Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you. The fact it was a permit-holder car park, rather than a pay car park, does help your case.  You can argue Prohibition at least. Have a look at the attachment in post 40 here  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/466177-ukpc-2x-windscreen-pncs-claimform-forgot-permit-appealed-res-parking-my-own-space-east-croft-house-86-northolt-road-south-harrow-ha2-0es-claim-dismissed/page/2/#comments You can use the introduction, Prohibition section, Double Recovery section and the concluding Statement of Truth as the basis for your own Witness Statement.  Your case is virtually identical.
    • Embracing diversity: The key to unlocking business successView the full article
    • Parking dispute - DCB Legal 09:05:24.pdfHi there, Please find attached the correspondence to date as requested. I have attached everything that I have in terms of correspondence. To the points raised: Your case is not looking too good at this stage. Not helped by the car park not appearing on Google Street view.  Interesting that UKPC seem to think that Walcot Yard is off Walcot Road when it is off Walcot Street. Part of Walcot Yard has the postcode BA1 5DW which is a building called North Range. You would have to find out where in Bath they would know the specific post code for the car park there since if it were the 5DW ending you may be able to claim that you weren't in BA1 5BG Walcot yard, Walcot Road, but BA1 5DW Walcot yard, Walcot Street.  >> Thank you, I am trying to find more information on this.  But probably the main help would come from the site manager. A  written statement from him explaining the informal situation with the land owner or better still  finding out who the land owner is  and contacting them might help. though getting UKPC to cancel at this late stage will be next to impossible. >> I can also do this. The site manager is able to provide a written statement. However, they have not been able to contact the site operator, who lives elsewhere in the UK. It is a very frustrating situation but I have really tried.  
    • no we dont give private advise helps no-one bar YOU not what CAG is about. post it here dx    
  • 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

Stole from m&s very worried


Recommended Posts

no the police will not be involved.

p'haps you should have thought a bit more about your child before you started this spate of repeated premeditated shop lifting....

all very well having worries for their future afterwards as some kind of excuse for being allowed to do it and continue to get off scot free.

dx

  • I agree 1

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

i see where you are going..but..

the store staff (wages expense) hours to search (if still existing) CCTV footage was available far out weighs the loss via the 'thefts'.

and any later external scammers like RLP/DWF etc can never have such access under GDPR.

what really disturbs me is the OP's historic attitude.

8 hours ago, strangerdanger said:

When we use the self scan till we dont always scan everything saving maybe £20.

dx

 

 

  • I agree 1

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 police will not be involved nor will you ever hear from them...end of no if's or buts.

this is a very very low level matter to them. IF they ever would get involved they would simply refer the matter back to M&S stating should they wish M&S themselves could deal with this under the civil court system. but ofcourse they wont.

its a daily incident carried out by 100's of people across the country each day.

prison...NO NO NO NO.

pers im rather more concerned by:

55 minutes ago, strangerdanger said:

I also get angry how my abuser when I was a child

this could be the route cause of many issues for you without realisation. inc this compulsive stealing.

id p'haps go have a chat with your GP in confidence.

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

please stop hitting quote

just type in the msg box.

there will be no prison

there will be no police.

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

1 hour ago, strangerdanger said:

I've not seen any responses on forums to what had happened to them after being caught and contacted by the police.

you weren't stopped at the time on the day, so the police would not be the first point of contact to you now. never seen nor heard of the police knocking on doors.

1 hour ago, strangerdanger said:

But I've seen plenty of articles with people getting weeks and months in prison for stealing food/drinks

mostly gang members AND the police were called when caught in store. 

1 hour ago, strangerdanger said:

there is a couple that says the cctv was sent to police and they tracked them down.

i very much doubt that unless it was for £100's or £1000's of in store theft. yours is not serious to them. and over many occasions. not worth the staff time to find them all and tot up your total 'theft' .

1 hour ago, strangerdanger said:

the more I read about this stuff the more i think I'm screwed.

nope.

they dont even know who you are and the store/security staff most certainly under LAWS cannot pass your details on to anyone other than the police.

if these RLP/DWF retail loss scammers latterly write i'd be seriously questioning their GDPR right to do this. never ever heard of it ever happening .

i used to work with in store/shopping centre security CCTV for +25yrs. never once did this happen to a joe public on theft that wasnt +£1000's worth.

dx

  • Like 1

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

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...