Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • 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

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 5900 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

But that wasn't the judges was it. Amongst other things evidence was found to have been witheld

 

As I recall it was judges who released them

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Please don't tar all Judges with the same brush. Remember the number of times they have whenever possible come down on the side of the consumer in this matter.

 

Clearly there ARE some unworldly judges for want of a better word but believe me when I say most judges DO know what is going on & are not one bit pleased. Also be assured that in most cases their ire is not directed at the consumer

 

I agree Pliny. Not all Judges are of the Establishment mould. Some are independent and some even have a care for justice. But to bend the system to one's outcome, all it takes is to ensure that a given judge is given a given case. That's a given, I imagine?

 

Shoestring

The more I read this site, the more congratulations I want to heap on CAG for the invaluable service they are performing. Bravo!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thought.

 

Judges are meant to be rich and who do rich people bank with?

 

Coutts

 

Who owns Coutts?

 

Nat West

 

I rest my case

PPMAN159

 

If this comment has helped please click on the scales.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Judges should be like football refs-unbiased and impartial!!!

 

Snigger.

 

I take it you are referring to Italian refs in particular?

 

What happens in Rome (match fixing) happens elsewhere in Europe, I shouldn't wonder.

 

Shoestring

The more I read this site, the more congratulations I want to heap on CAG for the invaluable service they are performing. Bravo!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having an account at Coutts (or not) does not imply a prejudice on the part of a Judge. If someone were to be "knobbled" it would not work along those lines.

 

Give credit where subtlety is due, please...

 

Shoestring

The more I read this site, the more congratulations I want to heap on CAG for the invaluable service they are performing. Bravo!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the main reason the judge did'nt take too well to TB's case was simply that to rule against the bank would be so hugely controversial and

would potentialy cost the banks zillions

 

Toms view is that m'learned just wants to get through a couple more quite cases awake before he retires - on a very agreeable pension no doubt.

 

We just gotta hope the appeal judge is on the right side of seventy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree CRFX, the judge will look at all the arguments placed in front of him and all precedents. It is very, very important to remember that what TB is doing is attempting to claim exemplary damages and that this is not a standard reclaim of bank charges. The crux of this is that the banks offered far more than the original claim in settlement and this was rejected as TB did not accept them putting money into his account without his knowledge. TB rejects this as more or less unlawful settlement without negotiation and I would totally agree with him. This case will actually have very little relevance unless TB wins the claim for exemplary damages. If he does then the floodgates open. If he does not and the banks have STILL failed to disclose their actual costs then as far as I am concerned it is BUSINESS AS USUAL in reclaiming unlawful charges. Sorry if i am teaching you to suck eggs CRFX, this is just my standpoint and opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's alright mate. Everyone's got their own take on this. I just think it's

not that easy for the judge to rule in Toms favour and as this is unchartered waters as far as bank charges go, It's how he chooses to interpret the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence

-- Napoleon I

 

Maybe the judge has been got at, or maybe he made an error of judgment. (Pun intended? I can barely tell myself ...)

HSBCLloyds TSBcontractual interestNew Tax Creditscoming for you?NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence

- Napoleon I

 

Never ascribe to imcompetence that which can be ascribed to greed and vanity!

Shoestring

The more I read this site, the more congratulations I want to heap on CAG for the invaluable service they are performing. Bravo!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looked at Tom's website, looks like an ideal launch pad for a petition or for rallying the troops to me, whatever way it goes.

 

The banks are in a lose, lose.

 

Over the last 18 months, peoples perception of them has changed completely. They are no longer the trustable institution that they used to be. You hear of little old ladies with bundles of cash in the house because they don't trust the banks. Did they know something we didn't?

 

My Grandfather always said "Never make an enemy of the Banks" but never expanded.

 

Whatever the decision here, I for one will fight on, and believe the damage (exposure) has already been done. Power to the internet and communication of the many.

 

I'm now on my 27th telly. Every time I see that Howard and his showgirls wanting to give me extra, whatever I'm holding goes through the screen. Good job Tesco are doing cheap portables.

 

Anyone need any remotes?

 

Tide

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote 'My Grandfather always said "Never make an enemy of the Banks" but never expanded.'

 

Try ' Never make an enemy of the people'

Templates Library

 

GE Capital Won

Capital 0ne Won

Northern rock Claim stayed working on negotiation

HSBC personal claim 1 ''WON''.

£1800 plus full stat interest plus costs.

Claim started 14/02/07 offer 3/07/07

 

Next:Coming soon to a thread near you! :)

HSBC personal Part 2 'return of the Celicaman'

HSBC business 1 ' my empire strikes back' N1 claim POC in progress after usual offensive offer from bank

HSBC business 2 'attack of the Celicaman'

HSBC business claim 3 'bank account menace'

HSBC business 4 'Revenge of the CAG Member' the final insult ....................... 'Maybe'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't tar all Judges with the same brush. Remember the number of times they have whenever possible come down on the side of the consumer in this matter.

 

Clearly there ARE some unworldly judges for want of a better word but believe me when I say most judges DO know what is going on & are not one bit pleased. Also be assured that in most cases their ire is not directed at the consumer

 

I agree with Pliny here, the Judge that I got at Telford Crown Court couldnt have been nicer. He did not seem frustrated at anything and agreed that what I said with regards to my claim was exactly right.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please click the scales in left hand corner if this post has helped you.

 

Click on the Below Links for more Info:

 

1, Step By Step Instructions

 

2, F.A.Q.s'

 

3, Templates Library

Link to post
Share on other sites

If people are so worried about judges and have a lack of faith in the judicial process then why are we even here guys? We are here as there has never been a precedent set. Stay on track, TB is claiming something different to our normal claims. I for one never thought I had a leg to stand on before falling into CAG. Now am here oh my god what a wealth of information in all subjects. I had it pointed out to me yesterday that I have been with CAG three months now, how time flies eh! Maybe that's why my mrs isnt speaking to me lol it's so bloody addictive. So far I have had two DCA removed from my life due to info here. Sill ongoing with bank charges but ho hum that will be a winner. I also have a biggy that am awaiting return of sar on. One member on here knows how much it could be worth and lemme tell you it would BJ any previous claim on CAG. CAG is amazing but we aren't right all the time. Our opinions are just that, opinions. Keep on track guys and don't confuse TB's claim with our normal ones as we are not seeking exemplary damages, but if TB wins and I hope he does then thanks Tom for opening the floodgates.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If people are so worried about judges and have a lack of faith in the judicial process then why are we even here guys? We are here as there has never been a precedent set. Stay on track,

 

Yes, but it pays to be forewarned about what can happen and what, I think, will eventually happen. Ignorance is no defence and it, therefore, behooves us to temper our hopes with a degree of phlegmatic thinking.

 

Currently, the volume of claims and payouts doesn't even begin to match the money the banks have spun out of unlawful charges over the last decade and more. They'll take some hits but they'll not repay (they can't) anywhere near the $22 billion odd that is estimated they've creamed in.

 

So, sooner or later the party is going to come to an end.

 

Shoestring

 

PS - this analysis is obviously contingent upon there continuing to be a growing number of people claiming through the small claims court system and there is no way to know or guess if this volume of claims will continue.

The more I read this site, the more congratulations I want to heap on CAG for the invaluable service they are performing. Bravo!

Link to post
Share on other sites

TB's now joined the site and will be posting a lot more stuff this week.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-our-forum/94184-thank-you-all-you.html

 

It appears we'll have to wait a bit longer for the judgement in his case.

After an exausting couple of days ripping Toms case apart, m'learned

took a well earned holiday and is expected to return today, if he can manage it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...