Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Write to the IPC complaining that UKPC have not observed the requirements of PoFA . IPC  Waterside House, Macclesfield SK10 9NR Dear IPC, I am writing to complain about a serious breach of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 by UKPCM. I feel that as it is more a breach of the Act rather than not just  complying with your Code of Practice which is why I am bypassing your operator. Should you decide to insist that I first complain to your operator, I will instead pass over my complaint to the ICO and the DVLA . My story starts with being issued a windscreen PCN on 8/3/24 which was almost immediately removed and a second  PCN was then  sent by post on 13/3/24  [deemed delivered 15/3/24] which I did not receive and had to send an sar to have that particular mess revealed later  but that is not the reason for my complaint. UKPC then sent a Keeper Liability Notice dated 12/4/24 warning me that as 28 days have now elapsed, I as keeper am now liable for the charge.  This is in direct contravention of PoFA since the keeper does not become liable to pay until the day after the original PCN is deemed to have been given which would have been 13/4/24 -a Saturday ]. Not only does it not comply with PoFA but it fails to adhere to your Code of Practice and is in breach of their agreement with the DVLA. You will be aware that this is not the first time that UKPC have fallen foul of the DVLA and presumably yourselves. I have included copies of both Notices for information. You will realise the seriousness of this situation if this is standard practice from the UKPC to all motorists or just those where windscreen tickets are involved since the Law regarding PoFA is being abused and is unfair to misguide motorists. I await your  response which I understand will usually be within a week. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I would think that should be sufficient for the IPC to cancel your PCN though  you should await comments from the Site team before sending your complaint. Don't forget to include both PCNs.  
    • Hi DX, Sorry, fell asleep as I was up all night last night writing that statement. Yes, I attached the rest of the witness statement on post 50, bottom of webpage 2. That's the important part.  It looks like the lawyer who wrote Erudio's Witness statement does not work for them any more. So, I'll have another lawyer representing instead. Not sure if I can use Andy's hearsay argument verbally if that happens.... I did not put it in writing. Apart from not sending deferral forms, my main argument is that in 2014 Erudio fixed some arrears mistake that SLC made and then in 2018 they did the same mistake, sent me confusing letters. What is the legal defence when they send you confusing material?
    • Chinese firm MineOne Partners has been ordered to sell land it owns near a US nuclear missile site.View the full article
    • That isn’t actually what the Theft Act 1968 S1 actually says, BTW. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/section/1 (1)A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it;   The difference between what you’ve said and the Act? a) intent to permanently deprive rather than  just depriving (which is why the offence of “taking without consent” was brought in for motor vehicles, as otherwise "joyriders" could say "but I intended to give it back at the end") b) dishonesty : If I honestly believed A's pen belonged to B, and took it and gave it to B - B might be found guilty of theft but I shouldn't be. 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Court Date - Have queries! Help Please?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5173 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

When is the court date (for whats now the CMC)?

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 357
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi Gary,

 

Think same as it was, 9th September. In fact yes it is, as they don't specify a different time or anything. (says on point 3 of order).

 

And what is a Case management hearing?

 

TQ,

Fzrkitten

Link to post
Share on other sites

A case management conference is like a prelim or directions hearing.

 

I definately think you should apply to set-aside the order. It seems like Lloyds have applied to have it re-allocated, although quite why is a mystery!

 

I'll post something for the application for you tomorrow.

 

Tomorrow morning you need to ring the court and find out whether or not the other party applied for the order (in other words re-allocation), or if it was made solely of the courts own motion. Also it would be good if you can ask what the situation is with the stays, whether they are being ordered or not.

 

Also, when did you recieve it? (the order, that is!)

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

Hi Gary, thanks so much. This is just a real kick in the teeth for me now, not happy!

 

Order dated 28th July, received Weds 1st August.

 

I did send both of the non-compliance letters, which at the end make suggestions but also ask for further directions - do you think he did it from that?

 

I see what you mean from sentence 4 - This order in part or in whole has been made on the application of one party without notice to another and on the courts own initiative.

 

Although I thought it was a bit cynical in point 2 - 'if the case remains defended'.

 

I wondered if the Judge thinks there's no way Lloyds will go to fast track - perhaps I'm just hoping!

 

Court opens at 10 so I'll come back to you after.

 

TQ,

Fzrkitten

Link to post
Share on other sites

RIGHT Gary, this means war!

 

Just phoned court, exceptionally helpful. Apparantly LLOYDS put in an 'ex party application', to ask for re-allocation, and the judge granted it (different judge to first order I noticed).

 

However, because I wasn't there, the time has been given for me to object/respond etc. (7 days is for me!!!).

 

The nice man said some stays are being ordered, but not on a blanket basis, more depending on the case and mainly if allocation questionnaires were submitted (not in my case). He couldn't comment on individual cases obviously.

