Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Hello Everyone - New Dirty tactics by NatWest


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5525 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

Am I being unreasonable for demanding an apology?  

1 Cagger has voted

  1. 1. Am I being unreasonable for demanding an apology?

    • No I should go for it
      0
    • No I should
      1
    • Yes I am
      0
    • Yes forget it
      0


Recommended Posts

Hi folks

 

Just thought I should warn everyone of the dirty tactics being employed by NatWest.

 

I wrote to the Bank asking for copies of my statements, which I received, I then wrote expressing my disgust at the way my account was being managed unlawfully. Whilst all this was going on my account was being mismanaged by the Bank with monies going missing despite having been paid in, and staff blatently lying to me and addressing me as "mate".

 

On Dec 18th 06 I received a letter from the Area Manager, which was dated 8th Dec 06. He stated that the communication between MYSELF and the Bank had deteroriated and that he had instructed the Branch to formerly give me 30 notice that all my accounts would be terminated!, and I should Bank elsewhere!

 

I went to the Branch and was told, we can do what we like when we like, with no reasons, we dont like complaints, so there is nothing you can do about it. After numerous other letters its trnspires that "my complaint" is classed as unreasonable behaviour and unacceptable.

 

EVERYONE BEWARE - I am still pursuing this as a matter of principal and wont let go, and the bank DID CLOSE ALL MY ACCOUNTS - AND I NEVER GOT THE NOTICE IN WRITING!

 

Ombudsman unable to assist I might add.

 

 

Brush 47 North Star:o:mad::-x:-x:-x:-x

Link to post
Share on other sites

You did get a notice, in your post the area manager has told you in writing. Please can you expand on what you are saying on missing monies as I can advise on the process of what has happened. Just so you know I work for NatWest so I do and can advise. It is not a tactic, but I can help if I know more info.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Nattalie

 

I do not wish to disclose further details regarding my account Im sure you appreciate that such information is confidential, however, the Area Manager said, and I quote "I have instructed your Branch to issue with 30 days notice", the Branch did not issue me with such a notice.

 

I am currently in the process of recovering charges from Nat West which started the whole thing off, and am presently awaiting a response from Head Office.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest peed orf
Thanks Nattalie

 

Not Nattalie, it's Nattie. He's the best person to give you advice on sNatch West.

 

..and am presently awaiting a response from Head Office.

 

You could be waiting a while!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ooops, spelling mistake, sorry nattie.

 

I appreciate the offer but the damage is done, Nat West are being stubborn and I hardly feel like discussing this delicate matter with an employee of Nat West. I also appreciate that nattie is trying to help, but a Bank that condones staff addressing customer as "Mate", who wont put their hands up and admit they lied to me and treated a disabled customer with contempt does nothing to put my trust in them.

 

Nattie I know has the best intentions in the world trying to help and I know that, but this Branch down here has rules unto itself and head office are letting them get away with it. Would you put up with a Manager saying " Suit yourself, its your lookout" with customers in ear shot?

 

I think its safer to just leave this forum and get on with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ooops, spelling mistake, sorry nattie.

 

I appreciate the offer but the damage is done, Nat West are being stubborn and I hardly feel like discussing this delicate matter with an employee of Nat West. I also appreciate that nattie is trying to help, but a Bank that condones staff addressing customer as "Mate", who wont put their hands up and admit they lied to me and treated a disabled customer with contempt does nothing to put my trust in them.

 

Nattie I know has the best intentions in the world trying to help and I know that, but this Branch down here has rules unto itself and head office are letting them get away with it. Would you put up with a Manager saying " Suit yourself, its your lookout" with customers in ear shot?

 

I think its safer to just leave this forum and get on with it.

 

 

Good luck to you.

 

As a fairly new member of this forum, I have spoken to Nattie through the chat facility, and he did not request any details which would give the bank any indication of who I am. Neither, has he done anything I've seen anywhere which could be construed by anyone as anything other, than being ultra helpful - even questioning things to help people get more/better results than they currently are doing.

 

With respect, I think although the severity of the situation might have upset you, and obviously the treatment you have received is substandard, you will truly get the best help here IMHO. Perhaps it may be better to look on Nattie as someone who can offer sound advice (because he practises it everyday for a start) rather than a potential "snake-in-the-grass" for NatWest, per se.

