Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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
    • Well done.   Please let us know how it goes or come back with any questions. HB
  • 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

Ajjars V egg


ajjars
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6200 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

Hi all,

 

Just realised I have not started a thread with egg.

Back in December we missed our monthly payment on the 23rd due to charges being taken from our Bank account (£1200 in 3 months - which we got back in full in Feb, without filing at court). The payment to egg was less than £10. egg added charges of 2x £16 for unpaid D/D and £16 for a late charge. The Bank charged us 2x £39. So, for a payment of £9 odd we incurred charges of £126. Plus the payment was still outstanding. I emailed egg and explained that I could not meet the payment with all the charges. I asked them if as a gesture of goodwill if they could waive the charges to enable me to meet the minimum payment. They said no. I couldn't make the payment they asked for, including all the charges.

 

On 12th January we received a default notice from egg. At this point the account was less than a month in arrears. Emails were exchanged back and forth but they were adamant they would not waive the charges. So finally in desperation I sent a SAR to them. I also explained that the account was in dispute. Got a letter back on 9th Feb saying "we are looking into your complaint". Got another one the same day saying "your egg card account has been terminated"! It was terminated with a balance of £575. In December the balance was £480 - within the limit of £500. So the rest was all charges that had been added since December.

 

Then on 18th feb got a letter from the infamous H L Legal. It was a letter with a "case" number, the threat of their representatives coming to levy on my assets, and a charge of £150 being added to the account. Needless to say they got a very short sharp letter the next day. Basically egg have been out and out a******es, they don't give a damn. I think once they got my SAR they knew what was coming and passed this straight to the debt collectors. Capquest are now dealing with it, although a letter to them about eggs antics have kept them quiet. The SAR request compliance was late. We had to fight the secure message I.D issue, but eventually we got the statements (and everything else!)

 

My LBA was sent off in the week, and I will be filing at court without further notice to egg. I am claiming in excess of £1500, Oh and I forgot to mention the default that appears on our file after a string of green payments. No missed payments showing on the file at all, all showing up to date then BANG! a default. As the charges amount to much more than the default balance, that will be my lever to get it removed. There has been much more in the way of correspondence but this is the gist of it!

 

Sorry its so long - but as you can see egg are total a***s. They are not responsible lenders. When I asked for help right at the beginning of this sorry saga - where was it??

 

Anyway - wish me luck! lol

 

Ajjars

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Well nothing much to report. LBA is up. Will file at court at the end of the month (lack of funds right now!). CCA'd Capquest (who are now in default) strangely tho - they have written to say they have put the account on hold for a further 28 days. Can it be that they don't have the agreement? Me thinks that is the case! Funny they wouldn't give us peace before ........

 

we have just been totally ignored by egg. No offers, no nothing! Oh well .... the wait will be worth it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Quick up date,

 

Haven't managed to file at court yet (had a badly needed holiday to fund!). In the meantime we have been getting letters from ARC debt collectors. Then a letter from Trevor Munn solicitors last week. They said they were going to take us to court, get a CCJ, blah, blah, blah. I wrote to Trevor and Co and explained the situation, that it is indeed egg who owe us money and that court action is imminent. Got a reply this morning from ARC to say that they have closed the account and sent it back to egg, and that they have instructed Trevor Munn to close the account as well. Small victory there then! Egg think they can bully and threaten us with their debt collectors. Not so!!!

 

Will be filing at court as soon as the good old Woolwich cough up (gone past AQ stage, just waiting for a court date). We will be claiming penalty charges plus the default removal which was placed on our file all of a few days after missing a payment.

 

Anyway, will keep this up dated!

 

Cheers Ajjars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Recent winners showed Egg to have become very enlightened, not at all obstructive in paying out if you send Eggmail or letters similar to the winners. Egg more than once volunteered to add on interest not asked. The latest winner taking 2 weeks from beginning to end, one winner needed only one week.

 

Nonstandard claims though, like Default removal have been known to take a very long time.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...