Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.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

Tom Brennan v NatWest - This is a must-read!!!


calvi36
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5901 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

There is no such thing as a Trainee Barrister and a Bankrupt barrister can still practice, contrary to what the chap has said.

He's actually a newly qualified barrister, and as I understand it, you cannot practise as a barrister whilst you are an undischarged bankcrupt.

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

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

He's actually a newly qualified barrister, and as I understand it, you cannot practise as a barrister whilst you are an undischarged bankcrupt.

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-charges-print/80097-bank-charges-challenge-lawyer-2.html

 

The quote from Advot8 indicates that you can still practise. The quote he uses from the head of the Bar Council

 

There is nothing in the rules to prevent a bankrupt barrister from practising provided that the facts leading up to the bankruptcy are not dishonest or discreditable.

Whatever I post is my opinion and should be taken as such, an opinion. While it is what I believe and is offered in good faith, it should not be taken as a statement of truth

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm... yes thats very interesting. Looks like my understanding may well be wrong then, although it did come from someone who would know. Perhaps its a somewhat grey area, who knows...

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

Its just something doesnt seem right to me. I may be wrong and if I am, as Im sure we all have been,I will appologies.

Whatever I post is my opinion and should be taken as such, an opinion. While it is what I believe and is offered in good faith, it should not be taken as a statement of truth

Link to post
Share on other sites

is Toms court date this Friday?

post office WON 12/11/06

 

abbey.LBA sent 30/10/06.MCOL claim submitted 8/11/06.allocation questionnaire sent 16/12/06.schedule of charges sent 16/12/06.WON

 

2nd abbey claim SAR sent 3/1/07.WON.complaint letter sent 18/1/08

 

alliance and Leicester.WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL my doctor only looks 14 and im only 28!!! i mean he really does look 14. GOOD LUCK to Mr Brennan. Friday 13th has always been a lucky day for me so this one true to form should be. My 28 days were up on sunday and now just waiting for a letter from the court. My local is Nottingham so i will keep you posted on wether i get an AQ from them or not. Will be watching Mr Brennans case like a hawk. And netty if i wasnt at work on friday i would come to london cheer him on. should be quite a crowd out side of court once word gets around!!! Happy easter every one by the way!

pelim letter sent 25/01/2007

reply from hsbc 01/02/2007

LBA letter sent 16/02/07

MCOL Issued 06/03/07

Deemed served 11/03/07

Deadline 08/04/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its just something doesnt seem right to me. I may be wrong and if I am, as Im sure we all have been,I will appologies.

 

Doesn't seem right to me either, especially after reading Advot8's posts on the other thread that is going on this particular topic.

 

It is difficult not to be sceptical about a newly qualified barrister saying that "It's the principal of it .....I think about all the other people in this situation .....". Why?????

 

Breezy

Breezy v Halifax

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether he has an alterior motive or not is irrelevant. The fact is that a legal challenge has been mounted in an attempy to force banks into disclosure of their charges. Would you rather sit on the fence and do nothing at all or support this guy? The choice is yours but am certain that I will not ever again sit on the fence when it comes to major corporations screwing joe public into the ground, acting outwith the law and basically stealing from those in society who can least afford it. I lost my home, car etc due to these illegal charges and YES I for one will support any action that is taken via the courts to stop these B******* from doing the same to anyone else.

 

Who am I? a working class guy, had my own business, worked my butt off. Through no fault of my own whilst away with work there was a fire at my home. I lost my wife and two children. Did the bank care that I could not work through grieving, NO THEY DID NOT. Their charges mounted and mounted and as I was self employed I ended up losing not just my family but a roof over my head. If I could claim against the bank my mortgage was with then I would but the statute of time is against me or I would take the bank all the way for £48k plus interest yes thats not a typo it's £48,000.