 

Can we go to war now please? pretty please? I was all for giving up last night but this is just underhanded and sneaky now!

 

TQ,

Fzrkitten

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Gary, you are out of PM space, and I posted last post as a quick reply by mistake, so not sure if you get notification still - so just bumping last post after I spoke to the court.

Fzrkitten

Link to post
Share on other sites

See post 174 from Gary. I think, with the situation after the OFT test case, I would be inclined to request a strike out. In my opinion, Lloyds are hoping that after the re-allocation they will be able to request a stay (essentially treating it as a new court claim). Of course I may be wrong. Hopefully, Gary will be able to offer more help.

broke dave v LTSB WON £3840 2 weeks before court.

Mrs broke dave v Barclays accepted offer £355.

broke dave v LTSB (Business) Prelim stage.

broke dave v LTSB (2nd Claim) LBA stage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe the bad luck fzrkitten. :-(

I really thought your claim would have been struck out in your favour by now.

I have never heard of a claim being re-allocated. Surely if it goes to fast track then they are delaying the point of disclosure then strike out for non compliance anyway? :confused: Then are they going to put a stay on it?

Fingers crossed GaryH can give you help on this.

Night Owl

Keep up the fight against Bank Charges.

 

 

Got Debt problems?

Don't panic, put the kettle on and read this

 

:-) Everything I write comes from my heart and head! The large filling cabinet that is my knowledge of life, however warped that may be!! :-)

 

<<< Please tickle my star!! if I have managed to help you or just made you chuckle!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Christina,

Where have you been?

Have a look here:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/announcement.php?f=11&a=108

broke dave v LTSB WON £3840 2 weeks before court.

Mrs broke dave v Barclays accepted offer £355.

broke dave v LTSB (Business) Prelim stage.

broke dave v LTSB (2nd Claim) LBA stage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys and gals.

 

Am taking Gary's advice, waiting as he's helping me write something to send to the court. Only got 3 or 4 days to get something in if they count weekends like we do! Received the new order yesterday. It was a different judge to first one, can't believe how sneaky lloyds were though. Especially after they should have been defaulted and struck out. I was away last week when ChristinaJP entered for judgement, otherwise mine should have been the same, but guess it still would have crossed with lloyds request.

 

Don't want to pester too much for advice, feel a bit of a burden at mo. Know everyone is spread so thinly, but appreciate all help and just people being there.

 

x

Fzrkitten

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gary - you still with me? I'm a panic merchant, sorry!

No worries - I'm on it now.:)

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

Thanks v much. Do you want me to get anything else together - is it worth including stuff like Mullen v Hackney and List of settled cases, and the Lincoln order? And would my personal letter help do you think - or hinder (I can pm it you if you want). It's already in my bundle anyway. And do I need to include my spreadsheet again?

 

With the N244 form, is that just for setting aside stays, or will it be ok for them getting re-allocation? I've got the instructions on completing it.

 

Sorry, too many questions!

 

I just realise that if I can't get this thing won now, then I'm stuffed for a while really I guess.

 

No pressure eh! :grin:

Fzrkitten

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you can gather the settled cases and Mullen v Hackney, although the application will predominantly be to set-aside the order for re-allocation.

 

Was there an AQ? If so, give the court another ring and see what track SC&M requested on it.

 

I'm doing the N244 for you now.

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

Hi,

 

No, I had no Allocation questionnaire. Lloyds just put in that 'ex party' thing, and it had been re-allocated to Fast Track as the directions I typed up here previously. Court confirmed Lloyds had put it in. It was dated 28th and I got it 1st Aug.

 

Did you say we were applying for strike out as well? Lloyds were well past deadlines for everything, submitted no bundle, and didn't comply at all. Sent both non-compliance letters and should have been able to apply for judgement last week, but it would have crossed with their sneaky request and I was on hol.

 

Christina - Nightmare! only just seen your post here, sorry. Can they do that after you got judgement?

Fzrkitten

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, we'll request a strike out, but thats secondary. If we made that the primary purpose of the application then a hearing would be called and in view of the fact you're now in the fast track then if you were unsuccessful you'd be liable for costs.

 

We'll apply for the order of re-allocation to be set-aside and request that the defendant is allowed a further 7 days to comply with the original order. Which they won't, which means they'll be struck out anyway.

 

How many of the charges were unpaid items, roughly?

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

Oh, and which judge made the order? Waterworth, by any chance?

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

How many of the charges were unpaid items, roughly?

 

Do you want me to email you my spreadsheet - I don't quite get this question - there's a LOT of charges for dd's returned etc, but probably equally or more for going over my 0 limit and getting charged for it - do you want to see?

 

Judge Downton this time, previous order I think was Lynch.

Fzrkitten

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...