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.
      • 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
      • 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

Landlord,Tenant & sub-tenants

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6402 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


Start your own new thread

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



Recommended Posts

In October 2005 I moved to share a flat with a lady who had Tenancy agreement with Landlord. In March 2006 another couple moved in as subtenants/lodgers,paying rent to the same lady who was the tenant at that time.

The landlord's relationship with the tenant deteriorated as she was not passing the rent we paid to her to the landlord.The lady tenant agreed to move out of the flat and recommend me to take over tenancy to the landlord as from 1st August 2006.I went to the landlord's office in July for a meeting to take over as the tenant.During the meeting I told the landlord that there are repairs that need to be done on the flat,some of them urgent,to be done before the rain season.The landlord agreed verbally and said he does not mind spending more money improving the flat as long as I pay my rent,unlike the outgoing tenant.I mentioned the leaking roof,burst water pipes,floor tiles coming out and kitchen to be redecorated.

On the 27th September 2006 I wrote to the Landlord reminding him that the roof need repair urgently before rains begun.I also mentioned other repairs like the floor tiles in kitchen and bathroom that were coming out.The landlord replied on his letter dated 3rd October 2006 giving me phone numbers for the roofer and plumber to contact and make arrangement for access.The plumber came and fixed the pipes.The roofer said he does not need access to the inside as he would just climb on top of the roof and do his work.Both came around mid October.

Rain temporarily stopped between mid October and mid November.When it rained again,i discovered that roof was still leaking and called landlord again.The guy came to repair within days but damage had already been done.

There was mould in the other bedroom where this couple lives and it affected their clothes.I told the landlord,who said I should move them into the lounge for a few days as he redecorate(new carpet & wallpaper) the room affected.This couple refused to pay me rent for December,saying its compensation for dry cleaning their clothes and living in a mould and cold room in the month of November.

The landlord send a council inspector after this couple moved out of the room.The day he came,heating was switched off as there was noone living in that bedroom.The inspector reported to the landlord that the room was very cold when he entered,so the cause of the mould was condensation.He said the room was not being heated properly.So the landlord said he was not responsible for the mould,but that I was budgeting on heating thats why there was mould in the room.

When i talked to the inspector over the phone,he said he was not aware that the roof was leaking.

I asked this couple for drycleaning receipts.They did not give me.They stated that their damage was more than the £440 rent they were withholding for one month of December.I do not have a written contract with this couple,but have one with landlord.

I went to the Citizen advice bureau.The lady said if I do not have tenancy agreement with this couple,then I can't enforce payment.I can only give them notice to move out.The lady stated that if the landlord refuse,I should talk to a solicitor,who can possibly sue.

I don't mind if the landlord give me notice of possesion because he has not repaired the floor tiles in the kitchen and bathroom as stated in my letter of 27th September.I have not enjoyed living in this property because i mopped the water leaking into the kitchen and pipes leaking in bathroom.I discussed compensation for late repairs but the lady at CAB said the landlord is not responsible for repairing inside the flat,but outside.Is that true.She said whatever repair that need to be done inside would be treated as wear & tear,which the landlord is not responsible for.

The boiler makes noise at night because its old.The landlord's gas certificate for 2004,2005,2006 states that the boiler is noisey and old.The latest,dated October 2006 stated that 'the boiler is very old and noisey,I would recommend replacement'.I believe the boiler is a health hazard.But the inspector circled 'safe to use'.

I am sorry my story is very long.Please help

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...