not sure what to do now  , cos last thing i want is a bailiff  turning up  at my door    but as ive never had the good s , won't get them now , and cant contact anyone  can  someone advise pls what to do as i guessing they have bought the debt 

and will these  people coming knocking at my door for the money      when i never even  got the goods  in the first place 


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please tell us how much you are talking about. It will help us to know the value at stake.

However, don't worry. I would suggest that you write to morecroft and tell them that you won't be paying and that for whatever reason the suppliers and breach of contracts and that's what you will tell the judge as well if they want to bother to take it to court.


And by the way, nobody will come knocking at your door. They would have to get a court judgement against you first before they could possibly instruct enforcement agents.

What is the total value?

After you have sent the letter which I have suggested, ignore all other correspondence unless you get a court claim in which case let us know

Link to post
Share on other sites

woe slow down


and never ever can be.

a DCA also has ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type.

totally ignore moorcroft, they dont buy debts either. only operate for their client...

whom are their stated client on this letter?



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

Hello and ty for replying  

  itdx100uk  it  says the client is Ideal World Ltd  

and your correct it says

my account details have been passed to us  by IDEAL WORLD LTD  to act as a collection agent  and we will now be dealing with your account 

and then goes on to say they offer a flexible approach  to repaying my account have have various options  to suit  

and to pls get in Contact as soon as possible  

and then it says the ways to get in touch with them  giving their phone number   email address etc  and  the methods i can pay by. 


so should and can i safely ignore  this  , as i don't want to contact them if i don't have to .


Or what is the best way to now deal with this pls





Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, treextree said:

so should and can i safely ignore  this  , as i don't want to contact them if i don't have to .

You don't have to write to them at all; however, not doing so will result in your letter box filling with half the amazon rainforest in the hope they eventually get some money from you. Writing to them with the letter BankFodder suggested may put a stop to that right from the off.

If you choose to ignore, you should continue to open any correspondence you get from them, just in case they ever did try to raise a claim against you. It would be easily defensible, you just don't want them to do it without your knowledge, which could result in a default judgement in their favour.

Link to post
Share on other sites

as long as you've not moved since ordering from ideal world you are very safe to simply ignore everyone

until or unless you ever get a letter of claim from a solicitor who's client is idealworld

a Notice of Assignment for a DCA stating they have now purchased the debt.


and a very very big or 

a county court claimform pack.

which as with 99.9% scam debt none of the above ever ever happen

go enjoy your life and stop panicking about a bunch of powerless letter writers whom make themselves out to be BAILIFFS.

they are not and cant do anything on any dent

a dca has no more legal rights than you or i or your cat.



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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...