Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

CEL ANPR PCN - 12 min stay trying to get app to work ! - Palmyra Pyramid Parking


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 181 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 recently received a letter from CEL saying I owe £60.

I entered the car park and downloaded the app.

I then spent the next 12 minutes (the limit is 10 minutes stay that you can stay without any "offence" being committed but I wasn't keeping track as i was trying to get the app to connect to my account)

I was unsuccessful

drove to a car park opposite (different land owner) that has a card reader.

I parked there instead.

Do I have a case not to pay?

£60 seems excessive for being 2 minutes over the allowance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's just a made up rules that they can't enforce. Against their own trade association code of practice for a start...

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to CEL ANPR PCN - 12 min stay trying to get app to work ! - Palmyra Pyramid Parking

thread title updated

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

For PCN's received through the post [ANPR camera capture]

Please answer the following questions.

1 Date of the infringement 3rd December 2023

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] Issue date 8th December 

3 Date received 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] Y

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes

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? Civil Enforcement

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Pyramid Arts Centre, Palmyra Sq South, Warrington, WA1 1BL
For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. BPA

2023-12-08 CEL PCN NTK offence 3-12-23.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

had to hide that

its totally unredacted.

now go back and read upload carefully!!

use the sites listed.

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

PCN file converted to PDF

post unhidden.

 

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

The PCN appears to give two reasons for its issue. No fee paid and no Permit.

If you were in an area that required a permit you were not allowed to park there without one. As that sign would have been a prohibitory one, ie no permit-do not park -there is no offer of a contract there. You cannot breach a contract if they never offered you a contract.

Also under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012  the Section 9 [2][a] they are required to specify the period of parking. They failed and only quoted an Incident date with the times you entered and left the car park. 

As it would have taken several minutes to find a parking spot, manoeuvre the car into the parking space making sure that the car wheels were within the lines and then leaving the parking place and exiting the car park obviously involved a fair amount of time . And that does not take into account things like having to possibly stop for pedestrians crossing in front of the car plus a possible traffic queue waiting to leave the car park.

On top of that as there app. was so poor you were unable to pay the fee, which is what you wanted to do. So there was either a frustration of contract and/or  you were not parked but trying to get permission to park.

You sensibly left when you could not make payment but apparently not fast enough for CEL.

This is what the BPA have to say on Consideration periods.

"13.1 The driver must have the chance to consider the Terms and Conditions before entering into the ‘parking contract’ with you. If, having had that opportunity, the driver decides not to park but chooses to leave the car park, you must provide them with a reasonable consideration period to leave, before the driver can be bound by your parking contract. The amount of time in these instances will vary dependant on site size and type but it must be a minimum of 5 minutes."

So you were unable to comply with the regulations because of their poor app. So you had not entered the "parking contract" and the Consideration period must be a MINIMUM of 5 minutes.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...