Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I haven't heard of them asking for photographic evidence in this way before – but I don't think it will really pose a problem. Have you got a history of sending parcels which were then lost and you had to claim for? When you send your letter of claim? Was the item properly declared? Was the item correctly valued? Please answer these questions and then take at least a couple of days reading very thoroughly the stories on this sub- forum. There are lots of them. Read some of the pinned topics at the top which will explain the principles and then read the stories to see other people's experience. Post up your letter of claim in PDF format so we can see what you sent.  
    • Just to clarify - it was the lender who undertook works, not me.  They racked up huge huge sums in refurb costs - which were completely unnecessary.  They have been trying to charge all the costs to me.  Of course, I refuse to be held accountable - in my defence and counterclaim.   (I refuse to  be held liable for these works costs whether vat was or wasn't added - I maintain its the lender that must cover the costs).  It was a ridiculous sum of money and made no difference to their ability to sell either.  As its still unsold.    I can see - from disclosure paperwork - that the lender ceo uses this contractor all the time on other properties - for himself and for the bank.  The payer may not be responsible for the contractor's failure to add vat - but the ceo can clearly see it's not being charged - and again and again on all his jobs.  So he is complicit even if not guilty of the actual fraud.    I admit I'm angry with them. The sheer injustice and arrogance (that they could/ can do whatever they want and get away with it - has been astounding.  It's why I have fought so hard to get justice.  This particular issue is just another niggle.  They think they are above the law; can circumvent it - with no consequences / repercussions.    Thank you dx for pointing me to the link. I will now follow that up
    • I have posted the letter off today - sent recorded delivery, so should get to the Police early next week. I also walked along the street where this happened and checked if there were any CCTV cameras or video door bells in that section of the road, but could only find one. I talked to the owners of the house with the camera but they say it is set to only cover the area leading up to the house and not really the pavement or road and footage also auto deletes after 72 hours, so anything captured would be gone now. That was disappointing. I walked along the road a bit more, but couldn't see any other video door bells or CCTV, so that didn't help.  I always thought most people have at least a video door bell these days but not in that road... 😐 So came home a bit disappointed.  If anything else happens I will post an update here, but may not be for a week or so. Not sure how long this will take now.
    • Hi all.   I've just cancelled my Virgin Media because my Wife and I are going abroad for 12 months or so. My Son will be staying in our home, and wishes to start a contract with them. He signed up to a great deal for New Customers online, and a Contract Agreement was signed online. He had a delivery date for a Self Installation Kit but it never arrived. After speaking to numerous Virgin Media Staff online, they are insisting that he calls their Pre Installation Team (I presume that is their sales Team to try and get more money). He doesn't want to speak to them over the phone. He doesn't mind doing a Live Chat, but he hasn't got an Account Number yet, so that's impossible. He even had a chat with a Team Member on Whatsapp, who say they don't have access to the information they need, so he has no option but to call them. Why can't they just be straightforward with their Communications? Is there any other option other than calling them?   TIA.
    • Hi All, I'm looking for help with a P2G claim for another lost parcel. Given the wealth of information on this site, I'm hopeful that this should be an easy one to fix, but want to be sure I have everything. On the 6th March, I contracted with P2G to send a parcel (a £600 Pioneer AVH-Z7200DAB car stereo which is not on either P2G or EVRi's excluded from compensation or prohibited items list) using EVRi, sent it off, and that was the last I heard of it. The EVRi tracking showed that the parcel had made it to the national sorting hub at 2:12 on the 7th, and then vanished. By Friday, I had started to get nervous, and so, raised an enquiry. And then another, and another - well, they weren't responding, and I couldn't get their telephone one to work, I think in all, it was more than 15 enquiries. I also raised an investigation with P2G as well. EVRi closed the enquiry confirming a loss on the 19th March, and P2G near the end, although P2G closed it claiming that I needed to send photos of the parcel as proof - which I didn't have, and I also do not have an account with P2G so couldn't upload anything (I did test, just in case), and this is why despite receiving advice on the EVRi Fb group to send the letter before claim, I haven't yet acted. I have proof of the eBay listing, and the refund, to demonstrate that which was being sent, but P2G's insistence that I have no photographic proof of the parcel with the label - I have the photo of the goods in their box before sending, but this is for the eBay listing, and so does not show it after the fact. This I fear is what P2G will seek to rely on as a defence, hence my 10 week delay on progressing with this. But, I am more than £600 out of pocket for the loss: £600 for the item and £8.04 for the delivery fee, although my claim will actually be for an initial £611.09 to cover the cost of the loss, their delivery fee, and my 1st Class Recorded stamp for the Letter Before Claim to P2G, rising to £681.09 to cover the additional £70 cost of opening the court case if they fail to respond within 14 days. This question mark surrounding P2G's request for photographic evidence, is this likely to cause me a problem? Steve
  • 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

NCP/BW ANPR PCN - Cambridge North Station


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 208 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 think Dave will be jumping up and down with excitement, he loves these.

He'll probably be along shortly...

