Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • He has failed to provide information required  pre action I have not received bill or details of what the other builder has done I have not receieved a letter before action  I had a verbal request to pay half of the new builders re-work  cost  I received an email stating if I didnt pay within 72 hours he would make a claim against me in the county court I did offer to pay £300 for the snagging which in my opinion was sufficient to cover any labour or materials on the minor items He went ahead and re worked the whole of the bathroom area without discussing it with me He has made a claim for £2400 He had taken it upon himself to carry out all of the works without recourse or discussion with me, other than an email saying he wasnt happy with some of the finish surrounding acurved wall and an extractor duct he stated he had lost confidnce in me and had appointed someone elase to carry out the work The original cost of the full garage conversion was £10400, building control were fully involved and passed all inspections I quoted in writing detailing the work I would carry out with a single price for the whole job no photos of the finished job he has taken lots of photos and videos but not shared them with me onlymeagain  
    • Evening All I am now working on pulling together my bundle of docs for Court (it needs to be submitted by 8 July) and have three parts I'd be most grateful for your thoughts on please. The first is a time line / case summary, the second concerns Items Not In Dispute and the third (I hope) sets out where P2Gs insistence that they are only liable for the first £20 of any claim falls foul of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and also cites three cases where different judges found against P2G and ParcelHero Ltd when they attempted to argue their very limited liabilty was warranted. Anonymised pdfs of all three sections are attached. Given that in their Defendant's Response P2G appear to have conceeded that the eventually delivered parcel was empty, and that the contents had not been handled with due care and attention, do I need the amount of detail I have included in the summary document, or do you consider a significantly shortened version would suffice? As ever, many thanks g59 Description of unenfoceable insurance requirements for my bundle.pdf Issues Not In Dispute - anonymised.pdf P2G Timeline and case summary - anonymised.pdf
    • the temp frozen bank A/C will be under the money laundering rules. he must be transferring large sums of money in/out a UK bank account from abroad and the automatic system has fagged him. now he must wait for a human to intervein.  can take anything upto 2mts see the barclays forum. you cant get a CO for CTAX as that would need a CCJ FIRST  9/10 council dont go for CCJ's on CTAX debt , as they can go direct to bailiffs  but they are powerless as there is no right of force entry. dx    
    • That's what the claim, defence /counterclaim and trial is all about
    • Yep, agree. No actual agreement number given. Thanks dx and Andy - amazing value given 👍 What's the next steps ? In terms of a response from the court / Pra Group ?       
  • 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

there's one in this thread..

i wonder if its the same, they seem to be identical regardless each time we have a thread with one

Vehicle Control Services Privacy Notice, Brooke Retail Car Park, HA4 0LN - Private Land Parking Enforcement - Consumer Action Group

 

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

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

these Excel/VCS privacy notices only have 2 things the operator has to do on them

enter the date 

tick either excel or VCS depending upon which firm manages the carpark .

 

 

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

Essentially there are organisations that, despite the tightening of legislative practice, remain committed to extracting money as they always have done - by way of underhand, strong arm tactics. 

My neighbour paid up, she was sure she would end up paying more, and it was the narrative that caused her to panic and pay up.

Of the others that I’m aware of, they’ve done the same. Some have appealed, lost, paid, others just paid, and from what I can tell it’s the surface seriousness of the appearance of the NTK.

Most of the NTK’s have been related to overstaying, returning twice within, or overnights when none have, and they’ve had proof they didn’t contravene but they ended up paying out of fear of the original sum increasing.

I’m wondering if there’s a higher authority to turn to, one that will investigate the practice of such organisations. The retail stores on the site don’t, or won’t, get involved, it’s nothing to do with them, the car park is managed privately etc etc. 

My neighbour is a typical, hard working single parent, no spare money, everything’s stretched, she felt it when she paid up. She said it was the unfairness of it that stung more than anything because she paid a fine for a thing she didn’t do, Excel took her money regardless of their deception and funky ANPR wizardry.

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...