Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • You can counter a Judges's question on why you didn't respond by pointing out that any company that charges you with stopping at a zebra crossing is likely to be of a criminal mentality and so unlikely to cancel the PCN plus you didn't want to give away any knowledge you had at that time that could allow them to counteract your claim if it went to Court. There are many ways in which you can see off their stupid claim-you will see them in other threads  where our members have been caught by Met at other airports as well as Bristol.  Time and again they take motorists to Court for "NO Stopping" apparently completely forgetting that the have lost doing that because no stopping is prohibitory and cannot form a contract. Yet they keep on issuing PCNs because so many people just pay up . Crazy . You can see what chuckleheads they are when you read their Claim form which is pursuing you as the driver or the keeper. they don't seem to understand that on airport land because of the Bye laws, the keeper is never liable.   
    • luckily like this thread VCS/DCB(L) PCN spycar capture - PAPLOC Now claimform - no Stopping in Restricted Zone - Bristol Airport ***Claim Dismissed*** - Page 4 - Private Land Parking Enforcement - Consumer Action Group although no on the crossing, same applies to you so WS time. there are numerous threads here on pedestrian crossing claimforms by VCS at Bristol and at other airports so use our enhanced google searchbox and find them. really a bad idea to vanish for SIX months and not been have reading up here.....................  
    • Not at all.  The onus is on them to ensure that their invoice respects the provisions of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to establish keeper liability.  Which it can't as the area is covered by bye-laws. Spot on. Irrelevant as to whether you entered into a contract with VCS to pay them £100 if you didn't obey what was written on their silly signs. Who cares?  What about their ridiculous generic Particulars of Claim where they deliberately mix up driver and keeper. And where do they mention this?  You haven't shown us anything. Of course you have to prepare a Witness Statement and you'd better get on with it. This is the problem here - you've disappeared for months & months, haven't kept us updated and presumably haven't read other VCS threads.  That needs to change - now. Otherwise you will lose - simple as that. For a start - please upload the court order which fixes the hearing date plus plus where "VCS mentioned my initial defence was generic and clearly copied from the internet".  We're not mind readers.
    • New bank notes featuring King Charles III will enter circulation for the first time today - here are the codes of the very first printed.View the full article
  • 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

walton v rbos


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4884 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 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Oh dear indeed!!

 

Come on guys, bang some comments on the website

 

David

 

PS I think you just hit that one into the stands!! Shot sir.

 

Methinks there will be lots of comments.

 

Make sure there's links everywhere guys.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

ops lets see them try and explain them selves now.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

.....but didn't RBSs Lawters claim in a witness statement submitted into court that all my accounts were accurate and upto date, but confirmed earlier to my MP - "Mr Walton's accounts had been set up incorrectly".

 

I'm not a lawyer but that reeks of intentialy misleading the court.

 

Oh Dear Oh Dear!

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent. What are they going to do now? :D

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

ummmmmmmmmmmmm.......

 

 

Media Centre

 

Contact Media Relations

 

 

 

Media Relations can only deal with calls from journalists. If you have any concerns about an aspect of our service please first contact your local branch. If you still have concerns please contact our Customer Relations Unit on xxxxxxxxxxxxx if you are a customer of The Royal Bank of Scotland or xxxxxxxxxxxxx if you are a NatWest customer. For general enquiries, please call the main switchboard on xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

The Royal Bank of Scotland and NatWest media centre is open from 08:30 to 18:00 Monday to Friday. For out-of-hours media enquiries please call xxxxxxxxxxxxxx for the duty press officer.

:cool: sunbathing in juan les pins de temps en temps

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are any of the TV news channels going to pick this up?

 

HAK

 

It's been covered in most of the Sunday paper reviews.

 

I saw it being mentioned early on in The Andrew Marr Show this morning, if anyone would like to iPlayer that program.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Be nice if Inland Revenue & Customs picked it up.

