Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)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; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
  • 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

Just reached the Small Claims point


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5891 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

Wise words indeed from you Barty, as I have received in the post yesterday a court date of 22nd August.

 

Just finalising the bundle now and will deliver the courts copy by hand at lunchtime and the bank's copy will go in the post.

 

Am I right in assuming that this thread GOT A COURT DATE? Important, please read...... is the latest regarding bundle contents?

 

Thanks again for helping me to 'keep the faith'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

OK - today is 14 days before my court hearing. This is the day by which both myself as claimant and LTSB as defendant were asked to provide documents to the court that we would rely on in court.

 

I put my documents in over a week ago. Did I read somewhere that the defence could be struck out if the Donkey doesn't provide documents? :rolleyes: If so, is it simply a question of phoning the court and asking them to do this or is there a template somewhere that would help?

 

Grateful for any help that anyone can provide.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks once again Barty.

 

Checked with the court, who have confirmed receipt of my documents but that nothing has been received from the Donkey.

 

They are advising me that despite some cases now being stayed, the Judge in my local court is proceeding with all hearings that had been given a court date, so I guess that all I now need to do is turn up on 22nd and see what happens. In the meantime, I will send the letter from the link that you have posted above. Should I include that in the documents that I take to court, although it wasn't (obviously) in the bundle that I submitted and if so should I cc it to the court?

 

Finally, does anyone fancy attending a court hearing on August 22nd with me!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks once again Barty.

 

Checked with the court, who have confirmed receipt of my documents but that nothing has been received from the Donkey.

 

They are advising me that despite some cases now being stayed, the Judge in my local court is proceeding with all hearings that had been given a court date, so I guess that all I now need to do is turn up on 22nd and see what happens. In the meantime, I will send the letter from the link that you have posted above. Should I include that in the documents that I take to court, although it wasn't (obviously) in the bundle that I submitted and if so should I cc it to the court?

 

Finally, does anyone fancy attending a court hearing on August 22nd with me!

 

I would, but mine is the 22nd too! Not at your court though, I wouldn't think.

Please note that I am not a legal expert and all advice given is without prejudice and is purely my opinion only.

 

** Nationwide - £1821.15-PAID IN FULL - Aug 06 **

** Halifax Mortgage -£390 - PAID IN FULL - Nov 06 **

Lloyds TSB - MCOL issued 09/03/07 - £2953 + costs - ON HOLD....

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Last throw of the dice today!

 

Am delivering to the Court at lunchtime the second 'non-compliance' letter referred to in the 8th August post above from Barty, to try and get the defence struck out.

 

It seems unlikely that this will happen so I'm bracing myself for a court appearance next Wednesday now. :mad:

 

Does any have, or has seen, any 'stay objections'. I've seen them mentioned in posts but can't find them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Countdown to court! 5 days and counting!!

 

I've done everything asked of me by the courts. Replied to all their letters, submitted bundle, requested that LTSB provide me with their defence (not received) and copied the request to the court (as advised in post 53 above), subsequently advised the court that LTSB still haven't sent their defence i.e. complied with the court's direction etc (also as advised in post 53 above).

 

Is it worth my while ringing the court to ask if they have or are planning to strike out the Donkey's defence as they haven't complied with any of the court's orders or will that antagonise the judge? I feel sure now that the bank will turn up next Wednesday and ask for a stay, and although I have my stay objections all ready, it doesn't seem right that they can simply turn up having not complied at all at any stage with the instructions of the court and possibly get the case delayed indefinitely?

 

Any further advice that anyone can give on this would be welcomed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You might want to have look at this post where Barclays turned up on the day and requested a stay:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclays-bank/110863-sarahapples-barclays-16-8-a-2.html?highlight=sarahapples#post1082140

 

It was refused on the grounds that they had not submitted a formal application.

 

HTH

 

Zoot

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just come back from the Court.

 

8 people were there claiming against 4 different banks (LTSB, Barclays, HSBC, A&L). Three of the banks sent representation. The fourth (A&L) didn't but had sent a letter requesting a stay.

