Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I recently upgraded my 3 Contract to a new phone which developed a problem. I contacted 3 and was initially told to speak to the manufacturer. They advised that as I was in the 30 day period of Consumer Rights Act 2015 to request a replacement that I go to the store to arrange this as it would offer a faster resolution. I agreed with this course of action and went to the store on day 29. Leaving it late admittedly due to health issues.   When I arrived at the store the Assistant Manager then gave just about every excuse under the sun about being able to help but because the policy was 28 days not 30 they could not help me. I countered this with CRA 2015 being 30 days and they refused to accept this so I asked for the policy in writing. We both looked on the 3 store website but embarrassingly enough for them it didn't state anything about faulty goods. The actual wording in the contract that I signed says "Refer to three.co.uk/returns" for the Full Policy which doesn't explain anything about replacement faulty goods. I know why... Because it's the legal requirement of 30 days... Store Manager being adamant the period for returns was 28 days refused to back down so I asked him to look up CRA 2015 which they declined saying "It's not my job to know the law" ... Of course if you're selling goods and services and are a manager you should be versed in CRA 2015.   Realising they weren't getting me to fold my argument they requested a colleague get a copy of the policy from the back room. When they returned it was very clear the document they were about to show me was the signed contract of another customer. Consequently I called this out and said "Don't show me that, that's someone else's personal data" which they seemed to take offence at and said I was just trying to give them a hard time. They went on to justify saying that what they were trying to show me had no personal data despite initials and a signature being clearly visible. I again instructed they take the document away from me. The wording was so small that the only way for me to read it would be to have actually taken the document to look at it. The ultimate irony is that policy in this other customers document would be irrelevant because that's not the document I signed.   Realising I was getting palmed off and probably being labeled as toxic I decided to leave, but not before writing his name down and sending off a blunt tweet to 3...   Needless to say I'm not too impressed, £16.55 out of pocket for a train ticket, probably going to need to return to the store again and having to put up with a broken phone either for 2 weeks (If manufacturer deal with this) or having to fight an outside 30 day period.   Tweet Sent... But not sure how I should approach that GDPR issue... So desperate to prove a point the manager didn't have he throws all regards to another customers data out the window?   When does my bad luck ever end...
    • did you send the irl complaint to zopla? dx
    • ok I will fill in the out of time statutory declaration.  My understanding is that the clock gets reset to when the PCN was originally issued?  If so then what do I do then as the company lo longer exists, I don't know who was driving the van on the day of the PCN so not much help 
    • That is a definite possibility, that OOT is a good idea, if accepted it will reset the debt to the original sum to pay or dispute and remove the bailiff fees.
    • Suggest that you complete the out of time statutory declaration with all of the details.   I would guess that if you were the director of this limited company that was dissolved, that you could still be liable. Doubt the Government would leave any loophole for companies with vehicles to escape PCN's after dissolution.  There will be a responsible director with on-going liability and as your name is on the DVLA records, it appears to be you.
  • Our picks

    • Future Comms issues. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/416504-future-comms-issues/
      • 3 replies
    • This is a bit of a lengthy one but I’ll summerise best as possible.
       
