Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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

amills58 v natwest


amills58
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6088 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

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

It's entirely up to you amills. If you're happy to accept the reduced offer - you should do so. However, whilst Nat West/Cobbetts may be requesting that all claimant's cases are stayed, not all courts are granting their requests.

 

Everybody is in the same boat at the moment - please click on the links in my signature regarding the test case announcement for further information.

Can't find what you're looking for? Please have a look at Michael Browne's

A-Z Guide

*** PLEASE NOTE ***

I do not answer queries via PM. If you send me a PM, please include a link to your thread - any advice I am able to offer will be on your thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI Hedgey

 

Do you think it would be worth phoning the courts and see what they say.

Also do you think it would be worth calling good old Mr Higley to see if they will up the offer.

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Borehamwood aren't going to up any 'gesture of goodwill' offer at this stage - they simply won't be dealing with claims until the test case has been heard (everything will be pending). All they're doing is honouring 'payments' that they've already offered to claimants such as yourself.

 

You could try phoning the court to see if they're allowing bank charge cases to proceed as normal or whether they're automatically staying them.

Can't find what you're looking for? Please have a look at Michael Browne's

A-Z Guide

*** PLEASE NOTE ***

I do not answer queries via PM. If you send me a PM, please include a link to your thread - any advice I am able to offer will be on your thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi

 

looks like i'm going to loose my bank charges claim kind of, I have just recieved a letter from cobbets saying that they have applied for a stay in my case, it seems I don't have any choice but to accept their 'good will offer' of nearly £600 pounds less of what they should be.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

looks like i'm going to loose my bank charges claim kind of, I have just recieved a letter from cobbets saying that they have applied for a stay in my case, it seems I don't have any choice but to accept their 'good will offer' of nearly £600 pounds less of what they should be.....

 

You won't 'lose' your claim - it will just take longer if the court grants the stay. Cobbetts can only request the stay - they can't demand it.......... and it's up to the Judge to decide whether to grant the stay or whether to let the claim continue as normal.

 

You don't have to accept their goodwill offer at all - especially if it's for nearly £600 less than the amount you're reclaiming. You should only accept the offer if you're happy with it. Otherwise, tell them no! ;)

Can't find what you're looking for? Please have a look at Michael Browne's

A-Z Guide

*** PLEASE NOTE ***

I do not answer queries via PM. If you send me a PM, please include a link to your thread - any advice I am able to offer will be on your thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi

 

I recieved a letter from the court today saying:

 

Upon neither party attending

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT

 

1. Save as appears in this order, this action be stayed pending the final decision of the test case or further order of the court.

 

2. The defendant shall by 4.00pm 14th September 2007 or by 4.00pm 21 days from the date of this order whichever is the later serve on the claimant a copy of the particulars of claim in the test case or notify the claimant of a website.....

 

3. The defendant shall within 21 days of the final decision in the test case file at court and serve on the claimant:

(a) A case summary of not more than 500 words setting out the effect of the final decision in the test case on this action.

(b) Their proposed directions in this case.

 

4. Upon receipt of the documents set out at paragraph 3 of this order the file be referred to a district judge to consider further dirctions.

 

5. Either party may apply to vary or discarge this order, provided that any application is made in accordance with part 23 of the civil procedure rules and made on 21 days notice.

 

So do you think I should bother to apply for a lift of the stay and does it have to be via that N..... form sorry I can't remember what the form is called, or can I send the letter that is on this site.

 

My 'good will' offer will run out in about 30 days so I need to do somthing quik so I still have the option to accept that whic to hounest looks the easier option.

 

Could someone help on this thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

2. The defendant shall by 4.00pm 14th September 2007 or by 4.00pm 21 days from the date of this order whichever is the later serve on the claimant a copy of the particulars of claim in the test case or notify the claimant of a website.....

 

I haven't seen this ordered before. It''ll be interesting to see what (if any ) POC's Natwest submit.

 

can I send the letter that is on this site.

 

Paragraph 5 effectively rules this out, if you apply to have the stay set aside, you will have to use N244.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...