Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hikertrash
      MET CCTV PNC - Starbucks closed- Southgate Park, Stansted CM24 1PY

      By Hikertrash · Posted

      Many thanks for the replies and advice!   I what to send this email to the Starbucks CEO and the area manager. Your thoughts would be appreciated.   [email protected] [email protected]   Re: MET Parking PNC at your Starbucks Southgate site   Dear Ms Rayner, / Dear Heather Christie,   I have received a Notice to Keeper regarding a Parking Charge Notice of £100 for the driver parking in the Southgate Park Car Park, otherwise infamously known as the Stanstead Starbucks/McDonalds car park(s).   Issued by: MET Parking Services Ltd Parking Charge Notice Number: XXXXXXXXX Vehicle Registration Number: XXXX XXX Date of Contravention: XX.XX.XXXX Time: XX:XX - XX:XX   After a little research it apears that the driver is not alone in being caught in what is commonly described as a scam, and has featured in the national press and on the mainstream television.   It is a shame that the reputation of Starbucks is being tarnished by this, with your customers leaving the lowest possible reviews on Trustpilot and Trip Advisor at this location, and to be associated with what on the face of it appears to be a doubious and predatory car park management company.   In this instance, during the early hours of the morning the driver required a coffee and parked up outside Starbucks with the intention of purchasing one from yourselves. Unfortunately, you were closed so the driver walked to McDonalds next door and ordered a coffee, and for this I have received the Notice to Keeper.   It is claimed that the car park is two separate car parks (Starbucks/McDonalds). However, there is no barrier or road markings to identity a boundary, and the signage in the car park(s) and outside your property is ambiguous, as such the terms would most likely be deemed unfair and unenforcable under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   I understand that Starbucks-Euro Garages neither operate or benefit from the charges imposed by MET Parking. However, MET Parking is your client.   Additionally, I understand that the charge amount of £100 had previously been upheld in court due to a ‘legitimate interest in making sure that a car park was run as efficiently as possible to benefit other drivers as well as the local stores, keeping cars from overstaying’.   However, this is not applicable when the shop or store is closed (as was the case here), as there is no legitimate interest. Therefore, the amount demanded is a penalty and is punitive, again contravening the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   As the driver’s intention of the visit was genuine, I would be grateful if you could please instruct your client to cancel this Notice to Keeper/Parking Charge Notice.   Kind regards
    • benawhile
      Extra headrest: Do I have to declare this safety mod?

      By benawhile · Posted

      I received the promised call back from the Saga man today who informed me that the undertakers have decreed it IS a modification and they will need to recalculate a quote individually for me. However it all sounds very arbitrary. The more I think about it, and with help from forum replies, the more I am sure that it is not a modification. If for example the original seatback had become damaged by a spillage or a tear, I would be entitled to replace it with the nearest available part. The problem is when it comes to a payout after an accident, there is no telling what an individual insurer will decide when he notices the change. I am still undecided which of the two best routes to go with, either don't mention the replacement at all, or fill in the quote form without mentioning, and when it comes to buying the insurance over the phone, mention it at the time.
    • honeybee13
      misuse of partners freedom pass

      By honeybee13 · Posted

      Please post up their letter so we understand what they've asked. You need to cover up your name and address and their reference number. HB
    • worry
      misuse of partners freedom pass

      By worry · Posted

      Hello,  I received the standard letter.  I don't understand No. 3: If this is in relation to a ticket irregularity, then if you were unable to produce a pass because you did not have it with you or if your pass was withdrawn because you were unable to produce a valid photocard to accompany it, please enclose a photocopy of the pass/photocard with your reply. Question: do i enclose my photocard? my partner's freedom pass was confiscated.
    • FTMDave
      UKPC 2x windscreen PNC's claimform - - forgot permit - appealed - res parking my own space - East Croft House, 86 Northolt Road, South Harrow, HA2 0ES - ** CASE DISMISSED **

      By FTMDave · Posted

      LFI is spot on. In fact you could sue UKPC for breach of GDPR, as UKPC knew full well right from the start that their case was hopeless.  They should never have asked for your details from the DVLA. Take some time to think if that is a road you want to go down.  

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

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

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Oh The Audacity of DG

Audreygreeneyes

By Audreygreeneyes
in HSBC Bank

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5563 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

chunkylinc

chunkylinc

Posted
Posted

Hi A..G..Eyes,

 

I hope you dont mind me crashing your thread, but I also have a prelim hearing on the 7th Aug and I've not received anything from DG, so was also going to send a copy of your letter to my court...hope you dont mind?

 

However the section of your letter which starts.... "Please find attached a copy of an order made by Lincoln County court..." and "The court considered the authority of Mullen-v-Hackney London Borough Council (1997)2 A11ER 906..."

 

Do you have a link to these at all so that i can print them out and attatch to my letter also..?

 

Good Luck with your hearing.

 

Ta Dan

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Audreygreeneyes

Audreygreeneyes

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Dan If you pm me your email addy I will send you it, or if you would rather I will copy and paste it on here so you can copy it.... and no please feel free to copy my letter, but I am doing a new one as that is the one I submitted on the 25th the day after the missed the deadline..........

 

A new one for the representations but again will post it so you can take it...........

