Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
    • New version after LFI's superb analysis of the contract. Sorry, but you need to redo the numbering of the paras and of the exhibits in the right order after all the damage I've caused! Defendant's WS - version 4.pdf
    • Hi  no nothing yet. Hope it stays that way 😬
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
      • 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

Missed scan threatened with social services!


Jhawc24
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6285 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 am really concerned about a letter my son's girlfriend has received. She is 32 weeks pregnant. She missed a recent scan appointment - basically they did not have any bus fare to get there. She received a letter from the hospital with a new appointment which states if they miss this one then they will have no alternative but to refer the case to social services!

 

What's that all about? I know the pregnancy has not gone easy some of the tests showed up problems, plus she's rhesus negative and needs to have injections. They have had to attend regular to have more scans than normal, including having to travel into Birmingham for a specialist scan. All has been well thankfully apart from the baby being a little small. Please note there has been no issues such as drugs or alcohol abuse - she even packed in smoking!

 

This is the first appointment they have missed, this letter causes serious concern and obviously upsetting for them. Is it a standard letter or is there something more sinister going on?

 

Any advice taken kindly, regards Joan.

First letter to halifax sent rec del 26/4

Data Protection Act letter to capital one sent rec del 26/4

Halifax 1st offer dated 5/5

Capital One ack Data Protection Act request rec 6/5

Request for repayment to Capital One 2/8

LBA sent 22/8

Court proceedings issued 13/10

Settled in Full 9/11

Donation made 14/11

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't see there is much to worry about.

 

Think you will find that in light of all recent child protection press, hospitals are being over cautious.

 

Unless of course there is something in either of their pasts which would necessitate social service involvement.

 

At the end of the day, the hosptial have a duty to protect the unborn child and they would do this by bringing it to the attention of the local social services.

 

BTW, can the hosptial not assist with travel to ensure they get to the appointments. Most hospitals have patient transport. It might be worth them asking...

PINKPETAL

 

Lloyds TSB (1) Statements received

LLoyds TSB (2) Statements Received

LLoyds TSB (3) Statements received

Halifax Credit Card (1) Statements received

Halifax Credit Card (2)

SARS request Sent

RBOS (Halifax) Credit Card (3) SARS has Elapsed, on 54 days now

Barclaycard - Goodwill offer of £264.00 :mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the replies.

 

Firstly, re patient transport - I actually work for the ambulance service so I know the criteria to be able to use it. Unfortunately she wouldn't qualify. Money has been tight because she is now on maternity benefit and he (my son) has lost his job - which means he has to find another job and does not get jobseekers. To claim back travel expenses they need to be on certain benefits which neither of them get.

 

They are both 21yrs and there is nothing in their past that would warrent social services. In fact she has qualifications in early years child care.

 

When they go for new appointment next week they are going to raise the issue with the department. Gizmo you are prob right about putting it in writing - it may be worth raising this issue with PALS.

 

Regards Joan

First letter to halifax sent rec del 26/4

Data Protection Act letter to capital one sent rec del 26/4

Halifax 1st offer dated 5/5

Capital One ack Data Protection Act request rec 6/5

Request for repayment to Capital One 2/8

LBA sent 22/8

Court proceedings issued 13/10

Settled in Full 9/11

Donation made 14/11

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would agree with Pinkpetal -- it's probably something that they've introduced in letters to "cover themselves".

 

Very best wishes to you, your family and the new arrival.

 

jaxads x

jaxads

 

Halifax - £2281, successfully refunded all charges after LBA letter & telephone call.

Have been offered the difference between the £20 and £12 charges from Capital One -- am sending LBA for remainder.

GE Money - Received settlement of £441, being total charges requested. No interest though.

CCA'd Bank of Scotland / Blair Oliver Scott to produce CCA Agreements on two Credit Cards - well in default, although still chasing payment!!!

EOS Solutions "ceased action on account" on behalf of a friend.

 

All in all, quite busy at the moment and enjoying every minute of it
:eek:

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I just ask, You mention that it is a 32 week scan which is not a "normal" scan time and usually indicates that the hospital are monitoring the baby - is that the case ?? Did they not phone the hospital to let them know they would not be able to attend ?

 

Hosptial's are going to be cautious and refer cases if there is cause for concern, now if there a probelms with the unborn and parents do not attend for appointments, that is just cause for concern. Please remember that social services deal with other issues apart from child abuse, so a referal from the hospital may or may not be beneficial in some cases.

 

Have they checked their eligebility for other benefits ?? and is there not a community car service in their area??

 

Just a thought....

