Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • As per the heading, received a parking charge for failure to display a blue badge in a disabled bay on a retail park.  I am a blue badge holder, disabled/wheelchair user with a Motability vehicle. I received the charge as 'notice to keeper' I was not the driver. I don't have a valid driving license so use a carer. The notice arrived a week after the alleged incident. It states that as the 'driver' failed to pay the charge in full  hence, it is now the keepers responsibility ( the notice was dated 2 days after the alleged infringement and as no notice to driver was on the vehicle, I don't know how they expect the driver to be able to either pay or dispute the charge if they are not aware of it) Anyway, really looking for help how to reply. I cannot remember if the badge was correctly displayed or not. Photos taken of car miss a bit where I store my badge if not displayed so it would be possible to see a badge even if not 'correctly displayed" . It was a bit of a sh**ty day weather wise, gusty and raining  (as seen on the photos which reminded me of the actual day) so it is possible that badge blew to the floor as the driver was helping me out of the car into wheelchair. There is no windscreen photo showing that a PCN to "Driver" was stuck on the window either. The car park is free. There are no Parking Signs at all near the disabled bays that one could read to adhere to any terms and conditions. The whole row of disabled bays - of which are there many only state badge holders ( does not stipulate Blue Badge Holders) The notice states that the parking company is a member of the BPA and Operating in accordance with the British Parking Association's Code of Practice. The BPA, section 19.1 State that at least one parking sign should be near the disabled bays, in a position that can be easily  read by by a disabled person without leaving their car in order to decide to be bound by such terms. We returned to look for signage on the retail park and could not find one sign that was near the bays. The only sign we could find was high up on a pole but not near the bays. Someone had to get out of the car and stand on tip toes to be able to take a photo of a sign. I would be grateful if someone could help or point me in the right direction. It is now  15 days since the alleged incident and 7 days since I received the notice.
    • also just to clarify is it required that I physically post to both the county court and Evri? I read in another thread you can just email Evri a copy since they will just rescan whatever you post anyway (if they even read it)
    • I'm going to add some context here, it may or may not be different to mine, but it provides a hint around what you can expect from Overdales. My thread to read  TLDR  Lowell / Overdales lied about sending letters (I keep all mine), Admitted the default notice was faulty and made up their own, saying that's all fine, (Fake letters sent to 'prove ' it), Sent documentation that is illegible, not on letterheaded paper.  They will lie, try and make things up, try and send you offers to settle, play good cop, bad cop, all in the name of intimidating you into paying up, don't fall for it!  
    • Hi Dx,   I really have tried to fill the this in and paste the answers as I appreciate the advice    but it’s confusing as asks for e1 box and e2 box to answer I don’t have that    what I received from the court is    Form 02 Form 03 Form 05 Form 07 for if I wish to defend  also initial writ  Thanks 
    • The Tories seem to be confused at the moment, UB. Leaving aside the point about their record for now, Atkins completely ignored protocol by interrupting the Labour minister while he was speaking. I'm sure if a Labour MP had done that to a Tory minister there would have been uproar. I hadn't realised that Christopher Chope is a deputy Speaker now - I had go and and look that up.
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 162 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

Terminator vs DLC


Guest The Terminator
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6405 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Guest The Terminator

Louise Clarke

Direct Legal & Collections

Buckingham Road

Brackley

Northants

NN13 7DN

18TH December 2006

Dear Ms Clarke,

The writer is in receipt of your letter dated the 13th December 2006 regarding the following Egg Account:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXX

The writer notes that inter alia there is no evidence that you have been assigned to collect the debt that your client is alleging and as there is no signed form of authority your letter has no substance whatsoever.

Furthermore the writer must also inform you that repeated phone calls or text messages will constitute a breach of Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act (1970) and Section 1 of the Protection from Harassment Act (1997) which are both criminal offences .I would therefore suggest communication is by letter only

If the writer does not receive a written acknowledgement within the next 10 working days then it will be assumed that the alleged debt no longer exists.

Yours Faithfully

The Terminator

Android City

Barnehurst

Kent

 

Now the reply that I got from DLC was as follows:

Dear Mr Terminator

Our Clients: Egg Banking PLC

Account No: xxxxxxxxxxxx

Balance Outstanding: xxxxxxxxx

Following our recent communication we are now instructed to take whatever steps are necessary to recover payment of this debt

This could mean one or all of the following:

1. The issue of a County Court Claim(which will increase the amount of the claim by up to a further £200.00

2. A collector personally calling at your address

3. Registration of the debt with an Investigation and Debt Surveillance Agency

These courses of action could prove to be expensive, time consuming and may affect your ability to obtain credit.If you wish to avoid this you must send your payment IMMEDIATELY and telephone us to confirm that this has been done

Yours sincrely

Louise Clarke

TEAM LEADER.

