Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Ok! Do you still want me to work on that letter you discussed above in post #26?
    • Thank you for posting up the required details and well done for apparently not revealing the identity of the driver. I am assuming you are the keeper? The depth of ignorance of the parking companies is absolutely amazing. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 is the law relating to private parking and allows those rogues to be able to transfer the charge from the driver [whose name they do not know] to the keeper after 28 days . This is dependent on them complying with the Act. So many of the don't and Alliance is no different. It would help if we could see what you appeal was and to post the back of the PCN as it is lacking so much of the wording necessary to make it compliant so that in your case only the driver is liable to pay the charge. And of course just entering the ANPR arrival times means that they have failed to specify the parking time which is a requirement..  Because the car park was so busy you had to drive around for quite a while before finally finding a place to park which is when the parking period may  actually begin. The poor dears at Alliance have not grasped that particular part of the legislation as yet. To be fair the Act has only been in place for 12 years so one must make allowances for their stupidity . We shouldn't really mock them- but it is fun. You weren't to know but the chances of winning an appeal against Alliance and the IPC is around 5%-and that is high for them. If they allow you to cancel they lose the chance of making money and they would have had a field day when you were there with so many people being caught overstaying because of the chaos in trying to find a parking space then trying to pay.  Your snotty letter could go something like this- Dear Cretins, Yes I mean you Alliance. After 12 years one would have thought that even you could produce a compliant PCN. Did you really think I would pay you a penny extra considering the time I wasted trying  to pay with  long queues at the parking machine, then trying to get a signal to call Just Park. On top of that you then had the cheek to ask for an additional £70 for what dubious unspecified pleasure? You must have made a killing that day charging all those motorists for overstaying because the queues to pay were do long and even walking to pay from the over flow parking fields takes time. And yes I did take photos of the non existent signs in the fields so please don't give me the usual rubbish about your signs being clearly visible. Oh yes that £70. Please tell me and the Court whether that charge included VAT and if it did, why am I being charged to pay your vat? I am sure the Judge would look carefully at that as well as the Inland Revenue. The truth is you had no reasonable cause to ask the DVLA for my data given the chaos at your car park and I believe that you therefore breached my GDPR...................... I expect others will give their views as well.          
    • opps this is going to get messy then if they don't refund. you should never keep util accounts in credit.
    • https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/motoring-news/new-private-parking-code-to-launch-in-the-uk-later-this-year/ The newly created gov petition 'Immediately Reintroduce Private Parking Code of Practice' is from Stanley Luckhurst, the 85-year-old old Excel Parking took to court. Excel lost the case and the pensioner's been campaigning for regulation of PPCs since this unpleasant experience. https://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/news/24085471.gerrards-cross-pensioner-takes-nightmarish-private-parking/ I would urge anyone on this forum who supports the petition statement "We believe the private parking industry is trending toward anarchy and must be brought to order by re-launching the Government Code immediately" to sign and share it. 168 signings at 4pm today https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/660922 If the gov new parking code is not launched before parliament dissolves (for the general election) then the legislation is at great risk of being shelved. And we'll be stuck with ATAs new joint code which does not address motorists issues such as a cap on parking charges, debt recovery or an independent appeal process.  https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/wash-up/
    • It was mostly taken from credit within the account left over from excess direct debits over the past year. 
  • 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

Statement of Evidence - example HELP!


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6255 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

On section 3 of my statement of evidence I need to Add an example of a charge incurred due to going over by a small amount.

 

The problem is because I do not have a running balance

on my printouts supplied by Abbey it is not easy to work out often how far I have breached my Overdraft. However I have more recent statements so have included the example below.

 

"On one occasion on 28/09/05, a direct debit payment was returned due to insufficient funds in my account. The shortfall was only thirteen pounds and thirty-four pence. I was then penalised for this breach by way of a charge of £35. The claimant holds this charge and indeed every other charge in question, to be punitive in nature, and wholly disproportionate."

 

My question is IS THIS OK? Thing is £13.34 over my limit is a lot compared with hundreds of times I've only gone pence over but because of the lack of running total I have to include this example. Will this be OK??

 

HELP PLEASE FOLKS, MANY THANKS:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, is it that you need to include that bit or you want to ? As you say, £13.34 v £35 is not exactly overwhelming - pity about the previous data. But what is "section 3 of the statement of evidence" ? I'm at Court Bundle stage, so I'm worried that I don't know. Regards, Mad Nick

Abbey £8370 settled 17 Apr 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I'm afraid because I have not got the RUNNING BALANCE at all except on my last few 6 original statements my argument example is limited. ANY SUGGESTIONS FOLKS????

 

I downloaded (well cut n pasted top Word) the page called "Statement of Evidence" Nick which was on thesite here somewhere - I think provided by Bankfodder although I may be wrong. It was just the number 3 bit of that document. Number 1 was "

1. The claimant submits that the charges levied to his bank account, as set out in the enclosed schedule, are, notwithstanding the defence of the defendant, default penalty charges imposed ............"

Number 2 starts "2. It is admitted that the Defendants charges were levied in accordance with the terms and conditions of the account in question. However, it is submitted that the Defendants charges are not related to or intended to represent any actual loss arising from a breach of contract.........."