 

So while you sit there pontificating on the rights and wrongs and motives of Tom Brennan, remember that we are here for one reason and that is to stop the banks and building societies from financially ruining those that are most at risk. Apologies but we must remind ourselves why we are here and stop getting involved in petty issues and second guessing instead look at facts. Fact is Brennan is trying to force the issue, fact is nobody has been able to get a bank to disclose in court nor by select parlimentary committee. So we deal in facts not here-say and so do the courts. the banks will just love reading the previous posts and will be scoffing at the fact that members of CAG are doubting the morals of this man. Wake up and smell the coffee, to quote an old adage.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether he has an alterior motive or not is irrelevant. The fact is that a legal challenge has been mounted in an attempy to force banks into disclosure of their charges. Would you rather sit on the fence and do nothing at all or support this guy? The choice is yours but am certain that I will not ever again sit on the fence when it comes to major corporations screwing joe public into the ground, acting outwith the law and basically stealing from those in society who can least afford it. I lost my home, car etc due to these illegal charges and YES I for one will support any action that is taken via the courts to stop these B******* from doing the same to anyone else.

 

Who am I? a working class guy, had my own business, worked my butt off. Through no fault of my own whilst away with work there was a fire at my home. I lost my wife and two children. Did the bank care that I could not work through grieving, NO THEY DID NOT. Their charges mounted and mounted and as I was self employed I ended up losing not just my family but a roof over my head. If I could claim against the bank my mortgage was with then I would but the statute of time is against me or I would take the bank all the way for £48k plus interest yes thats not a typo it's £48,000.

 

So while you sit there pontificating on the rights and wrongs and motives of Tom Brennan, remember that we are here for one reason and that is to stop the banks and building societies from financially raping those that are most at risk. Apologies but we must remind ourselves why we are here and stop getting involved in petty issues and second guessing instead look at facts. Fact is Brennan is trying to force the issue, fact is nobody has been able to get a bank to disclose in court nor by select parlimentary committee. So we deal in facts not here-say and so do the courts. the banks will just love reading the previous posts and will be scoffing at the fact that members of CAG are doubting the morals of this man. Wake up and smell the coffee, to quote an old adage.

 

Maybe you would like my log in details and password and the you can post my opinions for me and I then wont have to bother coming on the site. If you think everyone on here is 100% genuine you are dellusional.

 

Why do you think every month we have an email reminding people to donate? it because people come on here, bleed the information, get their refunds and then go off into the night with their payout and sod to the site that helped us.

 

Not saying you are one of these but that is fact.

 

Yes the fact is he is trying to force the issue in court BUT WHY. It COULD be a double bluff. We DO NOT know. So no actual facts have come around apart from someone who has been offered 60% above the value of his claim has decided he does not see that as enough

Whatever I post is my opinion and should be taken as such, an opinion. While it is what I believe and is offered in good faith, it should not be taken as a statement of truth

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you would like my log in details and password and the you can post my opinions for me and I then wont have to bother coming on the site.

I post only my own opinion here, however I do respect the opinions of others although I may not always agree with them. By listening and reading the opnions of others creates nothing else but learning and I for one am always learning. I have no reason to desire your log in details ISIRIS I have no wish to persuade you nor post for you but many thanks for your fine well thought out comments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted a part of my story to show the lengths the banks will go to in taking people for every penny they have. I hope none of you ever have to go through that. I am not a bankrupt I fought them all the way on that one. But in the end they won, with legal costs and charges that amounted to one fifth of the equity in my home, I still did not go bankrupt.

 

You don't think it will happen to you, they are uncaring buggers who care about nothing else apart from profit. If I had not paid the mortgage due to spending my money elsewhere then I could hold my hands up and say it's my fault, but hey presto my buildings and contents insurance were also with the same bank so they knew full well what had happened, they also tried to get out of the insurance claim and I had to spend £4k on legal fees to make them pay. THREE COFFINS later they attacked and charged astronomical amounts of interest and I could not deal with it. Result was, bank took all they could from me and did not give a **** about fairness and treating people with any form of dignity. Do I hate banks? No I don't, I hate what they do to people who are the worst off. I detest that they arrest wages, take homes, cars etc because of their charges. If I was to start taking an employees wages, register defaults against him, try to take his home, would the courts allow it. I think NOT.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether he has an alterior motive or not is irrelevant. .

