Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Items for sale include five rare Ferraris and a pair of Air Jordan sneakers signed by Michael Jordan.View the full article
    • TECHZONE BUXTON LTD overview - Find and update company information - GOV.UK FIND-AND-UPDATE.COMPANY-INFORMATION.SERVICE.GOV.UK TECHZONE BUXTON LTD - Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual... thread title updated. dx
    • next time dont upload 19 single page pdfs use the sites listed on upload to merge them into one multipage pdf.. we aint got all day to download load single page files 2024-01-15 DBCLegal SAR.pdf
    • If you have not kept the original PCN you can always send an SAR to Excel and they have to send you all the info they have on you within a month. failure to do so can lead to you being able to sue them for their failure.......................................nice irony.
    • Thank you and well done  for posting up all those notices it must have have taken you ages.. The entrance sign is very helpful since the headline states                    FREE PARKING FOR CUSTOMERS ONLY in capitals with not time limit mentioned. Underneath and not in capitals they then give the actual times of parking which would not be possible to read when driving into the car park unless you actually stopped and read them. Very unlikely especially arriving at 5.30 pm with possibly other cars behind. On top of that the Notice goes on to say that the terms and conditions are inside the car park so the entrance sign cannot offer a contract it is merely an offer to treat. Inside the car park the signs are mostly too high up and the font size too small to be able to read much of their signs. DCBL have not shown a single sign that can be read on their SAR. Although as they show photographs which were taken the year after your alleged breach we do not know what the signs were when you were there. For instance the new signs showed the charge was then £100 whereas your PCN was for £85. Who knows, when you were there perhaps the time was for 3 hours. They were asked to produce  planning permission which would have been necessary for the ANPR cameras alone and didn't do so. Nor did they provide a copy of the contract-DCBL  "deeming them disproportionate or not relevant to the substantive issues in the dispute" How arrogant and untruthful is that? The contract and planning permission could be vital to having the claim thrown out. I can find no trace of planning permission for the signs nor the cameras on Tonbridge Council planning portal. and the contract of course is highly relevant since some contracts advise the parking rouges that they cannot take motorists to Court. I understand that Europarks are now running that car park which means that nexus didn't  last long before being thrown out.....................................
  • 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

French v. Abbey (3) - Into the breach once more my friends!


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5147 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

Seeing no reason not to contact Inga after a nice settlement on my last claim I decided to email her with the following:

 

Dear Ms Kirkman / Mr Basson,

 

 

Ref : Claim reference XXXXXXXX - Noddy Town County Court

 

I am respectfully requesting, in conjunction with the attached letter sent recently and attached to this email, that we can negotiate a settlement of this claim, to avoid any additional costs to both parties.

 

 

My claim currently stands at £6994.60. I have already filed my AQ as have yourselves.

 

 

I am prepared to accept £6968 in full and final settlement. This figure is a gesture of goodwill and would forgo any additional interest or costs. A condition of this offer would be that the funds are available to me in the form of a cheque by 22nd June 2007.

 

 

I would like you to note that I intend to request full costs in court and that would include all letters charged at £6.75 for printing & reproduction and an hourly rate of £9.25 for preparation time, plus all postal charges.

 

 

This has the potential to save Abbey additional expense and would be looked on by the courts as a favourable negotiation on both sides.

 

 

I believe this offer to be a meaningful and realistic attempt at a settlement and would like you to duly note as such. Should you choose to ignore this, this email will form part of the evidence submitted to the court.

 

 

Yours sincerely

Well..... here's hoping she answers it? ;)

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 280
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Tick Tock........ I wonder if Pingu Kirkman has read it yet? :cool:

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah!

 

It'll just clutter my Inbox. I wonder where Pingu goes for the weekend?

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well i had a really wierd dream last night that she was at the Eden Project lol

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now.... you're just getting obsessed with her now! All because you want to bury her up to her neck in sand and let the sun and gulls do their worst and all because she read your email but didn't reply.

 

Mental note to all........... Avoid Lula as she is getting psychopathic LOL :D

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ooooops! :D

 

She's still a psycho though lol :p;)

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well received something in the post this morning that wasn't at all surprising! :p

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

No true! Received absolutely nothing :D :-|

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got a reply back from Inga this afternoon:

 

Without prejudice"

 

Dear Sir

Thank you for your email. With respect, we do not believe that a £26.60 reduction in the quantum of your claim represents a genuine desire to resolve this matter without recourse to the Courts. Whilst it is not our desire to litigate with our customers, some charge must be applied for the transitions that have occurred on your account.

Should you wish to reconsider your position and put forward a more commercially palatable offer representative of the transactions that did in fact occur on your account, we will be more than happy to consider the same.

Kind regards,

I however actually think £26.60 is a rather genorous offer of the costs incurred due to my contractual breaches as they are made up entirely from going over my limit and not unpaid DD's due to insufficient funds. £0.29 a time (max)I think as it's all handled by computer and the bulk of the cost is the letter and postage and that's being generous LOL

So now to draft another reply to Inga.................;)

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Transitions you mean PMSL

 

I totally missed that typo of Pingu's and for the life of me whilst cross-referencing my statements to see if any funds have been transitioned into something else can't find any! :p

 

Maybe I should hold out for the full whack now LOL :rolleyes:

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok have just kicked off my reply to Inga as a final attempt at resolution:

 

Dear Ms Kirkman

Thank you very much for replying to my email, it was most appreciated.

I was interested to note the contents of your reply and I am willing to drop my offer of settlement to £6850 as full and final settlement of this claim. I am aware of my duty to mitigate my losses and conclude that this should be a more “commercially palatable" offer to Abbey.

As a condition of your acceptance, I will require a cheque for the full amount is with me no later than the 24th June 2007 after this time I will conclude that this offer is unacceptable and will continue my claim with the court, which will include interest to date of settlement, court costs and a wasted costs order.

I would be happy to pay the actual cost per breach, if Abbey would reveal them, and such time that you do, I will be requiring repayment as set out above.

Yours sincerely

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

representative of the transactions that did in fact occur on your account,

 

no it sounds like she is saying that some of the transactions did not occur, I think i would be asking her what she meant by this

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it's to frikin late now you pyschopathic trouble causer! ;):D

 

And they did occur! I think lol

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...