 

I hope I 've not confused you Nick. I'm a bit confused myself. Filed the AQ today (deadline 9th April) and I'm on holiday till then.I've downloaded the BASIC BUNDLE but am still rather confused. I've used the suggested draft dirtections and new AQ strategy. CAN YOU GIVE ME ANY BASIC OUTLINE OF THE BUNDLE? There seems to be so much additional stuff in the Basic Bundle I downloaded.

 

Thanks nd good luck too. Keep posting and we shall all win.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked for an example where the action seemed excessive. I couldn't use the exact wording from the template but I did put this is

 

3. The breaches of contract in this case relate to exceeding overdraft limits, and having insufficient funds available to pay a VISA debit payment. On one occasion in July 2006, charges and interest of £68.17 were levied on the account to create an overdrawn balance of £62.53. We were then penalised for this breach by way of a charge of £20.

 

The £20 was not levied until the following month because the exceeding overdraft charge is not charged at the time but later. Can you find an example a bit like ours? Alternatively just look for anything that you can turn into a comment about being excessive. Be imaginative!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nick - the statement of evidence is another name for Witness Statement ie by the Claimant.

 

It was from Karnevil's post here:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/57385-examples-witness-statements-disclosure.html

 

IF ANYONE CAN SUGGEST IF I INCLUDE EVERYTHING IN MY "DISCLOSURE BY LIST" DOCUMENT IN MY BUNDLE SHOULD THAT BE ALL?

 

Sorry if these are dumb questions but I'm getting confused - must have read thousands of people's posts. THANKS EVERYBODY _:p

Link to post
Share on other sites

In reply to the above post by JonesHousehold (many thanks!) I can prove that in november 2003 I was charged over £430 in one month. I think there was

a unauth OD charge, and about 14 cleared transaction charges, and a couple of Unpaid DD's for good measure. Regardless of not being able to prove the balance shall I include this????

 

THANKS AGAIN - This is taking all my time, I want to get it right! My life

currently revolves around getting one back on the Shabbey!!!!:roll:

Link to post
Share on other sites

DancingJohn,

I downloaded (well cut n pasted top Word) the page called "Statement of Evidence" Nick which was on thesite here somewhere - I think provided by Bankfodder although I may be wrong. It was just the number 3 bit of that document.
Phew, that's alright then. To be honest, I haven't bothered with an example - maybe I'll reconsider (Bundle due in next week - nearly ready to post).

FWIW my bundle comprises (in order) :

  • An index page
  • Skeleton Argument (I read somewhere else that Judges look more benevolently on bundles which have a half page summary of the argument to save them wading through 300 pages !!) It's just a precis of the POC
  • A Witness Statement comprising :
    • fleshed out POC - I made it more narrative so that, if it comes to it, I can read from it
    • list of the correspondence (with one line summary of what each letter was about)

    [*]copies of the statements, microfiche and correspondence

I reckon that little lot should suffice. Regards, Mad Nick

 

PS Oh, I forgot - I've also got my own separate file to take to Court containing the Court forms and I'll include some back up docs. For example, some of my claims are >6yrs - they didn't mention that in their Defence, so I didn't see why I should mention it in the main Bundle. So I'll take some copies of the Limitation Act and an argument written down.

Abbey £8370 settled 17 Apr 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

(Arggh my second attempt - I lost the first one!!!!)

 

I would suggest you include this as your example. You could put something like -

In November 2003 charges totalling £430 were added to the account. The claimant holds the amount is so high that it demonstrates the charges are punitive in nature and wholly disproportionate.

 

You might expand this further if several charges are on the same day and you can remember getting only one letter for them all. I would like to see Abbey try and justify £430 worth of costs - for goodness sake the CEO must have dealt with the account at that level!

 

It's good that you are devoting a lot of time to the claim as you must make sure it is right. Your obsession will serve you well. Mind you in my experience Abbey will settle at the 11th hour. I take it personally now - I want to see Abbey suffer so I am happy to help if it means we can get a result for you. Then you can go and spread the word too. I was anxious like you are now and I had loads of support from Dave (it was a long time ago now!!!) but I am so grateful that the least I can do is lurk about and offer help to people like you.

 

Go for it. Pile on the agony for Abbey. If you can find other examples, add them in too so long as the whole statement doesn't get cumbersome. So if there are other months show them too in ascending order of amount.

 

Sorry if this rambles on - the wine is just taking the edge off my intellect! I shall look at it again tomorrow if you post what you want to add. Hopefully once my head clears I will be able to sound a little clearer.

 

PS is your username a reference to David Bowie or am I just old!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

JonesHousehold and Mad Nick - THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!!! That clears up

a hell of a lot and I'm determined to get this right because , like you so rightly say JonesH, Abbey made many months of my life Hell and brought unquatifiable stress on me when I could have done well without it.

 

I'll keep posting to help others too if I can and DONATE when I win.

 

THANSK AGAIN FOLKS - DOWN WITH THE SHABBEY

 

B.T.W. - not a Bowie thing although I'm a big fan of "Low" - its just a daft nickname from my acid-house :) / partying days that kinda stuck!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly I am from the Ziggy Stardust era - oh dear! Still an interesting thought merging Bowie and acid house.

 

We went to see The Bees last night, tons better live than on album. Great gig!

 

Good luck with the Abbey claim. I shall be rooting for you. Abbey (as well as all the others) have a great knack of bringing stress when it could have been avoided.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...