Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello dx100uk, After months of waiting for a response I finally got a reply and I must say it was the worst 4 months of my life the - fear of the unknown. So, they wrote back and said I was in the wrong BUT on this occasion they  would not take action but keep me on file for the next 12 months. It. was the biggest relief of my life a massive weight lifted -  I would like to thank you and the team for all your support
    • I have contacted the sofa shop who are sending someone out tomorrow to inspect the furniture. I suspect if anything a replacement will be offered although I would prefer a refund. Few photos of the wear in the material, this is how it was delivered.  
    • Yup, for goodness sake she needs to stop paying right now, DCA's are powerless, as .  Is it showing on their credit file? Best to use Check my file. All of the above advice is excellent, definitely SAR the loan company as soon as possible.
    • Hi all, I am wandering if this is appealable. It has already been through a challenge on the Islington website and the it was rejected. Basically there was a suspended bay sign on a post on Gee st which was obscured by a Pizza van. The suspension was for 3 bays outside 47 Gee st. I parked outside/between 47 & 55 Gee st. I paid via the phone system using a sign a few meters away from my car. When I got back to the car there was a PCN stuck to the windscreen which I had to dry out before I could read it due to rain getting into the plastic sticky holder.  I then appealed using the Islington website which was then rejected the next day. I have attached a pdf of images that I took and also which the parking officer took. There are two spaces in front of the van, one of which had a generator on it the other was a disabled space. I would count those as 3 bays? In the first image circled in red is the parking sign I read. In the 2nd image is the suspension notice obscured by the van. I would have had to stand in the middle of the road to read this, in fact that's where I was standing when I took the photo. I have pasted the appeal and rejection below. Many thanks for looking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is my appeal statement: As you can see from the image attached (image 1) I actually paid £18.50 to park my car in Gee st. I parked the car at what I thought was outside 55 Gee st as seen in image 2 attached. When I read the PCN issued it stated there was a parking suspension. There was no suspension notice on the sign that I used to call the payment service outside number 55 Gee st. I looked for a suspension notice and eventually found one which was obscured by a large van and generator parked outside 47 Gee st. As seen in images 3 and 4 attached. I am guessing the parking suspension was to allow the Van to park and sell Pizza during the Clerkenwell design week. I was not obstructing the use or parking of the van, in fact the van was obstructing the suspension notice which meant I could not read or see it without prior knowledge it was there. I would have had to stand in the road to see it endangering myself as I had to to take images to illustrate the hidden notice. As there was no intention to avoid a parking charge and the fact the sign was not easily visible I would hope this challenge can be accepted. Many thanks.   This is the text from the rejection: Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a suspended bay or space. I note from your correspondence that there was no suspension notice on the sign that you used to call the payment serve outside number 55 Gee Street. I acknowledge your comments, however, your vehicle was parked in a bay which had been suspended. The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief. The signs relating to this suspension were sited in accordance with the regulations. Upon reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO's) images and notes, I am satisfied that sufficient signage was in place and that it meets statutory requirements. Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted. I acknowledge that your vehicle possessed a RingGo session at the time, however, this does not authorize parking within a suspended bay. Suspension restrictions are established to facilitate specific activities like filming or construction, therefore, we anticipate the vehicle owner to relocate the vehicle from the suspended area until the specified date and time when the suspension concludes. Leaving a vehicle unattended for any period of time within a suspended bay, effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN. Finally, the vehicle was left parked approximately 5 metres away from the closest time plate notice. It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they park in a suitable parking place and check all signs and road markings prior to leaving their vehicle parked in contravention. It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times. With that being said, I would have to inform you, your appeal has been rejected at this stage. Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN: You should now choose one of the following options: Pay the penalty charge. We will accept the discounted amount of £65.00 in settlement of this matter, provided it is received by 10 June 2024. After that date, the full penalty charge of £130.00 will be payable. Or Wait for a Notice to Owner (NtO) to be issued to the registered keeper of the vehicle, who is legally responsible for paying the penalty charge. Any further correspondence received prior to the NtO being issued may not be responded to. The NtO gives the recipient the right to make formal representations against the penalty charge. If we reject those representations, there will be the right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.   Gee st pdf.pdf
    • Nationwide Building Society has launched an 18 month fixed-rate account paying 5.5%.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

Battle with Abbey


Boris Becca
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5973 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

HELP!!! I have had no bundle nor the courts and want to apply to the court to have it struck out on the basis that in the last order that these should have been supplied to all parties no less than 14 days before hearingwhich is next wednesday. I have the N244, can someone knowledgable help me fill it in as soon as poss. I kniw there is a cost, but as I am benifits it is waivered for me, so nothing to loose. This would of worked normally wouldnt it? so lets do it YES, NO ????????? Spoke to the ombudsman today for assistance on how they deal with a "HARDSHIPCASE" they said that Abbey must know I am putting forward as hardship case, I have called and told them and I will provide evidence at court. Any comments?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 200
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Forget the application - by all means send a letter to the court informing them that the defendant hasn't complied (I'll find one in a minute), but breaching small claims track directions is not grounds for a formal application, unfortunately. Even if it was your application would have to be listed for a hearing which would more than likely be at the same time as the existing hearing.

