Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • He was one of four former top executives from Sam Bankman-Fried's firms to plead guilty to charges.View the full article
    • The private submersible industry was shaken after the implosion of the OceanGate Titan sub last year.View the full article
    • further polished WS using above suggestions and also included couple of more modifications highlighted in orange are those ok to include?   Background   1.1  The Defendant received the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the 06th of January 2020 following the vehicle being parked at Arla Old Dairy, South Ruislip on the 05th of December 2019.   Unfair PCN   2.1  On 19th December 2023 the Defendant sent the Claimant's solicitors a CPR request.  As shown in Exhibit 1 (pages 7-13) sent by the solicitors the signage displayed in their evidence clearly shows a £60.00 parking charge notice (which will be reduced to £30 if paid within 14 days of issue).  2.2  Yet the PCN sent by the Claimant is for a £100.00 parking charge notice (reduced to £60 if paid within 30 days of issue).   2.3        The Claimant relies on signage to create a contract.  It is unlawful for the Claimant to write that the charge is £60 on their signs and then send demands for £100.    2.4        The unlawful £100 charge is also the basis for the Claimant's Particulars of Claim.  No Locus Standi  3.1  I do not believe a contract with the landowner, that is provided following the defendant’s CPR request, gives MET Parking Services a right to bring claims in their own name. Definition of “Relevant contract” from the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4,  2 [1] means a contract Including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land between the driver and a person who is-   (a) the owner or occupier of the land; or   (b) Authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land. According to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44   For a contract to be valid, it requires a director from each company to sign and then two independent witnesses must confirm those signatures.   3.2  The Defendant requested to see such a contract in the CPR request.  The fact that no contract has been produced with the witness signatures present means the contract has not been validly executed. Therefore, there can be no contract established between MET Parking Services and the motorist. Even if “Parking in Electric Bay” could form a contract (which it cannot), it is immaterial. There is no valid contract.  Illegal Conduct – No Contract Formed   4.1 At the time of writing, the Claimant has failed to provide the following, in response to the CPR request from myself.   4.2        The legal contract between the Claimant and the landowner (which in this case is Standard Life Investments UK) to provide evidence that there is an agreement in place with landowner with the necessary authority to issue parking charge notices and to pursue payment by means of litigation.   4.3 Proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and country Planning Act 1990. Lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under this Act and no contract can be formed where criminality is involved.   4.4        I also do not believe the claimant possesses these documents.   No Keeper Liability   5.1        The defendant was not the driver at the time and date mentioned in the PCN and the claimant has not established keeper liability under schedule 4 of the PoFA 2012. In this matter, the defendant puts it to the claimant to produce strict proof as to who was driving at the time.   5.2 The claimant in their Notice To Keeper also failed to comply with PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 section 9[2][f] while mentioning “the right to recover from the keeper so much of that parking charge as remains unpaid” where they did not include statement “(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)”.     5.3         The claimant did not mention parking period, times on the photographs are separate from the PCN and in any case are that arrival and departure times not the parking period since their times include driving to and from the parking space as a minimum and can include extra time to allow pedestrians and other vehicles to pass in front.    Protection of Freedoms Act 2012   The notice must -   (a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;  22. In the persuasive judgement K4GF167G - Premier Park Ltd v Mr Mathur - Horsham County Court – 5 January 2024 it was on this very point that the judge dismissed this claim.  5.4  A the PCN does not comply with the Act the Defendant as keeper is not liable.  No Breach of Contract   6.1       No breach of contract occurred because the PCN and contract provided as part of the defendant’s CPR request shows different post code, PCN shows HA4 0EY while contract shows HA4 0FY. According to PCN defendant parked on HA4 0EY which does not appear to be subject to the postcode covered by the contract.  6.2         The entrance sign does not mention anything about there being other terms inside the car park so does not offer a contract which makes it only an offer to treat,  Interest  7.1  It is unreasonable for the Claimant to delay litigation for  Double Recovery   7.2  The claim is littered with made-up charges.  7.3  As noted above, the Claimant's signs state a £60 charge yet their PCN is for £100.  7.4  As well as the £100 parking charge, the Claimant seeks recovery of an additional £70.  This is simply a poor attempt to circumvent the legal costs cap at small claims.  7.5 Since 2019, many County Courts have considered claims in excess of £100 to be an abuse of process leading to them being struck out ab initio. An example, in the Caernarfon Court in VCS v Davies, case No. FTQZ4W28 on 4th September 2019, District Judge Jones-Evans stated “Upon it being recorded that District Judge Jones- Evans has over a very significant period of time warned advocates (...) in many cases of this nature before this court that their claim for £60 is unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process and is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme Court v Beavis which inter alia decided that a figure of £160 as a global sum claimed in this case would be a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore unenforceable in law and if the practice continued, he would treat all cases as a claim for £160 and therefore a penalty and unenforceable in law it is hereby declared (…) the claim is struck out and declared to be wholly without merit and an abuse of process.”  7.6 In Claim Nos. F0DP806M and F0DP201T, District Judge Taylor echoed earlier General Judgment or Orders of District Judge Grand, stating ''It is ordered that the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverabl15e under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in Parking Eye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4)) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998...''  7.7 In the persuasive case of G4QZ465V - Excel Parking Services Ltd v Wilkinson – Bradford County Court -2 July 2020 (Exhibit 4) the judge had decided that Excel had won. However, due to Excel adding on the £60 the Judge dismissed the case.  7.8        The addition of costs not previously specified on signage are also in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, specifically paras 6, 10 and 14.   7.9        It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant in this case has knowingly submitted inflated costs and thus the entire claim should be similarly struck out in accordance with Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4).   In Conclusion   8.1        I invite the court to dismiss the claim.  Statement of Truth  I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.   
    • Well the difference is that in all our other cases It was Kev who was trying to entrap the motorist so sticking two fingers up to him and daring him to try court was from a position of strength. In your case, sorry, you made a mistake so you're not in the position of strength.  I've looked on Google Maps and the signs are few & far between as per Kev's MO, but there is an entrance sign saying "Pay & Display" (and you've admitted in writing that you knew you had to pay) and the signs by the payment machines do say "Sea View Car Park" (and you've admitted in writing you paid the wrong car park ... and maybe outed yourself as the driver). Something I missed in my previous post is that the LoC is only for one ticket, not two. Sorry, but it's impossible to definitively advise what to so. Personally I'd probably gamble on Kev being a serial bottler of court and reply with a snotty letter ridiculing the signage (given you mentioned the signage in your appeal) - but it is a gamble.  
    • No! What has happened is that your pix were up-to-date: 5 hours' maximum stay and £100 PCN. The lazy solicitors have sent ancient pictures: 4 hours' maximum stay and £60 PCN. Don't let on!  Let them be hoisted by their own lazy petard in the court hearing (if they don't bottle before).
  • 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 
        • Like
      • 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