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

On 07/09/2023 at 10:11, honeybee13 said:

The reminder is the latest in a series of threatograms. We only suggest taking action if you get a letter headed Letter of Claim.

I would try to get over thinking that threads are depressing. The one thing you need in order to get the better of the PPCs is the knowledge that comes from reading similar threads here.

HB

 

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

Well, time for the teenager to have a serious think if she/he wants to sue NCP for distress due to not respecting the SAR request.

There is a thread here from someone who did precisely that  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/452147-loc-to-ncp-for-failure-to-supply-sar-paid-in-full/#comments

Get them to read the thread and decide.

As they will see, the procedure is extremely easy, there really is no defence possible, and in this case NCP immediately rolled over and gave in ...

... but we've seen with other companies that they go running to solicitors, of course bottom barrel solicitors who work with private parking companies 'cos they can't get other work, who then file ridiculous defences just to drag things out so they can mess the motorist about and make money out of their thicko clients.  So that is a possibility too.

Their call.

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

Well we're not really interested in suing NCP for the hell of it, we just want the parking charge to go away. And we need them to respond to the SAR to be able to do that realistically.

How do I make them provide the SAR info?

Shall I just write to them threatening the action and copying to their legal team and BW Legal?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You've already asked nicely once and they'e ignored you.

 

The only way to really put the pressure on, is to send a letter of claim... and that is exactly what you've suggested above.

Only thing is if they ignore you again and you don't follow through with a claim, they'll just think you're a pussy and will roll over in 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 OTHERS

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

The process is:

ask nicely (you've already done that).

Lletter before claim giving them 14 days to comply.

Then if they don't comply, on day 15 click off the claim on mcol.

It's a slamdunk win in court, because they  have an obligation to comply with statute.

If they haven't complied, they literally have no defence.

As Dave already said, they can just pay up or...

"but we've seen with other companies that they go running to solicitors, of course bottom barrel solicitors who work with private parking companies 'cos they can't get other work, who then file ridiculous defences just to drag things out so they can mess the motorist about and make money out of their thicko clients.  So that is a possibility too."

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, lookinforinfo said:

Railway land is usually covered by Byelaws so the 14 day rule probably wouldn't apply.

Yes, exactly. That's why we're trying to get the data via the SAR. If they don't know who the driver is they can't pursue using POFA, I think that's correct?

 

@Nicky Boy 

Does our claim run alongside their claim, though, assuming they proceed as threatened by the latest DWLegal Final Notice?

I take them to court while they take us to court ie two separate actions?

Suing for providing the SAR data doesn't help us find out whether they've come after us illegally under the station bylaws etc does it? Or does it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why you think a SAR will help with that?

They will have NO record of who was driving.

Have you been reading other threads to educate yourself at all?

 

2 hours ago, EssexChap said:

Is the Letter of Claim the same as Letter Before Claim?

Yes.

 

Here's a useful list of some of the acronyms we use

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/147286-posting-in-this-forum-and-a-z-of-motoring-terms/#comment-4399743

 

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

Sorry I'm getting really confused now. 😳

I thought the SAR was to get the data that proved they were acting outside the railway bylaw rules? Otherwise why are we doing it?

"Certainly get the SAR off. 

There are other things that are probably wrong with the PCN.  It's also highly likely that they will try to pretend that POFA applies until they're challenged by which time they'll have tied themselves in knots."

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EssexChap said:

Suing for providing the SAR data doesn't help us find out whether they've come after us illegally under the station bylaws etc does it? Or does it?

No, it doesn't. Byelaws are exactly what they say.

The main point is that POFA2012 cannot be used because an area covered under byelaws is not "relevant land" as described in POFA.

Therefore, liability cannot be transferred from the driver (who they cannot identify), to the Keeper, under the terms of POFA.

Start reading up around the forum!

1 hour ago, EssexChap said:

I thought the SAR was to get the data that proved they were acting outside the railway bylaw rules? Otherwise why are we doing it?

I've had a look back up the thread... The SAR is to obtain all the paperwork that's been binned at your end.

As well as reading other threads, it would be a good idea to keep up with your own as well😉

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

NickyBoy,

I totally understand that's it frustrating for you experts to have a newbie like me getting confused and asking stupid questions all the time. But I have been reading,

I've spent hours doing just that, but this stuff is all new to me and it's very easy to get confused when you're learning.

Really sorry if it's annoying to you but I just want to get this sorted and to be honest snippy remarks just add to the stress of the whole situation.  

"All the paperwork that's been binned at your end" is, of course, just the original PCN which my lad threw away because he'd paid to park. If you'd prefer I just paid the sharks, just say so and I'll leave you in peace. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, EssexChap said:

Well we're not really interested in suing NCP for the hell of it, we just want the parking charge to go away.

OK, thank you, point taken.

Unfortunately however it's a huge mistake to throw away the paperwork.  It means we haven't a clue what the motorist is being accused of, whether they have followed the legal protocols or not, whether they are likely to do court or not, etc., etc.  We're groping around in the dark.

And as you can see, they take advantage of this and are uncooperative about replying to a SAR.

