Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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

max speillman - lost honeymoon photos


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6173 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

Having had my own photographic company you will find they are responsible for the cost of the film only, I never did agree with it and still don't but it is a fact. If you can get more take it.

Sorry but this is is completely wrong

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Bank Fodder what do you think of these quantifications?

 

Replacement film - £5.00

Telephone calls & postage - £20.00

7 months (to date ) of upset and inconvenience - £250.00

Loss of photographs of honeymoon - £250.00

 

????????

 

I find it very hard to put a price on it as obviously to me they are priceless.

 

In my opinion I would like a replacement holiday etc in order to take more photos but I know that that is not going to happen.

 

I was considering writing to them to confirm that I would accept £500.00.

Film - OK

phone calls etc - if they are fully itemised etc OK but it sounds on the high side.

Upset and inconvenience - no. not without medical evidence

Loss of photos of honeymoon - £250 a bit on the high side but no harm in trying for it.

 

However, you will have to describe the honeymooon, the cost and why it was so important.

 

No you won't lose any costs if you bring this action.

I don't see why you pay any attention to what Max Speilman says. Do you pay them for legal advice or something?

Stop writing to them. This is not therapy. It is litigation.

I think that you have had enough advice now. get started or put it behind you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but this is is completely wrong

I have been involved in three such cases over a 35 years span and won all three although we did correct the matter as well as we could by retaking some shots and reshooting but we were not obliged to do this. I have no problem if you think this is wrong I can only tell you of my experience.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been involved in three such cases over a 35 years span and won all three although we did correct the matter as well as we could by retaking some shots and reshooting but we were not obliged to do this. I have no problem if you think this is wrong I can only tell you of my experience.

 

Again I ask you - on which Law did you rely?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What sort of shots were they? That does matter. As this is a honeymoon, once in a lifetime type experience, that will (or should) make a difference as it is such an emotive subject. If it was just photos of Granny's birthday party, I doubt it would have the same weight!

Please note I'm not insured in this capacity, so if you need to, do get official legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly Rosiecotton. If it had just been a few shots of a night out on the ale with my mates, I probably would have just let it drop but as it was my honeymoon photos, there is no way I am letting it lie.

 

Me and my hubbie had never been on holiday together in the 9 years we had been together so I said to him that as it was our honeymoon and we wouldn't get the chance to go away without the kids again for a long time we should go somewhere special, so we saved very hard for 2 years and went to a 5 star hotel in mexico, costing over £2,500 altogether. The photos are irreplacable.

 

I went into the shop again on Friday to see if they had anything to report.

 

The shop assistant said that they had looked through every set of photos. I said to her that in that case it is obvious that my photos are not in the shop and there is no way after 7 months that someone is going to bring them back. Therefore, I am never going to see my photos again and £15 worth of reprints is not enough. She agreed but said the manager was on holiday for a week and when she comes back she will ask her to ring me to discuss compensation. I wait to see what kind of abysmal offer they intend to make and then I will issue a court action if I have to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick Note: Don't forget to go to local paper and ask them to run an appeal for the missing photos, and making Max Speillman look like idiots in the process, no pun intended there, lol

Good Luck

:DABBEY-WON! £1,359.34

:confused:CAPITAL ONE WON £1,523.27+£39court fees.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just before this gets out of hand - can you ask them to check for Dev & Print orders at the store that have NOT been collected to be scrutinized by you? Years ago I worked in Dixons (yes, I'm not proud!) and one of the common problems were when the lab stapled the 35mm strips together and affixed the serial number or barcode to the film itself. Often when the film was developed and printed it was cut to fit in the negative carrier, and the serial number erroneously applied to the NEXT film in sequence. This usually rectified itself by the next film, but 2 would be wrong. They still may have it, and if not too long ago (say within 12 months) is worth pursuing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they have supposedly checked every set of prints in the shop that are waiting to be collected. I also supplied them with a copy of a photo of myself so that they new what they were looking for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Went into the shop again today and the Area Manager was there. She said that she will look at all the correspondence between customer services and myselves and liaise with them about making me a satisfactory offer of compensation.

 

She seemed genuine and I have her direct email address so I can just harass her until I get something worthwhile.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that a bit of good news for you, still doesn't get your pictures back though. Still, you do have your memories which you can share with each other, chin up, and good luck with compo.

:DABBEY-WON! £1,359.34

:confused:CAPITAL ONE WON £1,523.27+£39court fees.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh My God!!!!

 

Got a phone call from Customer Services last night. She basically said the same stuff again, blah blah blah, and offered me £20. I told her to stop wasting my time and make me a proper offer. She said she wasn't authorised to do that.

 

She is now going to speak to her superiors and get back to me on Friday.

 

Let's see what kind of a joke of an offer they make me this time. :mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have had another stupid offer of £50.

 

I am therefore sending them this letter tomorrow:

 

Dear Sirs

I am very disappointed with your response to my complaint.

I am very disappointed with your offer. As stated previously, I will not accept such a low offer.

I note that you point out the terms and conditions of the contract again but I would like to point out that these are merely your firm’s conditions and a Judge will decide whether these terms are fair in this instance. Any contractual term which seeks to exclude liability for negligence is unenforceable at law. Your firm have been negligent in giving my photos to somebody else.

I am prepared to issue a claim for compensation in the small claims Court and will seek to recover the amount of £500.00. I believe that this is fair amount for the loss of honeymoon photos, 8 months of upset and inconvenience and postage and telephone calls.

Obviously, I would like to give you one more opportunity to avoid such proceedings and I am therefore giving you notice that I wish you to reply to me within 14 days with an appropriate offer of compensation.

If you do not comply fully within 14 days then I shall begin a claim against you for the full amount plus interest plus my costs without further notice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm posting the letter to them today. Got another letter off them offering me £50 now. Still laughing at that.

 

One of the Solicitors in my work said he will help me too. Max Speilmann's better watch out.

 

I was reading in the Metro today that some american Judge is suing some dry cleaners for losing a pair of trousers and he is suing them for £32.5 m.

 

I know he might not be successful with that amount but it says that he has been offered £6,000 which he has refused. He is claiming for 1000 hours that he has devoted to the case, hiring a car to transport his clothes to a different cleaners, mental suffering, inconvenience and discomfort.

 

I only want £500 so I will persevere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

note it says "American Judge", boy is he gonna get a crash course in UK law (assuming it's in the uk)

 

The American 'compensation culture' is a good deal to blame for many of this countries problems!

I don't always believe what I say, I'm just playing Devils Advocate

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you Storm Warrier but at the end of the day Max Speillman's are not going to get away with this. They can't lose people's honeymoon photos and then expect them to accept £15 worth of reprints.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...