Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi, I have found this group very helpful hence I am here seeking help and advice.   I got myself into a situation where I have now more than £50k in unsecured debts (personal loans & credit cards) and things are now getting out of control as I am struggling to make payments. This is purely my own created situation and I am taking 100% responsibility for it. I am keen to get out of this situation as soon as possible hence I would appreciate any help and advice in this process. I am employed at the moment and don’t want to risk going into IVA or bankruptcy as this would risk losing my job. Being sole bread earner of my family, I cannot afford to lose my job. I have been trying to keep up with the payments so far and had few missed payments instances until 3/4 months ago but got caught up with missed payments somehow using my savings. All my debts are still with original lenders. However I know I am getting into same situation again shortly and won’t be able to get out of it again. I have started exploring Debt Management Plan (DMP) option through StepChange but haven’t submitted it yet. Based on budgeting, I have around £820 available to make payments to all lenders after taking care of all other essential expenses. This is definitely lot more affordable than what I am currently paying to different lenders. 1. Is DMP right option for me in current situation? 2. what are the negative consequences of availing DMP? 3. is there something else that I can do to get out of this situation? I’m determined to clear out all my debts but need bit of breathing space and time. Let me know please if you need any additional information. Thanks in advance for all your help and guidance. MM  
    • Bookmakers use betting on political events to entice new customers, and say it is growing.View the full article
    • nope  and  neither dx
    • Ok Thank you DX will do just that . will keep you up dated.
  • 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

Excel vanishing Windscreen PCN NTK - parked in a restricted area - GALLAGHER retail park, Huddersfield, HD5 0AN


Recommended Posts

The fact that your PCN arrived late is irrelevant.

The criteria is that PCNs are deemed as having arrived two business days after posting.

Nevertheless as Nicky said the PCN still does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012  Schedule 4.

Do we believe that the PCN was posted on the 27th or was it actually posted so that it would arrive on the day that was too late to be able to pay the reduced sum?

If you work on the presumption that most of the private parking companies are a combination of unscrupulous scrotes and village idiots you can make your own decision from there.. If you have kept the envelope it might give you some proof.

The PCN should specify the period of parking which it doesn't.

There are times on the photos but they are not part of the Notice.

In any event you weren't there long enough to as you left within the Consideration period of a minimum of five minutes.

On top of that there was a court case Jopson v  Homeguard defined what parking was, and unloading and delivering was not classed as parked.

Moreover as you were not the driver and the PCN is not compliant you as the keeper are no liable to pay the charge.

And they do not know the name or the address of the driver so they are pretty well stuffed.

Another fault with the PCN is in section 9 [2][f] where their PCN states  one thing and the Act says another -"

(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,

the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;"

They miss out the words in parentheses which has been enough on its own to have a previous case dismissed.

I am also uneasy about the mention of further costs involving debt collection which are not mentioned anywhere in the Act.

Probably because in the Act the maximum that can be charged is the amount on the signage.

That alone should make the PCN non compliant on its own.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Their PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. iit was not posted until 13 days after the event for one thing meaning it would be deemed to arrive on the 15th day instead of the 14th day. Now though we cannot expect that your PCN also missed the deadline there were still two other things wrong with the wording of the PCN that if your PCN has the same wording as your friends means that your PCN would not be compliant either.

Their PCN does not specify the period of parking as required n the Act. It does show the ANPR arrival and departure dates but as those times include driving from the entrance to finding a parking place then later driving from the parking place to the exit cannot be described as a parking period.

I suspect that the " Important Note" on your form will also not comply though I cannot be sure until we see your actual PCN.The reason I can't confirm that is because they sent out the PCN too late they have said that they are pursuing your friend on the assumption that they were the driver as well as the keeper-something that Courts do not accept.

But it does look as if your PCN is not compliant which means that the keeper cannot be held liable to pay the charge. Only the driver can be made to pay it. If you have not appealed and revealed who was driving, there is no way that  Excel know who was driving. 

So just to be sure please send them an SAR . On another topic do you have any proof that you did not stay there for so long just to really spoil Excel's day.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

What do the Site team think about this-

Write a complaint to excel's Complaints dept, stating that you are the keeper of vehicle xxxxx but not the driver on the day.

You saw on one of the photos included with the PCN [give them the number of your PCN] that a notice was placed on my vehicle while my driver was unloading.

By the time my driver returned a few minutes after, the Notice had been withdrawn. The most likely person to have done that was the photographer as the time difference was too short for anyone else to have removed it.

I understand that if this was a Notice to Driver that the PCN you sent should not have arrived until at least 28 days later. Could you please explain why that Notice was removed and show me that document prior to me raising the issue with the ICO.

That way the scrotes know the situation -that they have been rumbled and should they continue with a non compliant PCN they have no chance in Court .

Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't agree more Maffster. I really hate when I read the sanctimonious bullshine from the likes of the BPA and the IPC when trying to justify the existence of their industry.

This is from the new IPC Code of practice

"This updated Code of Practice for members of the International Parking Community (the IPC), the parking trade body that drives up standards across our industry, will create a better parking experience for the law and rule-abiding majority of those who use our members’ car parks, whilst ensuring that those who flout the rules are encouraged to change their behaviour."

Do they really believe that they are driving up standards.across their Industry????? They are the depository for some of the biggest rogues . Birds of a feather spring to mind.

Hot off the Press. Apparently Excel has just switch ed from BPA to IPC. Above the headline there is a statement from BPA.

BPA says appeals service is independent and scrutinised.  

You would think that it would be something that was welcomed by an honest, transparent car park company........

  • I agree 1
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...