So - have a look at post 52 here  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/457490-espgladstones-mnpr-pcn-claimform-spinningfields-estate-manchester-received-nothing-prior-to-claimform/page/3/#comments  (I think it's post 52, sometimes the post count goes wonky, it might be a couple of posts above or below).

There is a suggested Letter of Claim (yes the same thing as Letter Before Claim).  Adapt it and sent it to NCP today.  If after receiving this letter they still don't cooperate, you can sue them but you don't have to.  The letter is designed to get serious about legal threats and focus their minds.

There is also a letter to send to the solicitors.  Obviously adapt it too.  Start with "Dear Rachael and Sean" for example as they are the two who run BW Legal.

Get two free Certificates of Posting from the post office.  This strategy worked in mkontheroad's case - hopefully it will with yours too.

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

So got a reply from NCP after threatening them with legal action, and guess what,  it's literally identical to the one in the other NCP SAR thread. "We did not receive the (first) letter..."     Liar, liar, pants on fire. I presume therefore this is their standard response to any SAR request. Ignore it until someone threatens legal action then pretend you didn't get it. This is scandalous. Should I follow up with the information commissioner etc?

Any way, I will send the proof of identity as requested by them and see where that gets us. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you haven't replied to them yet, I suggest you keep the heat on them.  Write to them on Monday, and enclose
   - original SAR request
   - proof of posting
   - I.D.
and point out that they are already in breach of their statutory duty and you would be quite within your rights to sue them immediately for distress.  However, you are prepared to delay doing so, on the proviso that within ten days of your letter, i.e. 2 November, a complete reply to the SAR pops through your letter box. 

I know you're reluctant to sue them, this doesn't mean you have to sue them on 3 November, it just means you can, and hopefully you'll get the desired response before.

Yes, why not kick up a stink for them with the ICO.

 

Edited by FTMDave
Timescales 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 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

Essex lad-look at them not sending you the sar. you want the PCN case to be over . They won't want to go to court  over the sar

Write to them pointing out that you both have claims against each other. Rather than both sides ending up in court perhaps the best recourse is both agree to drop the cases against each other .....................that way neither of you have to pay the Court to instigate proceedings or risk losing  the case.

So win win or lose lose depending on your pint of view. But it is a way of bringing things to a close quicker than going through the Courts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FTM Dave: No haven't responded, wanted to wait for you chaps to advise! 😀

Lookinforinfo: yes, that would seem a very rational thing to do if we were dealing with fair minded people! Indeed they might have suggested this.  But I guess they know the facts same as I do, so from what everyone here has said, they'll keep up the bully boy scare tactics until they have to back down? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's forget about the matter of the SAR for the moment.

You've seen how the fleecing PPCs act.  They send out a series of threatening letters pretending the amount to pay is constantly increasing in the hope of frightening the motorist into paying.  Eventually they will probably send a Letter of Claim which is the step before court action.  At that point we say to reply with a snotty letter showing them you'd be big trouble if they were daft enough to do court.  At that point they generally give up. 

But don't think they will ever formally back down.

And there are no guarantees.  If they never take anyone to court, ever, then word will get round that they are paper tigers.  NCP do do court.  Here is a search of our NCP threads.  You will say that the vast majority do not have "claimform" in the title - but some do  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/search/?q=NCP&quick=1&type=forums_topic&nodes=65&updated_after=any&sortby=relevancy&search_in=titles  You can make your own luck IYSWIM with the snotty letter, and given (a) POFA and (b) bye-laws they are unlikely to do court in your case.  Unlikely - but not impossible.

Returning to the SAR.  LFI's idea is excellent - but the pitfall is that if you go down that road then you have to be prepared to sue them.  What if they say no to your attempt at negotiation and continue?  Are you at that point going to issue a claimform for distress due to their failure to respect the SAR?  If the answer is "no" as seems the case then I don't think that's the strategy to follow.

I can't be sure, but I would guess that their staff, whose job is to send out the various levels of threatening letters at various intervals, are probably not the brightest bulbs in the box and didn't understand what the SAR was when it turned up, so chucked it in the bin.  But you've got NCP's attention now.  I would do what I suggested three posts up (I've amended the dates given you'll probably write on Monday now).  That would keep the heat on them and hopefully get them to respect the SAR.

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

7 hours ago, FTMDave said:

are probably not the brightest bulbs in the box and didn't understand what the SAR was when it turned up

 

I'm sure the data protection officer knows what a SAR is, even in a company as patently dodgy as NCP. I think they deliberately fail to act for self-preservation reasons and hope the requester backs off. 

The fact I received what was effectively a pro forma letter pretending they hadn't got our request only reinforces this belief. Especially as nobody in the company even puts their name on a letter.

(Interestingly, but not surprisingly) the BW Legal website is the only law firm's website I've ever seen that doesn't mention the name of a single employee! Every other normal law firm profiles the senior partners and often all the key front line staff!)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me introduce you to Sean and Rachel the directors.

FIND-AND-UPDATE.COMPANY-INFORMATION.SERVICE.GOV.UK

BW LEGAL SERVICES LIMITED - Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual return, officers, charges, business activity

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...