 

Firstly, you appear to be 'shouting' at us in anger and that doesn't bode well for a debate.

 

Secondly, from what you have just written, I have just discovered your background (regarding your wife/children) that I didn't know before and was shocked by what you wrote and cannot begin to imagine what it must have been like and probably still is.

 

Thirdly, you must accept different people hold different views. Just because we don't hold the same view as yourself, doesn't mean yours or mine/ours is any less worthy. I think we all have an opinion concerning our own particular bank and the banks in general, regarding bank charges, and would say that for the majority they happen when your circumstances are at their most dire (financial or emotional or both) and it snowballs etc etc

 

I can't imagine anyone on this forum wanting the banks to win in any way as we are all here for a common purpose and been affected by them ruining us financially and emotionally, though not to the extent you have suffered.

 

That said, I still think, until proven otherwise (as I would be more than happy to be) that there is more to this case than has been revealed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted a part of my story to show the lengths the banks will go to in taking people for every penny they have. I hope none of you ever have to go through that. I am not a bankrupt I fought them all the way on that one. But in the end they won, with legal costs and charges that amounted to one fifth of the equity in my home, I still did not go bankrupt.

 

You don't think it will happen to you, they are uncaring buggers who care about nothing else apart from profit. If I had not paid the mortgage due to spending my money elsewhere then I could hold my hands up and say it's my fault, but hey presto my buildings and contents insurance were also with the same bank so they knew full well what had happened, they also tried to get out of the insurance claim and I had to spend £4k on legal fees to make them pay. THREE COFFINS later they attacked and charged astronomical amounts of interest and I could not deal with it. Result was, bank took all they could from me and did not give a **** about fairness and treating people with any form of dignity. Do I hate banks? No I don't, I hate what they do to people who are the worst off. I detest that they arrest wages, take homes, cars etc because of their charges. If I was to start taking an employees wages, register defaults against him, try to take his home, would the courts allow it. I think NOT.

 

totally agree with you. bin there done that. :x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually i only became aware of this this evening, SRfrench has been talking about just such an action for ages now and I have been telling him not to be so daft lol, if it comes off the proverbial will hit the fan, if a judge in the high court even just rules for the exemplary comp then am i right in thinking that this will set a precendent and the floodgates will well and truely open

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Breeze, that is what I posted, so your post is welcomed also. My opinion is the one I work with as am sure yours is to you. I accept everyone has a different viewpoint and that my viewpoint is only my viewpoint. At no point have i ever shouted at ayone on this forum, shouting involves CAPS, As to more to this case than has been revealed, ofcourse there is, i gave a brief outline, however am not prepared to divulge to all and sundry what happened, why it happened, this is none of your concern. What is the concern of this forum is the FACT that a bank could take someones home in such as u say "dire" circumstances.

I post only my own opinion here, however I do respect the opinions of others although I may not always agree with them. By listening and reading the opnions of others creates nothing else but learning and I for one am always learning. I have no reason to desire your log in details ISIRIS I have no wish to persuade you nor post for you but many thanks for your fine well thought out comments.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please, please everyone! We are all entitled to our views. In every situation some people will see suspicious activity whilst others are prepared to accept it at face value. We can all watch with different views. I know it is hard to read a post in the way it was intended. Can we all just assume the last posting we read is typed in a friendly and informative fashion. That way we don't get drawn into the senseless trading of near insults.

 

PS this is typed in a friendly way too (actually slightly tipsy and just about to partake of some more so perhaps I should say no more today otherwise no-one will understand a word I print!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...