 

Anyway... hope all goes well and that the little one arrives safely

 

X

PINKPETAL

 

Lloyds TSB (1) Statements received

LLoyds TSB (2) Statements Received

LLoyds TSB (3) Statements received

Halifax Credit Card (1) Statements received

Halifax Credit Card (2)

SARS request Sent

RBOS (Halifax) Credit Card (3) SARS has Elapsed, on 54 days now

Barclaycard - Goodwill offer of £264.00 :mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

In terms of getting transport to hospital, this can be done on medical needs as well as financial ones. It might be worthwhile contacting the hospital, explaining the situation and asking them that as they are so concerned, wouldn't it be more prudent to arrange transport for her?

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I cannot see that your daughter in law has anything to worry about. Did the letter relate specifically to her with the referral to social services or is it something they have on all missed appointment letters.

 

Scans are not compulsory so the fact that she just missed an appointment (for the first time) shouldn't be raising alarm bells for any other reason other than the "was the appointment hard to attend" type of concern.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Scans are not compulsary.I never hadthem with two of mine (due to my brothers wife having a little girl that was born with practically no lungs, and deformed arms and legs-and she had been scanned regularly).

My daughter also has a very rare genetic syndrome witha high incidence of cancer (long, long story) anyhow the upshot of this was that the incompetent imbeciles in charge of her care did not scan her as the protocol for this syndrome dictates .

They responded to my eventual letter of complaint that "ultrasound had never been proven as an effective means of detecting tumours".

In the end (another long story)I got a written apology for fourteen of the points I had made.

Upon recepit of that I then thanked them very much and reminded them that my daughter had until she was 21 to sue them over their negligence (statistically this may not happen in life expectancy).

I did have scan for second baby, who they also told me was going to be another big baby, ahem 5lbs 4oz at birth.

Didnt bother for third child as couldnt see point.

Found out when he was six months old (genticst appointment "lost" for five years) that syndrome was genetic and autsominal dominant with and that I was the carrier. (which meant that my other two kids could have had syndrome as well)

Im sure this is very distressing for you daughter-in-law, as she has already been labelled a bad parent before the child is born.

I would ring and ask if this is a standard letter.

There are cases ironically such as my daughters, where the appointment is made and the parents dont take child, through neglect, religious reasons etc.

This then does become a child protection issue (except where the doctors cant be arsed in the first instance).

The key here is to keep hospital informed if you are not going to be able to make appointment and I would definitelyagree that your daughter should ask if there were any schemes available as transport is difficult (especially sitting on a bus when you are 32weeks pregant).

Good luck to you all, and I hope everything goes well for son and daughter-in -law with new baba1

Link to post
Share on other sites

they'll want you to have a 32 week scan because as you said the baby was said to be small. they will keep an eye on growth to ensure its getting enough to eat (placental function)

 

Yes they will want that but scansare not compulsory, implying they will involve social services means that they have other concerns, as social services have no powers to make someone go to a scan unless it is part of a partnership agreement already drawn up, as a result of other concerns.

Consumer Health Forums - where you can discuss any health or relationship matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to be too brisk but, in our hospital if we have a client that "fta's (fails to attend) at least 3 times then we have to send out a midwife to the house to find out why.. this often will uncover any problems there may be, and maybe we can offer help to remedy.we consider that its the mothers responsibility to ensure she attends. as a midwife l am not allowed to send or arrange any ambulance transport unless they are in labour. l have never heard of a letter of this manner being sent. naturally s/s take an interest in clients who constantly refuse to attend but this is invariable due to child protection issues. we also expect the mother to have access to phone credit, nappies and sanitary pads!!

the lady in question does not sound like the typical child care concern candidates..

Link to post
Share on other sites

oh, ps.

all tests as you say correctly are completely volentary = we cannot force any mother to undergo any test or procedure against her will.

if she doesnt wish it, l usually spend a long time to ensure she is fully informed of pros and cons , l want her to say she chose knowing full information (informed consent)

Link to post
Share on other sites

naturally s/s take an interest in clients who constantly refuse to attend but this is invariable due to child protection issues.

..

 

Not neccasarily - not attending a scan does not automatically flag concern - and unless there were other underlying past issues a referal of this nature would not receive any sort of priority.

 

we also expect the mother to have access to phone credit,

It may be expected and advised - but not enforceable.

 

the lady in question does not sound like the typical child care concern candidates

 

There are no typical cases - and it would be hard to assess concerns on a forum such as this with a few lines of information.

Consumer Health Forums - where you can discuss any health or relationship matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...