Re: Cca Request To Connaught Collections


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6039 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

Interesting thread, I am in the same boat.

 

joneshousehold mentioned earlier "T&C's are not good enough and the OFT or DTI have confirmed this so we can look for it if they persist on that line".

 

Do you have the actual text or link? I would like to have a read

 

Thanks, Monty

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Its an application form. It does seem to include the prescribed terms. Have they supplied the terms & conditions mentioned or a statement of account?

You may receive different advice to your query as people have different experiences and opinions. Please use your own judgement in deciding whose advice to take.

 

If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional. Any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability.

 

If you think I have been helpful PLEASE click the scales

 

court bundles for dummies

Link to post
Share on other sites

No signed statement of account , no creditor signature , no cancellation rights don't know if i'm supposed to have these and i thought terms and conditions were already on this application are they not right , sorry i'm a bit lost with this any and all advice gratefully received , lisa !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Copied from the CCA 1974.

 

What the agreement must contain

 

1 A heading in one of the following forms of words shown prominently on the first

page:

 

Hire-Purchase Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974

or

Conditional Sale Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974

or, in any other case,

 

Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

Where the document embodies an agreement, of which at least one part is a credit

agreement not regulated by the Act, the word ‘partly’ must be inserted before

‘regulated’ in the heading – unless the regulated and unregulated parts of the

agreement can be clearly seen to be separate.

 

2 The name and a postal address of both trader and customer.

 

3 A description (in enough detail to identify it) of any security to be provided by the

customer and a description of its subject matter. The description must be in the

main agreement but the full terms can be in a separate document referred to in

the main agreement.

 

4 Details of any default charges which the customer or a relative of his is required to

pay if he breaches the agreement.

 

5 Certain financial and related particulars (see below).

 

6 Statements of certain forms of protection and remedies provided for the customer

by the Act (see pages 12–14).

 

7 A signature box (see Appendix 2).

 

 

Point to note

In the case of regulated agreements (principal agreements) which contain the option of credit

protection insurance or other contracts relating to a guarantee of goods (subsidiary agreements)

the heading, statement of protection and remedies available to debtors under the Act, and

signature box applicable to the principal agreement may be used where these are different from

those which would be applicable to the subsidiary agreement.

