Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have just read the smaller print on their signs. It says that you can pay at the end of your parking session. given that you have ten minutes grace period the 35 seconds could easily have been taken up with walking back to your car, switching on the engine and then driving out. Even in my younger days when I used to regularly exceed speed limits, I doubt I could have done that in 35 seconds even when I  had a TR5.
    • 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.
  • 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

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

We all know that Direct debits and cheques etc are rejected by the Banks computer it checks your account and if you have not go the funds in to pay them it rejects it and applies a penalty to the account.

 

So if a direct debit comes up say £100 and theres not enough money in the account, bingo £30 plus penalty.

 

But if you go to the cash point machine and try to draw out £100 and there is not enough money this very same computer rejects you application BUT you do not get charged a penalty ....I want to know what is the difference. the same computer has rejected the same amount for the same reason not enough money, the cost can't be any different, anyone any different ideas?

 

sparkie1723

 

If your request for cash at the ATM is refused, this transaction involves only 2 electronic messages, and involves no third-party bank and individual to be notified. ATMs became universal no more than 20 years ago, from Day One a purely IT electronic process, with no manual historical precedent (well if a cashier at the counter refused to pay out cash, like the ATM she would never have charged either) .

 

Cheques and DDs bouncing has a different historical origin. 30 years ago cheques and D/D were pieces of paper laboriously centralised in Crawley and Lombard Street data centres from 10,000 originating bank branches nationwide, then redistributed to 10,000 other branches overnight, distance no limit, by strictly secure and confidential courier service.

 

Come 9am the following morning when branches open, one or more human cashiers would go through the incoming pile of cheques and D/Ds to check the signatures and D/D authorities (in the truly old days checking against balances written up in a ledger). Debits ripe for bounce are placed before the branch manager who allows himself a few hours to decide whether to bounce or not bounce, at times even ringing a customer. This is the origin of a bounce charge or exceed-limit charge -- in the old days more legitimately covering a laborious manual service.

 

However times have moved on, and ALL the manual intervention steps have been replaced by automated IT. Cheques and D/Ds no longer travel the laborious two-way journey, and human intervention long ceased. These cost reductions have not been passed on to the customer. Quite the reverse, the £2 manual bounce fee in the seventies has now been jacked up to £39 for the Abbey Bank.

 

Bouncing at the ATM does not have a tradition of incurring a penalty charge. Perish the thought Sparkie, if your thread gives them such a good idea, lol.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

And I would be very proud to say I knew him, IF I DID OF COURSE...........

 

I SINCERELY WISH HIM THE VERY VERY VERY BEST OF LUCK, and I shall be saying a few private mantras for him in my head

 

Fendy,

 

Not for the first time, an Englishman stands up against an army of bullies.

Not for the first time, ten million cheer and support him.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom Brennan v NatWest

Guildhall court, Monday 30th April (maximise for display)

 

-
Radio 4 interview outside Guildhall featuring Tom

(updated 9pm, 13th April)

(
1
2
)
….. -
BankFodder

?

(
1
2
)
-
freakyleaky

(
1
2
) .
………………………........................ -
crfx250

Friday

(
1
2
)
………… -
humbleman

……………….. -
whizzkid001

-
BankFodder

lawyer

(
1
2
)
……………….. -
whizzkid001

(
1
2
3
4
5
)
………………………. -
calvi36

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kimmy01,

 

2 of the links are outside of CAG. Who taught you these were threads?

2 of the threads are started by Bankfodder, the remaining 6 carried 300 postings within a few days.

 

Kimmy01, make your personal displeasure known to the authors.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The sensational Brennan showdown broke from nowhere 10 days ago, and threads exploded spontaneously in numerous forums all over the site.

 

Without a site map for these threads it would be impossible to keep up with all the exciting developments. There is going to be another huge surge of postings around 30th April, but Bookworm said no more duplicate new threads please. So here we are, one quick index to ten links.

 

By coincidence The Brennan sensation broke around the First Anniversary of the OFT pronouncement, for which I wrote a piece The First Anniversary.

