Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • You can counter a Judges's question on why you didn't respond by pointing out that any company that charges you with stopping at a zebra crossing is likely to be of a criminal mentality and so unlikely to cancel the PCN plus you didn't want to give away any knowledge you had at that time that could allow them to counteract your claim if it went to Court. There are many ways in which you can see off their stupid claim-you will see them in other threads  where our members have been caught by Met at other airports as well as Bristol.  Time and again they take motorists to Court for "NO Stopping" apparently completely forgetting that the have lost doing that because no stopping is prohibitory and cannot form a contract. Yet they keep on issuing PCNs because so many people just pay up . Crazy . You can see what chuckleheads they are when you read their Claim form which is pursuing you as the driver or the keeper. they don't seem to understand that on airport land because of the Bye laws, the keeper is never liable.   
    • The video-sharing app told the BBC that a "very limited" number of accounts had been compromised.View the full article
    • luckily like this thread VCS/DCB(L) PCN spycar capture - PAPLOC Now claimform - no Stopping in Restricted Zone - Bristol Airport ***Claim Dismissed*** - Page 4 - Private Land Parking Enforcement - Consumer Action Group although no on the crossing, same applies to you so WS time. there are numerous threads here on pedestrian crossing claimforms by VCS at Bristol and at other airports so use our enhanced google searchbox and find them. really a bad idea to vanish for SIX months and not been have reading up here.....................  
    • Not at all.  The onus is on them to ensure that their invoice respects the provisions of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to establish keeper liability.  Which it can't as the area is covered by bye-laws. Spot on. Irrelevant as to whether you entered into a contract with VCS to pay them £100 if you didn't obey what was written on their silly signs. Who cares?  What about their ridiculous generic Particulars of Claim where they deliberately mix up driver and keeper. And where do they mention this?  You haven't shown us anything. Of course you have to prepare a Witness Statement and you'd better get on with it. This is the problem here - you've disappeared for months & months, haven't kept us updated and presumably haven't read other VCS threads.  That needs to change - now. Otherwise you will lose - simple as that. For a start - please upload the court order which fixes the hearing date plus plus where "VCS mentioned my initial defence was generic and clearly copied from the internet".  We're not mind readers.
  • 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

Omega 3 v. NatWest


Omega 3
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6566 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

Have issued claim using MCOL against NatWest so they have 14 days to act. Have also sent strongly worded letter of complaint to NatWest about their habit of sending my confidential bank statements in tatty brown envelopes with holes in them!

 

Visited HSBC today to open a parachute account and they wouldn't do so unless I changed my salary deposit from NatWest to HSBC. I said 'yes',as long as you can give me the sam eoverdraft facility as NatWest to which they said no!' Are all these banks tarred with the same brush by any chance???!!!!:|

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I ended up going to Alliance & Leicester who my mortgage is with. I don't get any interest but atleast it's a safe haven!

 

Is it worth complaining to the information commissioner about the tatty envelope situation or is that not appropriate?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Lueeze

I dont know if its really worth it TBH, Its wrong but htey could blame it on royal mail...now if it had been opened then yes i would, or if it was sent to the wrong address then i would be crazy with anger, but Im not sure if its even worth it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont know if its really worth it TBH, Its wrong but htey could blame it on royal mail...now if it had been opened then yes i would, or if it was sent to the wrong address then i would be crazy with anger, but Im not sure if its even worth it...

 

They appear to be purposely damaged in my opinion. I'll post my pics later of my own envelope and how damaged it was, they're certainly not of the same grade as their standard envelopes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, MCOL has been acknowledged by NatWest giving them 28 days to respond. My DPA request resulted in only statements being sent to me so I wrote to Stuart Higley requesting confirmation that there had not been any manual interventions on my accounts over the past 6 years.

 

This is the response I received this morning:

 

"Thank you for your letter of 14 may 2006.

 

Hopefully the missing statements will be with you soon, if they are not already to hand.

 

In the majority of cases charges are triggered automatically when an irregular situation is handled but if manual intervention took place, the action taken would not be noted as a matter of routine. Therefore, no record exists against which I can refer.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Stuart Higley

Customer Relations"

 

Is this an admission that charges are applied automatically by computer? Does this also mean that they have ignored by DPA disclosure request by stating they have no records about me?