      THIS IS HOW THE PHONECALL WENT 
       
      I was contacted by future comms by phone, they stated that they could beat any phone contract I have , (I am a limited company but just myself that needs a business phone and I am the only worker) 
      I told future comms my deal, £110 per month with a phone and a virtual landline, they confirmed that they could beat that, £90 per month with a phone , virtual landline  they also confirmed they would pay Vodafone (previous provider) the termination fee. As I am in business, naturally I was open to making a deal. So we proceeded. 
      Future comms then revealed that the contract would be with PLAN.COM and the airtime would be provided by 02, I instantly told them that this would break the deal as I have poor 02 signal in the house where I live as my partner is on 02 and constantly complaining about bad signal
      the salesman assured me he would send a signal booster box out with the phone so I would have perfect signal.
      so far so good.....
      i then explained this is the only mobile phone I use for business and pleasure, so therefore I didn’t want any disconnection time in the slightest between the switchover from Vodafone to 02
      the salesman then confirmed that the existing phone would only be disconnected once the new phone was switched on.
      so far so good....
      • 14 replies
    • A shocking story of domestic and economic abuse compounded by @BarclaysUKHelp ‏ bank complicity – coming soon @A_Gentle_Woman. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/415737-a-shocking-story-of-domestic-and-economic-abuse-compounded-by-barclaysukhelp-%E2%80%8F-bank-complicity-%E2%80%93-coming-soon-a_gentle_woman/
      • 0 replies
    • The FSA has announced large fines against DB UK Bank Limited (trading as DB Mortgages) - DeutscheBank and also against Redstone for their unfair treatment of their customers.
      Please see the links below for summaries and full details from the FSA website.
      It is now completely clear that any arrears charges which exceed actual administrative costs are unfair and therefore unlawful.
      Furthemore, irresponsible lending practices are also unfair and unlawful.
      Additionally there are other unfair practices including unarranged counsellor visits - even if they have been attempted.
      You are entitled to refuse counsellor visits and not incur any charges.
      Any charges for counsellor visits must not seek to make profits. The cost of the visits must be passed on to you at cost price.
      We are hearing stories of people being charged for counsellor visits for which there is no evidence that they were even attempted.
      It is clear that some mortgage lenders are trying to cheat you out of your money.
      You should ascertain how much has been taken from you and claim it back. The chances of winning are better than 90%. It is highly likely that the lender will attempt to avoid court action and offer you back your money.
      However, you should ensure that you receive a proper rate of interest and this means that you should be seeking at least restitutionary damages - which would be much higher than the statutory 8%.
      Furthermore, you should assess whether the paying of demands for unlawful excessive charges has also out you further into arrears and if this has caused you further penalties in terms of extra interest or any other prejudice. This should be claimed as well.
      If excessive unlawful charges have resulted in your credit file being affected, then you should take this into account also when working out exactly what you want by way of remedy from the lender.
      You should consult others on these forums when considering any offer.
      You must not make any complaint through the Ombudsman. your time will be wasted, you will wait up to 2 yrs and there will be a minimal 8% award of interest and no account will be taken of any other damage you have suffered.
      You must make your complaint through the County Court for a rapid and effective remedy.

      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/Communication/PR/2010/120.shtml
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/redstone.pdf
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/db_uk.pdf
       
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/consumerinformation/firmnews/2011/db_mortgages.shtml
      Do you have a mortage arears claim to make? Then post your story on the forum here
        • Like
      • 0 replies
seylectric

A break in a double yellow line has to be at least a "car length"...

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1016 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

...So says one of Blackpool's finest!

 

(Bit of a moan but relevant issues covered, long post)

 

 

The street on which the local Royal Mail sorting office, where people collect their undelivered parcels, is situated is a one-way street which pay-and-dispaly parking meters on one side and double yellows on the other, plus apparently pointless markings on the kerb which, according to the parking ticket office are there to let people know it is an offence to park on the footpath - that's what they told me when I phoned to complain. If you didn't, you would be blocking the road.

 

Before we get to the main event - my complaint - there are already a couple of contentious issues here. First of all, I referred to the markings as apparently pointless as according to local rules it is an offence to park on any footpath anyway, so they say. So all footpaths need to be marked, or none of them!

 

Secondly it is interesting to note that they refer to this misdeameanour as an offence. Since parking is council controlled, and thus decriminalised, it isn't an offence, a point of major contention in Blackpool at the moment - they are still pursuing people for unpaid fines even though they have now lost several cases at NPAS because their parking tickets referred to an offence and so were illegally worded (I believe they have now changed the wording).

 

The parcel collection office is a particularly busy one, you can often be queing for at least ten minutes but being in the town centre the pay-and-display bays are usually occupied all the time (used to be free to park until the council spotted the money-making potential) and people collecting parcels park partly on the footpath opposite for a few minutes. No big deal, preventing an obstruction, no damage to the low kerb and plenty of room for pedestrians. Of course you're a prime target for a ticket and it's patrolled regularly. No need, just a money-making [problem] but we have all sort of got used to it and have to put up with it.

 

However on the Saturday before Christmas, Christmas Day of course being Monday, the parcel collection office was very busy and there were long queues. The council's answer? To position two trafiic wardens outside all day, so people could not park outside the parcel office without getting a ticket.

 

I myself had gone to collect a parcel, parked on the footpath before I saw the wardens which were ahead of the car parked in front of me. One warden appeared immediately and said, "Shift it - now!". I got out of the car and spotted the second warden. He was arguing with a woman who was in tears, in some distress actually, seemed she was protesting at the fact that she had a large parcel to pick up, had been driving around the block for an hour waiting for a bay, and finally gave up choosing to accept the inevitable ticket to collect her parcel, no doubt a Christmas present. However she was being told that a tow truck was on standby to tow away offenders who deliberatley ignored them.

