Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you for your responses. As requested, some more detail. Please forgive, I'm writing this on my phone which always makes for less than perfect grammar. My Dad tries but English not his 1st language, i'm born and bred in England, a qualified accountant and i often help him with his admin. On this occasion I helped my dad put in his renewal driving licence application around 6 weeks before expiry and with it the disclosure of his sleep apnoea. Once the licence expired I told him to get in touch with his GP, because the DVLA were offering only radio silence at that time (excuses of backlogs When I called to chase up). The GP charged £30 for an opinion letter on his ability to drive based on his medical history- at the time I didn't take a copy of the letter, but I am hoping this will be key evidence that we can rely on as to why s88 applies because in the GP opinion they saw no reason he couldn't drive i need to see the letter again as im going only on memory- we forwarded the letter in a chase up / complaint to the DVLA.  In December, everything went quiet RE the sleep apnoea (i presume his GP had given assurance) but the DVLA noticed there had been a 2nd medical issue in the past, when my father suffered a one off mini stroke 3 years prior. That condition had long been resolved via an operation (on his brain of all places, it was a scary time, but he came through unscathed) and he's never had an issue since. We were able to respond to that query very promptly (within the 14 days) and the next communication was the licence being granted 2 months later. DVLA have been very slow in responding every step of the way.  I realise by not disclosing the mini stroke at the time, and again on renewal (had I known I'd have encouraged it) he was potentially committing an offence, however that is not relevant to the current charge being levied, which is that he was unable to rely on s88 because of a current medical issue (not one that had been resolved). I could be wrong, I'm not a legal expert! The letter is a summons I believe because its a speeding offence (59 in a temp roadworks 50 limit on the A1, ironically whist driving up to visit me). We pleaded guilty to the speeding but not guilty to the s87.  DVLA always confirmed to me on the phone that the licence had not been revoked and that he "May" be able to continue to drive. They also confirmed in writing, but the letter explains the DVLA offer no opinion on the matter and that its up to the driver to seek legal advice. I'll take the advice to contact DVLA medical group. I'm going to contact the GP to make sure they received the SAR request for data, and make it clear we need to see a copy of the opinion letter. In terms of whether to continue to fight this, or to continue with the defence, do we have any idea of the potential consequences of either option? Thanks all
    • stopping payments until a DN arrives does not equal automatic sale to a DCA...if you resume payments after the DN.  
    • Sleep apnoea: used to require the condition  to be “completely” controlled Sometime before June 2013 DVLA changed it to "adequately" controlled. I have to disagree with MitM regarding the effect of informing DVLA and S.88 A diagnosis of sleep apnoea doesn't mean a licence wont be granted, and, indeed, here it was. If the father sought medical advice (did he?) : this is precisely where S.88 applies https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/64edcf3a13ae1500116e2f5d/inf1886-can-i-drive-while-my-application-is-with-dvla.pdf p.4 for “new medical condition” It is shakier ground if the opinion of a healthcare professional wasn’t sought. in that case it is on the driver to state they believed they met the medical standard to drive. However, the fact the licence was then later granted can be used to be persuasive that the driver’s belief they met the standard was correct. What was the other condition? And, just to confirm, at no point did DVLA say the licence was revoked / application refused? I’d be asking DVLA Drivers’ Medical Group why they believe S.88 doesn’t apply. S.88 only applies for the UK, incidentally. If your licence has expired and you meet the conditions for S.88 you can drive in the U.K., but not outside the U.K. 
    • So you think not pay until DN then pay something to the oc to delay selling to dcas?    then go from there? 
    • think about it, if you don't pay the full amount, what more can they do , default you  they've already registered a default notice by that point.  why have you got to await sale to a DCA.... for what?  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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/dcbl ANPR PCN claimform - didnt input reg - ignored everything - auto park estate, Eastgate street, Bury st Edmunds Suffolk IP33 1YQ ***Claim discontinued***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 146 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

as i said earlier you need to get reading up.