 

Comments and advice most welcome!:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It most certainly sounds like it. Hope I get one the same!

NatWest-

Data Protection Act Request sent 12/04 (Statements arrived 09/06/06!!!!!!!!!)

Parachute Account Created 25/04

Preliminary Letter Sent 09/06/06 reply received 14/06/06

LBA Sent 14/06/06 reply received 20/06/06

Moneyclaim request issued 27/06/06

Defence arrived 29/07/06

Offer of 50% from Cobbetts 03/08/06

Settled in full 23/08/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the majority of cases charges are triggered automatically when an irregular situation is handled but if manual intervention took place, the action taken would not be noted as a matter of routine. Therefore, no record exists against which I can refer.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Stuart Higley

Customer Relations"

 

Is this an admission that charges are applied automatically by computer? Does this also mean that they have ignored by DPA disclosure request by stating they have no records about me?

 

Comments and advice most welcome!:)

 

1) They have admitted their charges are automated.

 

2) They have told you (and therefore everyone else here) that they don't bother keeping records of manual intervention.

 

This isn't a breach of the DPA - they can't supply informaiton they don't have - but it does mean they can't prove that any manual intervention has ever taken place. So basically they can only ever lawfully charge you for the automated processing. Which is virtually nothing.

If you found this post useful please click on the scales above.

 

Egg - £400 - Prelim sent. On hold.

Mint - On the list Est £800

GE Capital - On the list (3 accounts!) Est £4000

 

MBNA - £545 Prelim sent 13/11/2006

LBA sent 1/12/2006

£350 partial payment received 18/12/2006.

Full settlement received 20/1/07

 

NatWest - Est £4000 not incl interest

Data Protection Act Sent 10/1/07

Statements received 24/1/07

Prelim sent 3/2/07

Full Settlement received 22/2/07

 

The contents of this post are the sole opinions of The Cornflake and not necessarily the opinions of any other members of this group. They do not constitute sound legal or financial advice and if in doubt you are advised to seek advice from a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought as much, I couldnt believe my eyes when I read what was written there. Been in touch with the information comissioners office today who were a bit vague but explained to me how to complain about Nat West failing to disclose information.

 

Thanks for all the great advice!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that I have a letter from Nat West customer relations stating that account charges are applied automatically is it worth writing to RBS (who are defending my claim) to let them know that I have this admission? Is this likely to make them settle? They have acknowledged my claim and have until 4th June to enter a defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On occasions when I have exceeded my overdraft limit due to a direct debit the people at NatWest have charged me £38 for a referral fee, however they have paid the DD. I am right in thinking that I can claim these charges back aren't I?:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Defence and request for further information received today from Cobbetts.

 

They are requetsing information about the accounts and the charges. Can I add recent charges to the total amount, that is charges which have been applied since I started a claim against them?

 

They go on to ask if the charges were a result of a breach of contract on my part. What should I answer to this? They then go on to ask me to identify the particular breach of contract (by reference to appropriate terms of the contract) that the charges related to.

 

The final tricky one is "Please specify all of the facts relied on by the claimant in support of the contentions in paragraph 5 above, an din particular please identify the contractual provisions that the Claimant alleges are unenforcable by reference to UCTA/the regulations."

 

Is all this pretty standard? And is it wise to issue my own CPR18 request when I writ eback to them?

 

Any advice and comments very welcome!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is what they've sent you a CPR18 request?

 

If so it is not applicable to the Small Claims Track and so does not need to be answered. I would respond to them advising them of this.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

If you Google it you should get a good link to a copy in the first few results. If one doesn't work try the Cached link.

If you found this post useful please click on the scales above.

 

Egg - £400 - Prelim sent. On hold.

Mint - On the list Est £800

GE Capital - On the list (3 accounts!) Est £4000

 

MBNA - £545 Prelim sent 13/11/2006

LBA sent 1/12/2006

£350 partial payment received 18/12/2006.

Full settlement received 20/1/07

 

NatWest - Est £4000 not incl interest

Data Protection Act Sent 10/1/07

Statements received 24/1/07

Prelim sent 3/2/07

Full Settlement received 22/2/07

 

The contents of this post are the sole opinions of The Cornflake and not necessarily the opinions of any other members of this group. They do not constitute sound legal or financial advice and if in doubt you are advised to seek advice from a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 10 March 2019.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6566 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...