Well Ms Clarke you are indeed a muppet what you have done there is not only broken the OFT debt guidelines but have committed a criminal offence under S1 of the Malicious Communications Act(1988).I look forward to my day in court with you then you can explain your actions to a judge.;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
Louise Clarke

Direct Legal & Collections

Buckingham Road

Brackley

Northants

NN13 7DN

 

18TH December 2006

 

 

 

 

Dear Ms Clarke,

 

 

The writer is in receipt of your letter dated the 13th December 2006 regarding the following Egg Account:

 

XXXXXXXXXXXXXX

 

The writer notes that inter alia there is no evidence that you have been assigned to collect the debt that your client is alleging and as there is no signed form of authority your letter has no substance whatsoever.

 

Furthermore the writer must also inform you that repeated phone calls or text messages will constitute a breach of Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act (1970) and Section 1 of the Protection from Harassment Act (1997) which are both criminal offences .I would therefore suggest communication is by letter only

 

If the writer does not receive a written acknowledgement within the next 10 working days then it will be assumed that the alleged debt no longer exists.

 

Yours Faithfully

 

 

 

 

The Terminator

 

 

Android City

Barnehurst

Kent

 

 

Now the reply that I got from DLC was as follows:

 

Dear Mr Terminator

 

Our Clients: Egg Banking PLC

Account No: xxxxxxxxxxxx

Balance Outstanding: xxxxxxxxx

 

Following our recent communication we are now instructed to take whatever steps are necessary to recover payment of this debt

 

This could mean one or all of the following:

 

1. The issue of a County Court Claim(which will increase the amount of the claim by up to a further £200.00

 

2. A collector personally calling at your address

 

3. Registration of the debt with an Investigation and Debt Surveillance Agency

 

These courses of action could prove to be expensive, time consuming and may affect your ability to obtain credit.If you wish to avoid this you must send your payment IMMEDIATELY and telephone us to confirm that this has been done

 

Yours sincrely

 

Louise Clarke

TEAM LEADER.

 

Well Ms Clarke you are indeed a muppet what you have done there is not only broken the OFT debt guidelines but have committed a criminal offence under S1 of the Malicious Communications Act(1988).I look forward to my day in court with you then you can explain your actions to a judge.;)

 

This is the letter being sent to this shower tomorrow :eek:

 

Louise Clarke

Direct Legal & Collections

Buckingham Road

Brackley

Northants

NN13 7DN

 

8TH January 2007

 

 

 

 

Dear Ms Clarke,

 

 

The writer is in receipt of your letter dated the 29th December 2006 regarding the following Egg Account:

 

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

 

The writer notes the contents of your letter which quite clearly breach the OFT guidelines on debt collection. The writer must also add that he will not be bullied or intimidated by your tactics and will be collating evidence which may be used in a Court of Law.

 

Referring back to the writer’s letter of the 18th of December 2006 for a company that portrays itself as giving a “First Class Service” it is amazing that you do not have the common courtesy to reply to the body of the letter and as you have been given ample time to respond the writer acknowledges that the alleged debt no longer exists unless the following criteria can be provided:

 

1) A copy of the original executed agreement which the writer is entitled to under sections 78/79 of the Consumer Credit Act (1974) as amended which gives you 12 days to provide a true copy of the agreement thus giving you until the 21st January 2007 to comply or a default situation arises (letters sent 1st class post are deemed to be received the next working day). The compulsory fee of £1 in postal orders is enclosed.

 

 

2) A form of authority from your client as requested in the writers letter of

the 18th December 2006 which you have not had the courtesy to

provide.

 

3) A list of all your clients charges which are both illegal and unlawful.

 

4) A comprehensive breakdown of how these charges are arrived at.

 

 

The writer referring back to the contents of your letter dated the 29th December 2006 will have no hesitation in seeking injunctive measures in the County Court if you persist in your threats.

 

Yours Faithfully

 

 

 

 

 

The Terminator

Android City

Barnehurst

Kent

Link to post
Share on other sites

2. A collector personally calling at your address

 

Well apart from harrassment I'm sure The Terminator will have great joy in telling the colllector where to go. :D

 

 

3. Registration of the debt with an Investigation and Debt Surveillance Agency

 

 

Ooh. Is she going to write your name on a list?:o :D

23/05/06 DPA Sent to Halifax

I Love You All :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

!!!Rock on!!! There Terminator,

I'm with you I really like that, take a look at my post on the RBOS you'll like the info I've just found on them in my case.

It going to come inusefull to a lot of people I think

 

Sparkie1723

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
[/font]

 

 

Well apart from harrassment I'm sure The Terminator will have great joy in telling the colllector where to go. :D

 

 

 

 

Ooh. Is she going to write your name on a list?:o :D

 

In answer to 1) Ivor yes or he/she can walk down seven flights of stairs

 

2) She can write my name on any list she pleases and why she's at it she can fill in a form for jobseekers allowance.:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
What the B****y H**l is a debt surveillance agency , is that an employment agency that finds jobs for people in debt???

 

Sparke 1723

 

Do they really think we are so thick that we don't know the law.Well I'm expecting in the next few weeks to see a CCTV camera positioned opposite my flat with the words on it" we are checking to see if The Terminator is leaving his property":D Really they are no more than a bunch of jokers who most proberly don't understand the Human Rights Act.Mind you I have a little ace up my sleeve about this lot that will get them into trouble with the authorities which I will post in due course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...