 

dont use email. use 1st class stamp get free proof of posting from any po counter, it does not hurt if its a day or 2 late you are a LiP (litigant in person - joe public against the system- you get certain leeway)


https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/347310-legal-n180-directions-questionnaire-small-claims-track-correct-at-sept-2016/#comment-5088148

3 copies

yes to mediation (unless you filed our Statute Barred Defence OR this is a claim for a Private Parking Ticket)

1 wit you

Suitability for determination without a hearing? no (read all the posts in N180 link above for the reason)

the rest is obv

1 to the court

1 to sols (omit phone/sig/email)

1 for your file

 

dx

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

@ihb9 Thanks for starting your own thread.

@Sym01 It would be a damn good idea to follow ihb9's thread, ihb9 has put in loads of superb work photographing UKPC's pathetic signage, all evidence that would be massively useful for your daughter with her 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

The problem is that the snooker hall didn't call in UKPC, whoever runs the whole site did.

The snooker hall must surely know who this is, as this organisation will have given them instructions for the reg. no. keying in.

If you can find out who this company is it could be vital info. for you and for ihb9.

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 presume you're following ihb9's thread in any case, but it seems this evening that they have managed to get the invoices they received cancelled.

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

Can your daughter find out from the snooker hall who this mysterious organisation is that runs the estate?  They are the ones who have the power to halt the whole thing.

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

From my own case on the same estate, it was the business we were visiting themselves that contacted UKPC and got our PCNs cancelled. From the cancellation confirmation from UKPC, it looks like they called and followed up by Email, so Bury Bowl ought to be able to do the same ... although time has gone on now.

Apparently these new scheme was 'request' by the vets and snooker hall businesses, and it seems the snooker hall is owned by the landlord. Trying to find a contact for that there is https : //www[dot]potblacksportsbar.com/ which gives a phone number of 01284 704231, or they also seem to run a golfing simulator there too https : //www[dot]thegolferslounge.co.uk which quotes the same phone number or [email protected]

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I messaged Andy Goodridge last week, he said he would email his contact at UKPC but that he was usually unhelpful. Still waiting to see the outcome as to whether he did email them. I will follow up after this weekend

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what Andy said last week!

"We have had loads of it as you can imagine the company ukpc make their money from fines so it's not in their interest to signage it well!

We have signs on all doors and tell as many as we can just sometimes we are busy and people slip into club

Email me the details I'll try email them for you and kick up a fuss it's really there to stop people parking and going into town we get lots of it

I'll try for you email me details asap l've sent you an email.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sym01 said:

We have had loads of it as you can imagine the company ukpc make their money from fines so it's not in their interest to signage it well!

then write back telling the muppet they ARE NOT FINES!.

dx

 

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

4 hours ago, ihb9 said:

From my own case on the same estate, it was the business we were visiting themselves that contacted UKPC and got our PCNs cancelled. From the cancellation confirmation from UKPC, it looks like they called and followed up by Email, so Bury Bowl ought to be able to do the same ... although time has gone on now.

Apparently these new scheme was 'request' by the vets and snooker hall businesses, and it seems the snooker hall is owned by the landlord. Trying to find a contact for that there is https : //www[dot]potblacksportsbar.com/ which gives a phone number of 01284 704231, or they also seem to run a golfing simulator there too https : //www[dot]thegolferslounge.co.uk which quotes the same phone number or [email protected]

 

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

Please spill the beans. 

This is the person/organisation to contact to call their dogs off. 

Knowing who it is will be massively important for future motorists who get caught out, as surely they will.

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

Almost scared to put this on, but this is a draft email. What else should I include? 
 

I am writing to you as I believe you are the land owner of Autopark estate, Bury st Edmunds.
I received a PCN from UKPC in March 2023 for my vehicle being parked on the estate for 29 minutes on 22/03/23. Although I admit to being the car owner at the time, I do not admit to being the driver of this vehicle. 
The vehicle and its occupants were using a business on this estate that they had been going to for 2 years. They were unaware that UKPC had taken over the running of this site and due to the poor signage and not being told on entry to the business that they needed to input details I,the owner, have now been issued with court proceedings.
I am appealing to you, as the land owner, to see if there is any way you could help cancel this PCN before it goes to court.
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's great detective work - well done.

I would cut out "Although I admit to being the car owner at the time, I do not admit to being the driver of this vehicle",  just not outing the driver is good enough.

I would also name the business and add that the business has admitted that users are sometimes not informed of the registration number regulation and also that they have admitted that UKPC's signage is inadequate.

 

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...