 

Yeah good point Pete & freaky, will now copy them off and just before you ask.... hahahaha not a dicxkie bird from DG............

 

I was trawling through the FOS and HSBC stufff and it seem they have to apply for the waiver and they also have to apply for each individual stay. on the HSBC site in the small print it said it would take 20 days:)

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites
johnnymitch

johnnymitch

Posted
Posted
Are you 2 husband and wife? LOL:grin:

 

That is weird, Freaky, I asked that PD very same question on Russjo's thread last night! LOL :rolleyes: . Funny we should both come up with that within hours of each other , Eh?( Laffin )

 

Even weirder, I've just checked - it was within 17 minutes of each other!

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites
johnnymitch

johnnymitch

Posted
Posted

Bump :grin: :grin:

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites
johnnymitch

johnnymitch

Posted
Posted

Yes, Dear! ;)

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Audreygreeneyes

Audreygreeneyes

Posted
  • Author
Posted

ok here it is............ this is what I have spent all day draftingthis and printing off all my letters emails and faxes. so here is my masterpiece........

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

We write today with regards the Court Directions of the 15th May 2007 with regards the above reference number in which we can make written representations to the court with regards this claim. We do this in this letter and its enclosures

We submit that the defendant’s litigation strategy has been flagrantly abusive of the public resource, and further, contrary to almost all of the Overriding Objective’s of the Civil Procedure Rules. It is respectfully submitted that the Defendant not be allowed to continue to conduct litigation in this manner with impunity.

We would aver that if the Defendant had the serious intention of defending this claim at trial, as is indicated by its defence, then it is incumbent upon the defendant to comply with the directions and requests of the court and deadlines thereby set.

It would be most unfortunate if HSBC were allowed to manipulate the system any further. It would seem the equitable ruling to disallow the defence and the granting of a stay should the defendant apply for one, when the defendant has done absolutely nothing to reach a resolution on this matter over the past months rather than to reward such lack of regard for the court and the claimant with a stay of any sort.

The defendant has already had more than enough time to move this case forward and it is believed that the defendant has purposefully stalled in this case.

The defendant has had several opportunities to move this case forward: this is supported by the letters, faxes and emails the claimant has sent to the defendant. Copies of these are included for your review.

The claimant believes the defendant has settled many similar claims in a much shorter period and given there were two options in the order of the 15.05.2007 and they failed to inform the courts and ourselves of their intentions by the due deadline they have waived all and any right to defend or stay this claim.

We also believe that the defendant has also behaved in an unreasonable manner by failure to respond to the claimant’s letters, faces and emails, failure to negotiate prior to the court hearing.

We ask the court to award judgement in our favour given the exhaustive lengths we have gone to in order to resolve this issue without the courts involvement and the defendant’s blatant refusal to adhere with the court order of the 15th May 2007.

Yours Sincerely

now I have checked it thrice times over but my eyes are shot now but am sure Uncle Pete and Big bro Freaky will point any tying erros I have made...............lol

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites
freakyleaky

freakyleaky

Posted
Posted

Spelling is spot on! I hate to say! :)

 

But what about the presentation? Would it not look better and more professional like this:-

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

We write today with regards the Court Directions of the 15th May 2007 with regards the above reference number in which we can make written representations to the court with regards this claim. We do this in this letter and its enclosures

We submit that the defendant’s litigation strategy has been flagrantly abusive of the public resource, and further, contrary to almost all of the Overriding Objective’s of the Civil Procedure Rules. It is respectfully submitted that the Defendant not be allowed to continue to conduct litigation in this manner with impunity.

 

We would aver that if the Defendant had the serious intention of defending this claim at trial, as is indicated by its defence, then it is incumbent upon the defendant to comply with the directions and requests of the court and deadlines thereby set.

 

 

It would be most unfortunate if HSBC were allowed to manipulate the system any further. It would seem the equitable ruling to disallow the defence and the granting of a stay should the defendant apply for one, when the defendant has done absolutely nothing to reach a resolution on this matter over the past months rather than to reward such lack of regard for the court and the claimant with a stay of any sort.

 

The defendant has already had more than enough time to move this case forward and it is believed that the defendant has purposefully stalled in this case.

 

The defendant has had several opportunities to move this case forward: this is supported by the letters, faxes and emails the claimant has sent to the defendant. Copies of these are included for your review.

 

The claimant believes the defendant has settled many similar claims in a much shorter period and given there were two options in the order of the 15.05.2007 and they failed to inform the courts and ourselves of their intentions by the due deadline they have waived all and any right to defend or stay this claim.

 

 

We also believe that the defendant has also behaved in an unreasonable manner by failure to respond to the claimant’s letters, faces and emails, failure to negotiate prior to the court hearing.

 

We ask the court to award judgement in our favour given the exhaustive lengths we have gone to in order to resolve this issue without the courts involvement and the defendant’s blatant refusal to adhere with the court order of the 15th May 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites
johnnymitch

johnnymitch

Posted
Posted

Hi Auburn, just one little point - last para - I think it's 'adhere to' not 'adhere with'.

 

Sorry if that sounds pedantic - just had to get one over on Freaky LOL :p

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...