 

The LTSB bloke came up to me and said that he would be requesting a stay. I told him that I would be objecting to it. He tried to suggest that would extend proceedings but I told him that was OK with me.

 

Then we were advised that we would all be going in to the court together, which I knew was going to mean bad news. Once in there, the judge rambled on about the OFT case for a while and then said that in view of that case he would be staying all cases if the banks had requested one (which they had) and if no one objected.

 

I stated that I objected to a stay, followed by others, but he wouldn't budge or let me state reasons for my objection, and after a bit more rambling ordered a stay for all the cases.

 

My questions are:

1) Whay make us all turn up at court if this was what was going to happen anyway;

2) Why did we all have to go in together;

3) Why wasn't I allowed to formally state my objections to a stay.

 

This has all appeared to be a large waste of my time now. I followed the directions of the court to the letter, when the Donkey did nothing that it was asked. Apart from all the time and resource taken in my preparations before today, I've had to take two hours away from work, and all to no avail.

 

Understandably I'm disillusioned with the whole thing. WHoever said "the law is an ass" was spot on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I'm interested to have received a couple of recent communications from the Donkey and First Direct.

 

Both are claiming to be "shaking up" the current account market by offering new deals. FD is offering no interest on a current account market but an automatic sweep into a higher interest account, plus interest-free overdrafts up to £250 etc. LTSB are restructuring their charging regime to - allegedly - mean that we as their loyal customers will pay less in charges in future.

 

Is this all an effort to show that they're not as bad as all that when the court case arrives? Will the court fall for this tactic, resulting in the court case coming down in favour of the banks and none of us with outstanding cases receiving a penny back? Or does it indicate that they realise that they were in the wrong all along, in which case shouldn't we be pursuing this underhand tactic to highlight what they are trying to do to all concerned?

 

This delay until the court case in January seems only to have benefitted the banks in allowing them time to get their houses in order.

 

Any comments from anyone?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then we were advised that we would all be going in to the court together, which I knew was going to mean bad news. Once in there, the judge rambled on about the OFT case for a while and then said that in view of that case he would be staying all cases if the banks had requested one (which they had) and if no one objected.

 

I stated that I objected to a stay, followed by others, but he wouldn't budge or let me state reasons for my objection, and after a bit more rambling ordered a stay for all the cases.

Sorry to hear that. Its the way most cases are going, unfortunately. Which judge was it please?

LTSB are restructuring their charging regime to - allegedly - mean that we as their loyal customers will pay less in charges in future.

 

Any comments from anyone?

IMO the restructuring is basically an attempt to a) influance public opinion - they are going out of their way to tell you how nice they are and how much they want to help you avoid being charged, blah, de blah, de blah, but more importantly, b), the intention is to present the charges as 'core term' - I.e the price for a genuine service which is part of the core bargain of the contract, which if successful would mean that the charges fall outside of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations. This is why they've got rid of the higher overdraft rate and any references to 'unauthorised' overdrawing or any hint of the charges being punitive or as a result of a breach. You are now completely free to go over the OD "zone" if you wish, but they will sting you for providing the "service" if you do!!!!:-x

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 H,

 

It was District Judge Carron, who up to that point I had the impression was more on our side than the banks' but now I'm not so sure.

 

Totally agree with you regarding the real reasons for the banks recent behaviour. My concern would be that, come the OFT case in January, the courts will see this as the banks being reasonable and completely forget about what's gone before. :-x I'm less certain than ever that I'll get anything out of this now, but will wait and see.

 

Are there any plans for CAG or Martin Lewis to elevate this into the public awareness to ensure that this attempt by the banks is highlighted for the sham that it is?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Hi All,

 

been a while since I posted last but was so brassed off with the whole thing that I decided to lay low until the OFT court case started.

 

Anyone got an update on things? I haven't heard anything since the hearing started.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Fantastic news from the Courts this morning!

 

My stomach's been churning since I woke up.

 

Regardless of the fact that this doesn't necessarily mean anyone will get a payout any time soon, it surely marks the beginning of the end for the banks' main argument.

 

Best news I've heard since my case was stayed last August.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...