 

Not wanting to cause offence, obviously, but it is easy to get a bit over-wound when there is money at stake.

 

Regardless of the above, best of luck with your claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to add my support for petrafyde's last post. Nattie has never given anything but sound advice and IMHO is an extreemly valued member of this forum.

 

If you do decide to leave, best of luck in your claim.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, I think that if the OP wants to deal with that issue in their own way then fair play to them. As I said, I know most things inside out back to front(regardless of whether the branch seems to have a different approach). Please remember, some members will look at a bank worker with suspicion and that is their feelings which I have no problem with. I call people by various things, including mate, as you do become friendly with them. They call me things as well(which could get my post edited!!) The area manager is speaking for the bank and the banking code states that the bank should give 30 days notice for account closure which a representative of the bank has done. The issue on bank charges is at issue which we can all help on including me.

Please remember they are not attacking me and the OP has issues with NatWest. Let's help. As I have stated they have given correct notification for the account closure. I was intrigued by the wording of monies going missing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK!!!! Monies missing - monies deposited into my account at another Branch, yet failing to appear in my account 10 days later, big dispute, Bank denying all responsibility, no knowledge, luckily I had Bank receipt and promptly provided it, 5 days after which the money appeared!

 

"Mate" - to be used as a greeting to a casual response or person well known, NOT to be used by Bank staff who I dont even know or have even seen before.

 

I must respectfully dispute that 30 days notice WAS NOT given. A letter dated 8th of the month,received 18th of the month, and account closed 8th of next month is NOT 30 days in my reckoning, it maybe by the time the letter was written but not to be received 10 days later.

 

Lies - to be told wife went into bank personally to deal with matter, when I know for a fact she hadnt, she is disabled and cannot get out unless I am with her.

 

To be told bank issued replacement card, and when checked with district office to discover no replacement ordered.

 

To be spoken to by a Bank Manager in such a way as to be offensive is not acceptable.

 

As I said, all blew up since claim made to recover charges.

 

Case closed.

 

Have written to head office and district office, 3 times, no response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will deal with each point bit by bit.

1) 30 days from date of the letter or calender month, not 30 days of receipt.

2) poor service but rectified with receipt(it can happen), if any charges on the account they should have been sorted out.

3) They should have referred to you as sir, or your name not as "mate"

4) That is a serious issue

5) there is a system in which a card can be ordered but will need to be checked by a secondary person, not all cases, but I have seen when it has not been checked and therefore drops off the system after a few days, still poor service.

6) unacceptable although may need a bit more info but I think from OP it was as stated unacceptable

A further point is Customer Relations Unit, Borehamwood to actually state the timeline and what you feel is totally unacceptable because clearly some aspects are.

Have you received an apology for any of the things that were unacceptable?

 

Please come back on this by all means because I am sure there are things that may need more clarification

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes brush yes u do - your right this is not acceptable from a bank. i hope u get your money back and are able to lay NatWest to rest as i have. i see that your pointing out that this has only come about since the start of your claim and this isnt unheard of, people have experienced NatWest closing their parents accounts down once a clam has been started - possibly in confusion due to similar names but all the same its not good. as i say good luck, god bless x x

 

Nattie i dont think brush wants these things rectified he was just pointing out the crap service and bad experience SINCE starting the claim. it would drive mem insane being a natwest worker reading all this - t must be hard for you also x

NatWest (CLAIM 1) - £2181.24 SETTLED IN FULL

VIRGIN MBNA - £377 SETTLED IN FULL + INTEREST

NATWEST (CLAIM 2) - £1008.30 - SETTLED IN FULL

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...
The area manager is speaking for the bank and the banking code states that the bank should give 30 days notice for account closure which a representative of the bank has done.

 

One small point : the OP said the area manager would instruct the branch to do this but the branch didn't.

I really do appreciate all those 'thank you' emails - I'm glad I've been able to help. Apologies if I haven't acknowledged all of them.

You can also ding my gong if you prefer. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a problem with NatWest and despite sending a letter to Customer Services, never got a reply.

 

I then sent a recorded delivery letter to 'Chief Executive' at their registered office address, setting out my problem and got a phone call from a very nice lady (responding on his behalf) within a week. She apologised and sorted everything out for me. I was very pleased.

 

I would recommend writing (by recorded delivery) to the 'Chief Executive' at the London registered office as a way forward

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...