 

I turned back to my car to see the first warden writing out a ticket. I then asked him if he knew the laws relating to parking on double yellow lines. he of course said he did, so I asked him why he was giving me a ticket. Before he had the chance to answer, I pointed out that there was a break, in fact several breaks in the yellow lines. I then pointed out that this rendered them basically non-existent and that nobody was commiting an offence by parking there, and they were wrong to stop them, let alone book them.

 

I deliberately said offence to gauge his reaction. He initially said, "What break? I can't see any break in any lines so you're commiting an offence. That's why you have got a ticket. You were warned."

 

Really? I then pointed out the breaks, about 4ft from where we were stood (remarkably he still couldn't see them the first time) and told him that I had no problem winning my appeal at NPAS. I then questioned that if he knew the laws he must know that he has just given me a ticket KNOWING that I am not illegally parked! I told him that if he didn't know he should resign because he obviously wasn't up to the job, and if he DID know he should resign because he was booking people illegally! He saud that he was well aware of the law and a break in a double yellow line "had to be at least a car length long". Obviously this is boleaux but I would love to know how the Road Traffic Act defines a "car length". Interestingly, no mention was made of parking on the pavement.

 

Not until I phoned up to complain that is. My complaint was about the attitude of the warden that ticketed me (I could have avoided it, yes, but I'm not bothered about that, that's not the point here). My point is WHY is there a need for such overzealous regulation anyway? Couldn't they have turned a blind eye for one day instead of making the last shopping day before Christmas into a lot of hassle for people? And they can't understand why town centres are dying!

 

Think about it - we hear a lot on the news about town centre stores losing out to internet retailers but I wonder if a lot of the reason for it is the fact that you can't park in or near town centres without paying for it or risking a ticket. Those retail parks are always heaving because it's free to park and no worries about fees or fines or your car being towed away. The likes of Tesco etc. seem to be making fortunes and one of the main attractions is free parking where you want to be, are councils ever going to wake up and realise that it is THEY who are killing High Street trade?


I only mouth my opinion, please look elsewhere for sensible advice! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had a similar debate with a traffic warden regaarding the gaps in double yellows being at least a car length. I was parked over a mini-sized gap in the double yellows in my Toyota Camry (think about two mini's long). He elected to let me just get out of his sight before he changed his mind, which suited me as my mate had just picked up our takeaway.

 

A car-length is a very subjective measure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was he talking about the length of a Smart car or a Rolls Royce?:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no such requirement - for any break to be at least an car length - therefore any debate as to what constitutes a car length in this context is sterile.

 

The regulations are absolute and require that the lines are continous and terminated with a T-bar. There are no permitted variations.

 

Many Councils and, indeed, some adjudicators will quote "de minimis" (In fact, de minimis non curat lex = the law does not concern itself with trifles) and state that a reasonable man would recognise that the lines existed. However, there is established case law that says that if the signs are not as prescribed (and road lines are signs) then they do not exist and cannot therefore be contravened. This strikes down any test of reasonableness (which doesn't exist in the legislation anyway)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's really what I was getting at, not only are they fleecing the motorist at will, they are now LYING to the public in order to attempt to justiy to the public what they are doing there in the first place.

 

The whole thing is a disgrace, as I said if either the warden doesn't know the law or is blatently lying then he should resign. Chances are though that he is making excuses such as this with his department's blessing!


I only mouth my opinion, please look elsewhere for sensible advice! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I pointed out to a traffic warden that there was no T bar on the double yellow lines so I was not illegally parked as he stated .He laughed sarcastically and said well watch I'm still going to give you a ticket anyway . I said what with the disabled badge correctly displayed on my car and all these witnesses watching your actions .He laughed again but just then walked away .

I regretted having the disabled badge on show as there where many witnesses so I'd of prefered to of got the ticket and challenged it / him , because of his attitude.


When you want to fool the world, tell the truth. :D

Advice & opinions of Janet-M are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you have any

doubts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.

plus apparently pointless markings on the kerb

 

What kind of markings? Single, double, or treble bars on the kerb, at right angles to the road, indicate that loading restrictions are in effect.

 

Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was this ever appealed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was this ever appealed?

 

This is a long time ago now! After complaining on the phone at the time I got the ticket, pointing out the large gap in the lines, I never heard another word about it so I assume they must have dropped the matter and cancelled the ticket.


I only mouth my opinion, please look elsewhere for sensible advice! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is a long time ago now! After complaining on the phone at the time I got the ticket, pointing out the large gap in the lines, I never heard another word about it so I assume they must have dropped the matter and cancelled the ticket.

That's interesting. I haven't tried calling them. Might have been worth a try at the time, instead of letting it go to the NTO stage. Something to think about it future...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...