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

MET ANPR PCN - Arla Old Diary South Ruislip - "Five Hours Free" vs "Five Hours Maximum" ?


Recommended Posts

1 Date of the infringement  04/05/2024

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 08/05/2024

3. Date received 14/05/2024

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] not that I can see.

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] Not yet

7 Who is the parking company? MET Parking Services

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Arla Old Diary South Ruislip

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. It just says POPLA

 
I went to Cineworld in Ruislip 04/05 for the first time and saw on entry the sign for the multistory car park that said 5 hours free parking (I have attached the sign I saw).
 
I assumed I would be a bit longer than that as I was also going to the restaurant afterwards and then would just pay the additional hourly cost. 

When I returned I looked for the pay meter I couldn't find one and then I saw a sign that said 5 hours maximum stay £100 charge for staying longer (I have not been able to go back to take a picture as of yet). I then received the parking charge £100 which is outrageous. 
 
I was a genuine customer of the retail park, I spent money in Cineworld, Nandos and Treatz and then left.
 
I have attached a picture of the sign upon entrance which says nothing about maximum stay, it seems this is only advertised once inside. 
 
If that sign had clearly said maximum stay 5 hours then I would simply not have gone to the restaurants and given the retail park business which I presume is what it would want and what the multi story car park is for..customers? 

I have recently suffered the loss of my Nan and Step-father and this was one of my first outings to see a friend and take my mind of things.
 
I really could do without such a big expense during what is already a hard enough time.
 
I have complained to Cineworld who said they can do nothing and to contact the car park owner, I also complained to Nandos and had similar response. I can't find the details for the retail park management as the number on google does not work. 
 
Is there any point of me appealing on these grounds or do I just have to pay. 
 
Thanks!

sign.pdf

2024-05-08 MET NTK incident 2024-05-04.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m going to tag in the parking expert who will come and find a problem im sure

@lookinforinfo

Although I think normally you can avoid these things until a Letter Of Claim I’d let the parking expert him/her self confirm this because they’re very good

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you today?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

please complate this:

and put all your pdfs in date order in one mass PDF

you NEVER Appeal!!

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to METANPR PCN - Arla Old Diary South Ruislip - Parking Charge "Five Hours Free" vs "Five Hours Maximum" ?

ok sorted post 1 and renamed the thread and PDF's no need to do the above 

do not appeal.

have a read of 

these threads 

Programmable Search Engine (google.com)

^^clickme

comeback with anymore questions

it is NOT A FINE! word changed

 

 

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to MET ANPR PCN - Arla Old Diary South Ruislip - "Five Hours Free" vs "Five Hours Maximum" ?

Don't appeal.  If you read around the forum MET are a disgraceful company who we know very, very well.  They and the other private parking companies never, ever, ever accept appeals - ever.  All appealing does is risk throwing away your legal protections.

You're right that the signs are ambiguous.

Unfortunately Cineworld and Nandos will be telling the truth, it will be the Retail Park who called in MET.  I too haven't been able to find any contact details for the Retail Park.  As you've already been on to Cineworld and Nandos, could you ask them for an e-mail address for the Retail Park?

Also, if this place is near to you, can you go back and take photos of the signs near Cineworld that you could have seen?  If the signage is rubbish it's not your fault you were caught out. 

BTW, what you've received isn't a fine, it's a simple invoice, a private company doesn't have the power to issue fines.

 

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

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

First, the Entrance sign does not mention anything about there being other terms inside the car park so does not offer a contract. so it only  is an offer to treat.  Second, the sign does say % hours free without mentioning that it is also the maximum time one can stay. it would be logical to presume that there would be a fee for staying longer-but not £100.

Looking at the PCN-as usual it does not comply with the protection of freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.

First it does not specify the parking period since their figure includes driving from the entrance to the parking space, then later driving from the driving space to the exit.

Second it does not inform the keeper that the driver is expected to pay the charge Section 9 [2]] (b)inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full;

What that means is that you as keeper are no longer liable to pay the charge-only the driver is. As anyone with a valid insurance can drive your car they will have difficulty proving who was driving especially as you haven't appealed. In addition the Courts should your case get that far, do not accept that the driver and the keeper ae the same person.

So just relax and ignore all their threats even from their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors.  Just do not ignore a Letter of Claim if you get one of those-come back to us so that you can send a snotty letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at post 9 of rocky_sharma's thread for the same car park  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/419324-metdcbl-windscreen-pcn-paploc-now-claimform-electric-bay-abuse-asda-arla-old-dairy-south-ruislip/#comments  MET do have decent signs stating "5 hours maximum stay" ...

... somewhere in the car park.  No doubt the decent signs will be few and far between and placed where no-one will see them, with rubbish or non-existent signage in the rest of the car park.

However they will lie and say the signage was superb.

So if you can get photos of what you actually saw while driving to the cinema that would help a lot.

 

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

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

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...