Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi   I have a conference call with the solicitor on Friday and will raise the issue of quantum then   UU were advised in December of last year that our plans were to employ a specialist to look at the land and produce a report and we invited their comments. Our last correspondence via our 'employed' solicitors was back in January and UU issued a final letter saying that they were happy that there was no contamination based on the fibre reports that had been issued and they did not take responsibility for any delays that were being caused.  Our solicitor at that time followed that letter up quetsionning how there could be no contamination based on the fact that asbestos cement had been found lying on the land but UU did not respond to her even after she chased it.  They went on 'radio silence' and there has been no direct discussion since with UU.  At that time she advised that we proceed through our legal expenses cover as they were not responding to her letters and she anticipated escalating costs based on their refusal to reply.   We have not had a survey carried out as our Solicitors are relying on Environmental Health to produce this as mentioned earlier.   I have involved our MP in the matter and he got the HSE involved again but their position was that the matter had been dealt with by the contractors regarding the breaches and they described it as a one off incident so closed their file.   There were a number of disciplinary actions taken within the teams and new procedures were implemented.   He also contacted UU with our concerns and they replied with an almost carbon copy of the final letter sent to ourselves back in January.  They claim that they are acting within the Waste Framework Directive in that a decommissioned pipe may remain in 'situ', however, as the pipe was substantially damaged this does not apply but this is what they are sticking to.  Our MP has offered his assistance moving forward should we need it but we haven't asked for his involvement any further at the present time.   We are in Cumbria and although my husband and I have discussed it we have not contacted the press although we do openly talk about it to anyone who wants to listen.   At the present time we are not looking to speak to the press but if we decide to do so I have numerous videos and photographs of all the works and also a recorded conversation with the SHEQ manager of the contractors who openly admits that there were breaches.   Thanks  
    • I couldn't send it through paypal as they say -    Donations to this recipient aren't supported in this country
    • Exactly, I hope that I can witness its closing down in the future years.  I just sent through a donation. It is not much, but I hope you won't mind 😛
    • I received the Notice Of Discontinuance this morning from E Shoreman-Lawson for Elms Legal, on behalf of VCS. Thanks again for all assistance and encouragement. There is no doubt that this site is providing a service to the underdog and I will certainly be making a donation. I will also upload anything from my exhibits that may be useful for others, in particular the DVLA audit of compliance in which VCS do not fare well. Although yesterday was a bit of an anti climax, today I am taking comfort from the fact that at least this case has cost VCS money.
    • In any case let's be optimistic for a minute and say "prove I'm the driver" is a good defence point.  The problem is that if the judge doesn't agree you immediately lose the case.  "Prove I'm the driver" needs to be one of several points.   1.  Locus standi.  NCP are not the landowner.  You do not believe they have the right to bring this claim.  You requested to see a contract with the landowner giving them such a right by way of a CPR request and their solicitors refused to do so.  Exhibit BW Legal's letter.   2.  Suing the wrong person.  Your "prove I'm the driver" point.  (Obviously this will have to go if you admitted being the driver to NCP).   3.  Insufficient signage.  Tiny print.  What LFI wrote in post 29.   4.  Planning permission.  You do not believe their signs have planning permission which is a criminal offence.  You requested to see such permission from their solicitors but the solicitors refused to do so.  (Have a look at the WS in post 123 of EL21's thread  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430570-vcs-2vanishing-windscreen-pcns-now-claimform-brook-retail-car-park-ruislip/page/5/?tab=comments#comment-5130039  You can adapt point 41 of this WS).   5.  De minimis.  The incident happened four years so you are unsure what happened.  It's possible you paid but you input your registration number wrongly.  You put NCP to strict proof you didn't pay.  Paying but getting a single digit of the registration number wrong is de minimis.   6.  Unreasonable conditions.  In any case NCP deliberately make it difficult to pay so they can issue PCNs.  No cash.  Card payment which often doesn't work and they do nothing to fix.   7.  Unicorn Food Tax.  (You can use nigh-on verbatim points 45-53 of EL21's WS).   As dx says, you're a Litigant in Person so you don't have to write in legalese.  When you have time, post up a first draft and we'll take it from there.    And please answer about how NCP suddenly started to write to you personally.
  • Our picks

A little light relief.


squarebob
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5318 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

It has only been 18 days (not counting Sundays) since I sent off my D.P.A. request to the A&L, but as I had not heard anything from them and had no nails left, I decided to give their customer centre a call. Having heard of the way some people had been dealt with by the A&L, (me included in my past dealings with them), I was prepared for the worst. It never happened. I was spoken to politely; I made my enquiry, and was given a polite answer in return, 40 working days from receipt of request etc. Then I thought that I would really push the boat out and ask if my request had been received etc. Asked for my account number(s)! I was asked to wait (not long), while it was being checked. Returning shortly,an apology was given for keeping me waiting and I was told that the department that deals with these requests had received mine on the 16th of March, (where it had been since the 10th, I know not), and that it had a deadline for completion by the 25th of April. It was nice to receive this positive (and friendly) response from them, no doubt this will change once we move onto the next stage, but for now, thank you A&L for putting the customer first. :) I will keep forum members posted if and when further developments occur.

 

P.S. It has been through reading the forum letters (and answers) and realising that there are other people out there either in the same boat, or worse off than me that has given me the incentive to making the First move towards 'Financial Freedom'. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...