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 
        • 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

Bt Late Payment Charge Fight


denver
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6037 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

I've had enough of this. I have paid the £5 late charge on, bar one, every bill since it was introduced. Being late once tends to produce a domino effect (well, it does with me anyway).

The "reminder" letter does not, apparently, incur the charge. Pay after that and no charge will be applied. At some mystical date after the "reminder" has been sent out (and you still haven't paid) then the charge is added to your next bill . Nothing else has happend since the "reminder" so the £5 "admin" charge covers NO admin. I've just been told this by BT. So I told them it's therefore an unenforcable penalty charge.

The dates also vary wildly - they've just admitted it. Recently, after allowing for the crap postal service, I have had about 10 days from receipt of initial bill to the £5 charge being applied. In anyone's eyes that has got to be wrong - and don't forget the bill is for 3 months service I haven't even had yet, not the previous quarter.

Here are the 4 example bills.

 

Bill 01/02/06 Rem. 15/02/06 Charge 26/02/06

Bill 01/05/06 Rem. 15/05/06 paid

Bill 01/08/06 Rem. 08/08/06 Charge 18/08/06

Bill 01/11/06 Rem. 08/11/06 Charge 19/11/06

 

It only adds up to £35 with the others but that's my £35.

They've given me all the dates over the 'phone so off goes the first letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's nothing preventing you that your challenge their right to make the Charge under consumer law, and request that it be credited to your account. If the do not, your recours is either to pay up on time and pay the charges, or take htem to court for the amount charged and have them justify the fee to a judge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi

it seems to be really interesting for me anyway :)

I had lots of this lately, maybe I will have a go as well.

Keep us posted. Thanks

If I helped you click on my scales (on the bottom on right hand site). Thanks

 

July 2006 - DPA sent - never got reply

September 2006 - First letter sent, got offer for half of charges, Thanks but no thanks reply with LBA sent in October 2006

January 2007 - filed Small Claim on-line

after some mix-ups on 14 February 2007 Small Claim pack served to Halifax

they have 6 weeks (Claim from NI take longer) until 28 March 2007 to respond

 

See my thread:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-bank-bank-scotland/71700-kecimot-against-halifax-learn.html

 

Direct contact for Halifax

 

Matthew Ingham

Team Leader - Regulated Sales

Customer Relations - Halifax

HBOS Plc

CB/2/CR/26527

Direct Dial: 01422 326 527

[email protected]

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a point of information - British Gas has announced it will NOT implement its Late Payment fee and has abandoned its plans to do so. I'd like to think this will have ramifications for other firms that try this on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have they now... I wonder what made them change their minds... Couldn't be the mass exodus of customers ripped-off by the price hike/freeze/drop, could it? The late payment fee could have been the legendary straw that broke the camel's back...

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have my wholehearted support for your battle with BT. I have a similar story dating bak to 2005. If anybody wants to hear it I'll quite happily provide all info. Suffice to say I delayed paying my Phone bill until they had sent me a copy of the February 2005 Upgrade Mag. I had a question regarding when the Surftime hours changed. I wrote, emailed, phoned, emailed, wrote etc, etc. I said I wouldn't pay my bill until I had a copy of the mag in question and an explanation of their charging policy/change regarding Surftime. I had various explanations, mostly unintelligible as they came from the 'Southern Hemisphere'. Suffice to say I sent two letters to Jillian G. Lewis, Customer Services Director. They were both sent Recorded Delivery. Surprise, suprise NO REPLY.

 

PLEASE also be aware that as from 1st May 2007 BT will levy £4.50 per quarter (inc. vat) if you DON'T pay your bill monthly by direct debit or by monthly payment plan. (See BT Update mag for February 2007).

 

Whichever way you turn they're out to get you. I am actively looking to leave BT altogether as soon as I can.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can NEVER leave BT (unless you live in Hull or a cabled area - the services you receive will be indirectly supplied by them, and as Sky and others point out when you complain about the imposition of late penalties or non-DD charges, the first response is everyone else is doing it! Well, I never read 'Update' they can stick it on my bill, and I'll pay as always directly to their bank account - less any fees they cannot justify. (Being asked how it costs them extra to process my payment that arrives in full to their bank account). Let battle commence!

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I mentioned earlier, I had a response to my initial request for a refund of the late payment charges which just fell short of implyng that my late payments have resulted in various famines and the Iraq war. Anyone who doesn't pay their BT bill immediately is the **** of the earth. The writer (Mrs Jane Thompson) told me the "issue has been closed".

Well, that was dated 1/3/07.

I responded with a "letter before action" sent on 5/3/07.

Today (8/3/07) I have received a second letter dated 6/3/07, again from Mrs. Jane Thompson. She wouldn't yet have received my "letter before action". This one says that the "issue" has been sent to the complaints department and their procedure will be followed (some sort of never-ending maze presumably). The letter invites me to call a number if I want to "discuss this further" and trusts this "clarifies the situation".

Er....no!

 

Oh well, if no intelligable response by the 20th, the court action starts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good for you Denver.

 

I wonder two things regarding this £5 charge...

 

How many poeple have managed to pay their bills any quicker as a result of this charge since it was introduced?

 

How much have BT made from all the £5 charges they slap on us?