 

Latest links found from Google:

 

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=448336&in_page_id=1770

 

http://news.sky.com/skynews/xml/article/0,,91070-1176387979,00.html?f=mf

 

BBC website - lawyer trying to force banks to reveal costs - Page ...

 

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article2447665.ece

 

http://www.ifsconline.ie/reuters/full_story.html?story=MTFH18783_2007-04-11_16-28-38_L11657678&picture=

 

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=420655&page=4

12-04-2007, 9:23 AM #80

Dangle_kt

 

My Sister lives in Dublin and they only get charged £3.50.

Do you think the banks over there LOOSE money??? Of Course not!

They have just made the decision NOT to milk people who can least afford it!

 

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

 

The Radio 4 audio interview on the doorsteps of Guildhall last Friday described how Tom went alone into court to face 3 NatWest barristers ("a lot more than that" said Tom).

 

So that this courageous 30-year-old from Lewisham (in difficulties within the past 6 years) lacks nothing in backup, research, and counsel, is it time on D-Day minus 15 for CAG to open a Brennan Fighting Fund to help him in his and our battle against sophisticated NatWest battalions?

 

Tom has my £10 this day without hesitation.

 

But Bankfodder, where should I send it?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybelline,

 

No news yet from the 2 hot sources:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/networks/radio4/aod.shtml?radio4/moneybox

http://www.tombrennan.co.uk/

 

 

However, another case (not Tom) came to a head at 3:30 pm today:

 

record settlement by NatWest at £35,988

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6559673.stm

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those who shy away from county court cannot escape from the court of public opinion.

 

After Diana's death tabloid journalists were regarded like lepers. Now politicians are persons from whom you would not buy a used car.

 

Bankers cannot see they are becoming a public laughing stock.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

bong,

 

Is it possible to collate a list of dates and courts which dished out strikeouts for abuse of legal process?

 

While county courts cannot establish binding precedents, judges would understandably take an interest in other judgments.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

RBS-NatWest are the biggest retail bank group in the world, and I believe now the biggest earning group in UK private sector. Lets say they have a ballpark 25% share of the 4.5 billion per annum unlawful charges, if so Cobbetts are defending a billionpound per annum income stream against Tom Brennan.

 

God knows what a battalion of lawyers RBS-NatWest have deployed against Tom, burning the midnight candle looking for loopholes.

 

Tom said in his Radio 4 interview he has a team of colleagues working with him -- I hope so. But this 30-year-old has been short of the readies within the past 6 years, and is currently not earning. Battle will be joined in 13 days, and I do not believe we should take Tom's victory for granted.

 

For Bankfodder (I would PM if only your mailbox were not overflowing):

 

I have 2 cheques burning a hole in my pocket -- £10 for CAG, £10 for Tom Brennan. Please tell me where to send them.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is too late for NatWest, what Tom discovered cannot now be undiscovered. If NatWest were to outdo the Abbey in placating Stephen with fivefold payment, the whole world will deduce what has happened, confidentiality clause or not.

 

If one litigant bows out, a hundred can take his place. The idea of uncovering unlawful charges by suing for exemplary damages cannot be patented.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

90 minutes, and I have caught up with all postings on Paul's 8-month war with NatWest, ending in £17K victory. With so much time, effort, risk and emotion invested in the fight celebrations are well merited, very well done to Paul and Mrs for the staying power and for sidestepping traps.

 

Has anyone kept a diary of the man-hours invested in tussles with bankers and lawyers? Hours spent fighting the Dark Side are hours taken away from other activities. Sure, great victories have been won, but at great cost. I am not sure an objective audit would conclude "Once you have the money back with interest you have suffered no loss."

 

If I had spent 8 months in an all-engrossing tussle then won £17K, I would have made a loss on the deal. Questionable if I can afford such a win.