 

Financial and related particulars

 

The following information must be shown together as a whole and not interspersed with

any other information, apart from cross-references to terms of the agreement and subtotals

of the total amounts.

 

 

1 In the case of agreements for fixed-sum credit where the money must be spent on

specified goods, land or services, a list or description of the items, together with

their cash price. Where there is more than one list or description of the items to be

bought with the credit, the cash price of each must be shown, together with the

total cash price. For instance: ‘mahogany dining room suite, six chairs and one

table, £1,500; colour TV £298; total cash price £1,798’. Where there is more than

one list or description, the cash prices and descriptions can be shown in a

schedule to the agreement, provided that the agreement itself refers to the

schedule and states the total cash price.

 

Points to note

The cash price is the price at which the seller would be prepared to sell to a buyer for cash.

It excludes any credit charges and is net of any discount offered to the customer.

‘Specified goods’ etc means goods agreed upon before the agreement is made. Thus these

are specified goods for a hire-purchase agreement but not, for example, for a trading check.

 

2 The amount and nature of any advance payment. This includes a deposit, any

amount allowed in part exchange, and any other payment the customer has to

make before being provided with credit or before entering into the agreement.

 

3 The amount of credit to be provided under a fixed-sum agreement (for example, a

cash loan) or particulars of the credit limit under a running-account agreement (for

example, a credit card).

The credit limit can be expressed as:

a a sum of money, or

b a statement that the trader will, under the agreement, periodically determine

the credit limit and notify the customer, or

c a sum of money together with a statement that the trader may, under the

agreement, periodically vary the credit limit and notify the customer, or

d if (a) (b) or © above are not appropriate either a statement indicating how the

credit limit will be determined and notified to the customer or a statement that

there is no credit limit.

Point to note

Under a fixed-sum agreement where the credit must be spent on specified goods, land or

services, the amount of credit will be the total cash price less any advance payments. If

there are no advance payments, nor any charges for credit under such an agreement, the

amount of credit (which will be the same as the total cash price) need not be shown.

 

4 The total charge for credit and the total amount payable by the customer in the case

of most fixed-sum agreements. The exceptions are given in the ‘points to note’

below. Charges payable by the customer that form part of the total charge for credit

are explained in the booklet Credit charges and APR (see page 35). The total

amount payable is the sum of the amount of credit provided under the agreement,

the total charge for credit and any advance payments. If either the total charge for

credit or the total amount payable cannot be precisely calculated, an estimate can

be shown – provided that this and any assumptions made in the estimate are stated.

 

Points to note

Point 4 does not apply to fixed-sum agreements where:

$ the credit must be spent on specified goods or services, and

$ the total amount payable is not more than the total cash price (that is, there are no

credit charges).

Nor does it apply to fixed-sum agreements under which the timing and/or amounts of

repayments of credit are not specified, or the total amount payable can vary according to

any formula specified in the agreement (including the level of any index, for example the

house price index), or the amount or rate of any credit charge can vary (whether in

accordance with the level of an index, for example, bank base rate or otherwise). In these

cases, the details of interest and other charges to be shown are the same as those required

for running-account agreements.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Regards

BigAndy

The Grand essentials of happiness are: something to do, something to love, and something to hope for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well I can't see 3 and 4 anywhere on it, the default charges or security bits , but does what you have said above combined with no signature from them and heading mean it is unenforceable then ? and do any of the rest of that mean anything to me , sorry to be so thick just trying really hard to get my head round all the info needed !

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion Yes. It does not contain the correct heading etc. But I stand to be corrected by those with more knowledge on here :D

The Grand essentials of happiness are: something to do, something to love, and something to hope for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

just had advice from someone who said it does not have a heading anywhere on it stating consumer credit act 1974 just application form , also no penalty terms or default charges and no cancellation rights ever received no signature and just one other thing the a/c no that 1st credit have is different to the one that citi have is this relevant ? p.s on the above i am only quoting anothers opinion in the hope that the more opinions i have the better informed i will be not trying to correct or offend anyone !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi all , still not heard from their solicitors do you think I won't until they try to take me to court , and also any advice on the above much appreciated , still waiting for S.A.R from citi too so everything on hold at minute , but i'd like to thank everyone for all the help i have had so far this really is an amazing site , cheers lisa

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

What did I put in a post in this thread :? that offended so that it has been unapproved????:? :? :? Which post has been removed????:?

You may receive different advice to your query as people have different experiences and opinions. Please use your own judgement in deciding whose advice to take.

 

If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional. Any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability.

 

If you think I have been helpful PLEASE click the scales

 

court bundles for dummies

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...