Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi folks, The keeper received correspondence today from DCBL.  The keeper has received previous correspondence from (Possibly) Parking Eye and Debt Recovery Plus, all of which has been ignored with zero contact with either company. The keeper has moved house twice since the original PCN but has kept DVLA informed of every move and V5 updated accordingly. The driver recalls entering the car park but didn't see any signs indicating payment required. The drivers friend happened to be in the same car park a few days after original PCN was received. Friend is a truck driver and said there is a sign but at truck windscreen height. Driver was in a small vehicle and, due to being careful as to where they were driving, did not see the sign. Original paperwork has been lost while moving but keeper still has scans of paperwork from Debt Recovery Plus. Driver was on site for approximately one hour after a long drive and was resting. After having read previous cases on here, is it still safe to ignore? 1 Date of the infringement 15th September 2020   2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] Unsure    3 Date received A/A 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] A/A 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Driver recalls there was a screenshot of the reg plate, but it wasn’t a very good one.  6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No.   Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up A/A  7 Who is the parking company? Parking Eye?   8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] MFG ESSO Cobham Gravesend  DCBL 30:04:24 Redacted.pdf
    • Hi all, hope you can help. I've received a £4k repair estimate from the main dealer after my 2016 F30 330e developed the dreaded drivetrain error. The qoute is for a replacement cell module and associated labour and various bits and bobs to get it done. I initially had them investigate the issue when it first popped up a year ago. They replaced the auxillary battery which 'fixed' the issue for a few months before returning. Last Novemner the issue escalated to 'Battery not charging' which would clear after powering off the car , and disappear. Took it into the dealer and they diagnoised a faulty high voltage battery under the boot but could not do any work as they needed to schedule more cars for this 'specialist high voltage work'. So they said I could continue to drive the car until they got in touch when the car could be booked in for repairs. Roll on to April, the issue became severe (battery not charging error not going away, car in limp mode one morning) and car completly died at a traffic light same day (dashboard flashing all over the place), couldnt engage in 'Drive' and had to be recovered by AA to the dealer. Turns out car was now only running on the 12v battery in the boot and that had run flat as the hybrid function had stopped working altogether. My question is whether this is a reasonable estimate. Could this be done cheaper elsewhere? The dealer has servived this car from new hence took it them in the hope they'd not point fingers at any other party. Should I be paying for this at all since I raised the issue with them before it escalted and resulted in a now expensive fault? I also suspect the KLE may have gone too based on other posts, but the dealer hasnt qouted for that yet. I worry they'll' 'discover' that after I've already shelled out for a new cell module and end up lumbered with another bill to replace the KLE. Feels like I know about what they need to do than they do. The Service Advisor has been completely useless. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
    • The Petrol Station is Shell Garage Wickham (Hampshire ) Another person obviously had the same issue as they had called the garage previously-
    • Thanks Dave, that all sounds clear to me. In terms of avoiding PCNs, I'm not sure if I can. I need to be able to park in that spot, especially as I've got kids to lug forth and back for the school run. Likewise it's not always possible to use the MA's permit system either, as I've not always got them to hand. So, if I'm actively avoiding PCNs, then it could mean I've given in to their idiotic rules. But, I do get what you're saying, as I imagine the risks go up if they claim there are multiple PCNs to be paid at court. Not sure what to do with this one.
  • 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

Burglary, are work tools covered?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6173 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

My daughter and son in law were burgled Saturday night, they have only lived in the house two weeks ( they had changed the locks ). My son in law unloads his work tools from his van each day after work. They took five power tools value £1600, when they contacted their insurance company today, they were told work tools are not included. This seems very unfair, it's the first claim they have ever made and been with the same company five years, and after all the tools are his property, how can they say they are not covered?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is probably correct, however, the policy wording would need to be looked at to make a definitive answer.

 

Your son in law should have really had his own material damage / property cover under the business.

 

Has he spoke to his employers? There might be cover under the business policy?

 

With regards to it not being fair - work tools (hilti, snap on, etc) are far more expensive then black and decker, etc. and if the insurers were to cover these then the premiums would rise significantly.

Abbey - owed £3260 - Paid up.

 

Barclays owed £2500 - Paid up.

 

Halifax, Mint & Egg - next on the hit list

 

Dont click on the scales - I'm quite proud of my little red dot! - As the little red dot has gone - click away!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, they should be under a business Policy as a specified item including cover away from the main premises. Generally such items are regarded as theft attractive and carry high premiums and policy terms regarding storage/security.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your replies.

 

My son in law is a self employed carpenter, and has public liability insurance, and I know the tools are covered when they are in his van. He took them into the house as he did not want his van broken into.

 

They are all site tools so yes they are more expensive. I suppose the **** who did it will flog them on Ebay or some car boot sale. Its the second nail gun his had to replace, the last one was stolen from his van while working on site, hence the new insurance. That was a couple of weeks ago. Also they are only two weeks into living in the house they just bought plus five weeks from their first baby being born, so it could not have happened at a worse time for them financially.

 

He says he can not understand how someone could steel a man tools and his living, I said these **** bags would steel money from their own mothers purse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Val very sorry to hear about the theft.

 

Are you sure your son-in-law has cover for tools whilst in his van? Most tradesmans' policies that include cover for tools specifically exclude losses from unattended vehicles/overnight cover. If he has definitely got cover for them in the van this would suggest he's got a very comprehensive 'trade all risks' section - this should cover them whilst stored in the home subject to the usual 'forcible & violent entry/exit' condition (i.e. there must be evidence to show that there has been a break in). In this case it would be worth looking at his tradesmans' policy again.

 

Hope this helps! :)

WOOLWICH -S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 03/03/07 :cool:

LBA sent for non-compliance with Data Protection Act 28/04/07 :mad:

 

ABBEY - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 03/03/07 8)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that majorclanger, I will get him to check that out, he said he had them covered in the van and had they been stolen from there it would have been alright.

 

It was a break in, the police attended and tried to get finger prints. They had forced a window, needless to say we have spent the last two days, securing the place, fitting dusk to dawn lights, window locks etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a horrible experience isn't it - my sympathies with you all Val, especially as it's a stressful time with their new baby, new house ,etc. I hope you manage to get something sorted out.

 

Best wishes :)

WOOLWICH -S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 03/03/07 :cool:

LBA sent for non-compliance with Data Protection Act 28/04/07 :mad:

 

ABBEY - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 03/03/07 8)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Gertie100

When the insurance was taken out was it specified that there would be high value goods on the property? (regardless of whether or not they are "work" or "business" tools)

Reason I ask is because my husbands trade is carpentry, however he is teacher. But when we took out the insurance we informed them that there was a large amount of tools in the workshop which are high value and this is noted seperately on the insurance.

 

Sympathies for situation obviously...sorry

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...