 

Twelve months after the OFT pronouncement of 5th April 2006, how goes the war? Are banks winning, or are claimants winning? Less than 1% of unlawful charges have been refunded in 12 months. Unless Tom Brennan wins a watershed victory for the public, 100,000 separate tug-of-wars will continue indefinitely the same way they have done for 12 months. A penetrating analysis of the Dark Side's War Plan is quoted below.

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/42507-cprs-time-delays.html

 

The courts are ultra conservative and always will be. You file for a judgement; they file for a set aside. You obtain a judgement and file for a warrant of execution; they file for a stay of execution.

 

You have to play the long game, civil law is very civilised and breaching an order like this will not mean a great deal, Cobbetts know this which is why they do it with impunity.

 

Exercise patience, do not get emotionally involved and keep playing the game. Nat West have the money, they can afford this, but they can also afford to tie you up in court until you get bored if they so wish - and if it did not go their way and it looked like they might lose, they'd pay up and not feel a thing.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Parkvale,

 

Shylock Bank did all this while wearing the righteous cloak of the law.

 

Their six-figure-salaried lawyers will have known for decades they were quietly getting away with the unlawful, and on this very day openly getting away with the unlawful.

 

A chapter in the history of this green and pleasant land that needs to be cleansed.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lula, 2 things are magical about your loo roll:

 

(1) It appears to be a conic section, wider at the top than at the bottom. Even Waitrose would not be selling something this sophisticated. No, not even Harrods. Niemann Marcus maybe.

 

(2) This roll appears never to be used up. I would pay £100 for such value merchandise. You have found the bathroom equivalent of Eternal Youth.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The HongKong and Shanghai Banking Corporation has a strong customer base in Asia where it started life. The punitive charges issue only arises in the UK, where the 19 million accounts of RBS-NatWest make them easily the biggest retail bank group, beating UK HSBC formerly the Midland Bank.

 

Speaking of exhorbitant charges unique to the UK, nowhere is this more blatant than in Northern Ireland. There the Ulster Bank (part of RBS-NatWest Group) charges £30. Put one foot across the border into Eire, and the charge falls by 90% to the universal Irish rate of £3, see links below. Are Irish banks ten, twelve times more cost-efficient than UK banks?

 

http://www.ulsterbank.co.uk/content/ni/personal/current_accounts/downloads/Guide_to_Personal_Current_Account_Fees_Interest.pdf

 

Ulster Bank

 

"If you exceed your arranged overdraft facility or if you go overdrawn without prior arrangement...... £30"

 

http://www.accbank.ie/content/accbank/cms.nsf/Files/CurrentAcFeesChargesJan20 06/$file/Current%20Ac%20Fees%20&%2 0Charges.pdf

 

ACC Bank

 

“REFERRED CHARGES…Cheque, direct debit or standing order presented which if paid would place your account in an unathorised position – Euro 4.44

 

 

Allied Irish Banks

 

"3. Late Payment Charge

Should payments not be made in accordance with the Conditions of Use an administration charge of EUR 3.81 will be debited from the cards account.

 

4. Over Limit Charge

Should the account be operated in excess of the Credit Limit, an administration charge of EUR 2.54 may be debited from the cards account.

 

5. Returned Payment Charge

Should any payment either by cheque or direct debit be returned unpaid an administration charge of EUR 4.44 will be debited to the card account."

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

From Wikipedia :

Mayor's and City of London Court is a County Court in London, England. It is located at Guildhall Buildings, Basinghall Street. It was created in 1922 from the Mayor's Court and the City of London Court.

Address:

 

Guildhall Buildings

Basinghall Street

London

EC2V 5AR

England

 

DX 97520 Moorgate EC2

 

Work Type

Admiralty

Civil

Trial centre

 

Contacts

 

Court Manager : Mrs C. Thickins

Listing Officer : Mr V. Cullen 020 7796 5413

Customer Service : Mrs E. McIntyre 020 7796 5400

Bailiff Manager : Mr M. Newley 07899 068882

 

Opening Times

 

Court building open :

9.30 am

Court building closed :

4.00 pm

Court counter open :

10.00 am

Court counter closed :

4.00 pm

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...