 

You mean you have called Abbey? It would also be an idea to write to them I think.

 

Collect the evidence which you'll put forward to establish yours is a hardship case along with anything from the FOS or FSA website which says they should be exempt from the waiver.

 

Have you got your stay objections template sorted? Get everything uptogether and I'll talk to you sometime over the weekend to see where we're at.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here you go -

 

[you]

 

District Judge ******

C/O The Court Manager

****** County Court

Court Address

Postcode

 

[date]

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

[You] -v- Lloyds TSB Bank Plc

Claim No:********

 

I, the Claimant, refer to the claim as detailed above and specifically the order made by district judge ***** dated [date]

 

The defendant has not complied with the order in that it has not served upon me the evidence, or any such documents, upon which it intends to rely at the forthcoming hearing.

 

I wrote to the defendant's solicitor on [date] to request that it serve the Defendent's documents at its earliest convenience. I have received no response to this correspondence.

 

I can confirm that my documents were filed on [date] and served to the Defendant on [date]

 

It is submitted that the Defendants non-compliance creates a significant imbalance between the parties in light of the forthcoming hearing, which I believe to be contrary to the overriding objective. This imbalance is particularly exacerbated by the fact that the Defendant is represented by specialist solicitors, whereas I am a litigant in person.

 

Accordingly, it is respectfully suggested that the court may be minded to make an order pursuant to Rule 3.4 of the Civil Procedure Rules, or other order as the court deems just.

 

Yours faithfully

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the hearing next Wednesday? What time is it?

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just above paragraph 3 , shall I delete that part as I have not written,as suggested. I get what you mean now ,but will send this letter. I have not done my stay objections yet will do tonight, have you got any links to oft and fos sites? Would be good to catch up , do you know if anyone can possibly come with me yet? I did speak to Clare Fletcher briefly, I told her it would be put forward as a hardship case and to remind her that I had explained this before in writing . She really had nothing to say, except that they would be sending a Barrister! Nothing we dont know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, leave it out.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, back from court, was in ther for a hour an half! Abbey did not get granted their stay today!:) The Judge wants time to reflect on today and discuss with his felow judge. The Harry Potter lookalike requested ther stay along with all the jargon, which I appossed to for a number of reasons. He did not have my bundle so obviously i mentioned breach of the order, why didnt they apply for a stay weeks ago and that if the judge was not to give the stay , how would he defend the case. he had no instruction to defend the case. At this stage I passed on the stay statements, Thanks to GARY. It was explained to me it was in our best intersts in veiw of the OFT. I said I realised this however my case has been dragging its feet and then mentioned the cpr 18 and that I requested that back in June wey before the OFT and I had no responce from Abbey. I then mentioned about my Hardship case and that I had looked at various websites of the social security act 1992 and that benifits should be inalienable , I passed a load of printed stuff showing this, the barrister was asked about it , he said he new nothing about this, so could not comment. The judge said he would take it on board and have it looked at, we spoke about how much of the charges taken was benifit money etc.I took income and expenditure which I did with the CAB and proof etc. going to eat tea finish in a bit............

Link to post
Share on other sites

I took along an extract of psm:s for the judge , I asked first if it was o.k and gave him the bit about their judges descion to stay the aspect of the case relating to unfair terms whowever the Abbey in its defence had stated at para 6...... and so on and that this part of the case was ajourned. We then went through Abbeys defence cross refrenceing, he seemed interested and will consider. so basically several isseues. So in summing up the judge reserved judgement on the application of a stay , to discuss with his brother judge , he said " they wanted a consistant approach to case managing" and would conider all infomation given and give an answer in writing within 3-4 weeks, with consequential directuions, and if a stay is ordered with supplimentry orders.Hopefully granting the points bought up in the "in the alternative" part of the stay statement. If he turns down the stay it will come with a new court hearing date. The judge was understanding and I am so fed up with the banks fobbing off, again will just have to wait and see, but in the mean time food for thought on our part, but also for Abbey, not to be so compacent. Before we went in the barrister said , dont worry it shouldnt take more than 5 10 mins ,he shook my hand when we got out after an hour and half and said well done, he wasnt expecting that!!! Thank you to everyone especially Gary, who without you I would never of done this ,I mean it from the bottom of my haert, no other way heart.... good old vino. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

when I asked about "why abbey didnt apply for astay sooner,rather than using today, the hearing, the answer given was that they had sent out a letter about the stays being applied for and showed me a copy, I said I had a copy buy personally felt that the letter could be miss leading to some people in that a stay was already the case and that you can bet your bottom dollar that if I hadnt kept to my part of the order they would be applying to have my case struck out today! the judge mentioned about me claiming as alitigation in person, basicaaaly claiming charges against Abbey for being ther today. I hope all this helps everyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well done BB great job. It feels good when a judge takes you seriously eh. Whatever the outcome, it is more food for thought for the Abbey. Sounds like the Abbey were a complacent as ever. Any film makers out there, read this site there is a wealth of material for another "carry on" film.....

"Carry on Soliciting"

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Good morning all, woken up at 6.45 this a.m. to a phone call from southern counties radio, they have quastion and answers on bank charges, they have been following my story, so will be on the radio, as always will mention cag. Back soon!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...