 

regards. PXR5

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm inclined to think that the same would apply to BT's £10 "Reconnection Fee". Does it really cost £10 for someone in BT's billing department to take their mouse and go "click!" on my account? Or perhaps it's even automated: when the outstanding balance is paid then I'm reconnected. Any BT employees fancy revealing any secrets?

 

Whatever, I'll give short odds BT wouldn't be too keen on justifying their charges to M'lud.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dev,

interesting thread.only just picked up on this.

 

I took on the AA this year of a smilar issue with late payment charges on my car insurance. Initially they gave the usual fob offs stating the legilsation only applied to banks..

I started to quote the unfair terms and conditions in consumer cotracts, quoting specific sections and they paid up..£60.

I hope you get a similar result, will watch with interest...good luck:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm inclined to think that the same would apply to BT's £10 "Reconnection Fee". Does it really cost £10 for someone in BT's billing department to take their mouse and go "click!" on my account?

 

My last reconnection charge was £15! But to be fair, i am poor, and we all know BT like to charge the poor more for their service.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I first heard of the £5.00 late charge, ironically, I was late paying the bill. However the wording from BT was so wooly, I enclosed a letter refusing to pay it.

 

The basis was that BT "MAY" charge £5 if the payment was late. Bloody cheek, like I'm going to agree to it using its discretion as to whether it would try and make me pay more or not.

 

This latest penalty charge is something else and we need to get this profit making scheme stopped now.

 

I've produced a template complaint letter to BT. Please feel free to use it as you see fit.

 

BT Direct Debit Charges - Template Letter for BT's Unfair Charges

 

Odd

Abbey - Won DPA Claim - Aug 06 and got bailiffs in to recover my court costs of just £30.00

Abbey - Won Charges Refund of £1050 - Nov 06

Egg - Recovered £220 due to Customer Services misinformation - Feb 2007

Nat West - Prelinimary Letter to recover on Credit Card charges £30.00 sent March 2006. £25.40 offered - rejected and the bank reckons that this is it's last word on the matter. We'll see if that's still the case when it reads my N1 form sent recently. It has until the 17th April to respond or the N1 will be submitted.

 

Please check out my web site www.BankChargesScandal.co.uk for Research, Useful links and my story.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Is there any BT worker on here who can tell us EXACTLY what the procedure ( I mean click of what switches) it takes to reconnect a telephone line when it's disconnected.)

 

Late Payment fees are unlawful unless they can be justified as a true cost. They are a penalty.

 

I refused to pay the last penalty on my bill with a £5 penalty. I just received a letter saying " If you pay your bill late, you are in breach of your contract with us. As a matter of general law, we are entitled to seek to recover the (reasonable) costs we incur as a result of that breach".

 

What is General law? are we talking common law matey? if so common law states you cannot charge a penalty that exceeds your liquidated loss.

 

The fact they charge in advance for rental means they got my money for three months longer than I'd like... who owes who?

 

 

If there is an engineer or someone who actually knows the exact process I'd be very pleased to hear from you.

 

Hallo again Bookie!

Link to post
Share on other sites

edit....

 

The fact they charge in advance for rental means they got my money for three months longer than I'd like... who owes who?

 

 

 

That's an interesting point and unless BT can justify this, I fear that a court might find in the consumer's favour.

 

It's also interesting that BT seems to be able to apply the charge when it likes in a billing cycle - it's not charged universally on X days of being late. Indeed, the late charge is in addition to the equally diaboloical £4.50 per quarter charge for those who aren't on Direct Debit.

 

My feeling is that BT is sailing VERY close to the wind on this.

Abbey - Won DPA Claim - Aug 06 and got bailiffs in to recover my court costs of just £30.00

Abbey - Won Charges Refund of £1050 - Nov 06

Egg - Recovered £220 due to Customer Services misinformation - Feb 2007

Nat West - Prelinimary Letter to recover on Credit Card charges £30.00 sent March 2006. £25.40 offered - rejected and the bank reckons that this is it's last word on the matter. We'll see if that's still the case when it reads my N1 form sent recently. It has until the 17th April to respond or the N1 will be submitted.

 

Please check out my web site www.BankChargesScandal.co.uk for Research, Useful links and my story.

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to BT, the late charge is applied 10 days after the red letter is issued if payment has still not been received. Of course, that does not allow for any delay in receiving the red latter which, if there bills are anything to go by, are now taking up to 7 days to be delivered due to using TNT and Royal Mail last mile delivery services.

MBNA - Agreed to refund £970 in full without conditions. Cheque received Sat 5th Aug.:D

Lloyds - Settled for an undisclosed sum.:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I haven't updated for ages. I received a second letter from BT almost identical to the first.

I will be filing the court papers this Friday.

I will base it on similar wording to that used for bank charges since the principle is the same (i.e. charge is not a true reflection of the cost).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andrew1,

I take your point about it only being £5 but they will have to justify it. I can't see it costing more than pence, if that. It probably involves no human intervention. Their system probably recognizes an unpaid bill on a certain date and the charge is automatically added.

As you say, it would be good to hear from an ex employee. I'm going to ask a mate's brother who worked in BT sales if he can help.

Whatever, it's worth possibly losing the £30 court fee to either get the money back or know where the court stands on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...