 

10 phoney accounts like this @ 100k unrecoverable balance = £1,000,000 write off for taxation purposes. Put money down it's the tip of the iceberg.

 

Wonder how many other institutions copied the RBS [problem], (If indeed it was RBS who dreamt it up to start with).

 

As RBS can't seem to explain to the press for what 'internal accounting' purposes these accounts actually serve, mabey the above should be asking the questions.

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you remind us all Paul how yourself and others got hold of this info in the first place?

 

Was it in response to a standard SAR, or was it pursued through the courts or ICO ?

 

Apart from how dumb they were to carry out such practices, I can't believe how dumb they were to actually reveal it all !!

 

.... Some heads are really going to roll over this !!

All opinions and advice I offer are purely my own, and are offered without any liability. If unsure seek the help of a licensed professional

...just because something's in print doesn't mean its true.... just look at you Banks T&C's for example !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Be nice if Inland Revenue & Customs picked it up.

 

10 phoney accounts like this @ 100k unrecoverable balance = £1,000,000 write off for taxation purposes. Put money down it's the tip of the iceberg.

 

Wonder how many other institutions copied the RBS [problem], (If indeed it was RBS who dreamt it up to start with).

 

As RBS can't seem to explain to the press for what 'internal accounting' purposes these accounts actually serve, mabey the above should be asking the questions.

 

David

 

Maybe HMR&C as well as shareholders.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you remind us all Paul how yourself and others got hold of this info in the first place?

 

Was it in response to a standard Subject Access Request, or was it pursued through the courts or Information Commissioners Office ?

 

Apart from how dumb they were to carry out such practices, I can't believe how dumb they were to actually reveal it all !!

 

.... Some heads are really going to roll over this !!

 

RBSs deceit was exposed after they responded to a standard Subject Access Request and CCA request. It is my understanding that this creative activity was widespread in the nineties.

 

 

I will be forwarding a letter to RBSs lawyers this week to seek clarification that the witness statement they submitted into court confirming that all my accounts are accurate and up to date was correct.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Be nice if Inland Revenue & Customs picked it up.

 

10 phoney accounts like this @ 100k unrecoverable balance = £1,000,000 write off for taxation purposes. Put money down it's the tip of the iceberg.

 

Wonder how many other institutions copied the RBS [problem], (If indeed it was RBS who dreamt it up to start with).

 

As RBS can't seem to explain to the press for what 'internal accounting' purposes these accounts actually serve, mabey the above should be asking the questions.

 

David

 

Yes, this is what was discussed on The AM Show - they were talking about how this type of behaviour has resulted in the credit crunch, because the likes of RBS are clearly using accounting techniques to "create" debts that the company relies on, then using those debts to chase debtors, resulting in negative equities all over the place.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be forwarding a letter to RBSs lawyers this week to seek clarification that the witness statement they submitted into court confirming that all my accounts are accurate and up to date was correct.

 

Paul

 

It may be useful to print off the articles from the ST and include those in your letter, Paul.

 

I'd love to be a fly on the wall when that particular time bomb is opened...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had asked the Inland Revenue questions about these router accounts some 9 months or so ago.......they had never heard of them.......I also asked as to how an account (mine in particular could have TWO book debts),,they were not aware of either and couldn't answer the questions ...but also said they could only act if the treasury asked them to..............I had made the Prime minister aware of the facts 12 months ago and the Treasury..............Action taken ......none.

 

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, this is what was discussed on The AM Show - they were talking about how this type of behaviour has resulted in the credit crunch, because the likes of RBS are clearly using accounting techniques to "create" debts that the company relies on, then using those debts to chase debtors, resulting in negative equities all over the place.

 

A debt being an asset when it comes onto the balance sheet.

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

The way that I understand it is that an unsecured OVERDRAFT on a CURRENT account is shown as a LIABILITY on the banks balance sheet, but an unsecured LOAN account is shown as an ASSET.

 

We believe this is why our accounts were changed from 'Current' to 'Loan' accounts without our knowledge.

 

D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...