PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

1107 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

bama
Posted on: Mon, 20 Aug 2018 - 10:33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


I think the remedy is in Tort.
I don't have access to a full set of Atkins though sad.gif
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1409528 · Replies: 35 · Views: 999

bama
Posted on: Sat, 18 Aug 2018 - 12:39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


QUOTE
they have done it perfectly


if the OP knows this then I see no need for their other questions

(plus it would be pretty rare for a PE case for it to be true).
Haven't PE just been sold.....
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1409093 · Replies: 35 · Views: 999

bama
Posted on: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 - 18:36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


did you have a solicitor represent you ?
if not was this your first time in court.

expecting detail advice on miving forward with showing all relevant paperwork - including the truro judgment may be expecting a lot. you post doesn't give all rthe facts needed, only the paper trail can do that.
did at least 75% of the residents agree to the parking scheme ?
yes the paper trail for the introduction of the scheme will be needed.
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1407025 · Replies: 19 · Views: 913

bama
Posted on: Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 19:08


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


Injunction still on the cards (as per the linked UKPC case)

I wonder whois actually putting the tckets on the car ?
Does a PPC bod come around and do it or is it the MA (or a fellow resident ? ) who does it ? (this is often done like this on commission/a bounty).
if its the MA that does it there may torts in the offing
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1406743 · Replies: 150 · Views: 8,542

bama
Posted on: Sat, 28 Jul 2018 - 18:43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


QUOTE
the department responsible at the DVLA

department of which body ?
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1403270 · Replies: 5 · Views: 811

bama
Posted on: Sat, 28 Jul 2018 - 18:33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


QUOTE (666 @ Thu, 26 Jul 2018 - 17:48) *
QUOTE (bama @ Thu, 26 Jul 2018 - 15:51) *
QUOTE (666 @ Wed, 25 Jul 2018 - 07:53) *
QUOTE (nigelbb @ Wed, 25 Jul 2018 - 05:40) *
Even if they had seen the blue light why should they expect the police car to dangerously jump a red light? The blue light doesn’t give priority.

Highway Code, Rule 219.

"Look and listen for .... emergency vehicles. Consider the route of such a vehicle and take appropriate action to let it pass ..."


err, any law that says so ?

and even that part of the HC doesn't say anything about blue lights giving priority.
clue, it can't because they don't. it is up to the blue light driver to go around other traffic.


still waiting to see what case law was being used by the Bib.


You asked "... why should they expect... ?". Emergency vehicles are allowed to pass red lights, and routinely do so. The HC explains that other drivers should consider this and act accordingly.

While the HC is not in itself law, ignoring it suggests careeless driving, i.e. not that of a careful and competent driver.


err, (again) and under what circumstances is the HC usable in evidence ?

if it isn't in evidence then what it says is irrelevant and thus ignoring it 'suggests' nothing at all.




QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Thu, 26 Jul 2018 - 16:00) *
The police driver appears to have been negligent - there seems to be little dispute about that. The real question is whether the OP was negligent. A couple of points there:

1. More than one person can be negligent at any one time. Just because the police driver was negligent doesn’t mean the OP wasn’t.

2. A vehicle crossing a give way line doesn’t automatically mean that the driver of a vehicle that hits it cannot be negligent. The question would be whether a driver taking proper care would have avoided the collision.

There is no rule of law that “two wrongs make a right” i.e. that, the police driver having driven negligently, that the OP could be relieved of all responsibility if their own driving was negligent.


Agree completely. The onus is on both.(though I do hold that the blue light driver carries more of the burden)
Thats one of the reasons why I asked about what law was being trotted out by the BiB.
OP hasn'r been back on for days though.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1403266 · Replies: 97 · Views: 3,779

bama
Posted on: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 - 14:54


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


FOI the TEC for a copy of the latest TEC Users Guide plus the associated documents.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1402668 · Replies: 4 · Views: 298

bama
Posted on: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 - 14:51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


QUOTE (666 @ Wed, 25 Jul 2018 - 07:53) *
QUOTE (nigelbb @ Wed, 25 Jul 2018 - 05:40) *
Even if they had seen the blue light why should they expect the police car to dangerously jump a red light? The blue light doesn’t give priority.

Highway Code, Rule 219.

"Look and listen for .... emergency vehicles. Consider the route of such a vehicle and take appropriate action to let it pass ..."


err, any law that says so ?

and even that part of the HC doesn't say anything about blue lights giving priority.
clue, it can't because they don't. it is up to the blue light driver to go around other traffic.


still waiting to see what case law was being used by the Bib.

  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1402666 · Replies: 97 · Views: 3,779

bama
Posted on: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 - 16:30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


AIUI its up to the blue light driver when using their exemption to ensure it is safe.
if the civvy hit was driving normally and within the speed limit I can't see how they carry blame.
sounds like the bib was overdoing it.
give way to oncoming traffic is the number one rule of the road
kinda goes double when you have an exemption from other rules - there can be no exemption from giving way when blasting through red lights.

and to repeat a previous question
exactly what case law are they quoting ?
(do the facts match I wonder)

the Bib self insure so keeping costs down is kinda in their interest.

i know of no legal rules that say what you have to do to assist blue light drivers.
In fact civvies who creep over the line at red lights to assist emergency services can and sometimes do get done for it. QED
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1401970 · Replies: 97 · Views: 3,779

bama
Posted on: Sat, 21 Jul 2018 - 14:42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


exactly what case law are they quoting ? ?
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1401059 · Replies: 97 · Views: 3,779

bama
Posted on: Sat, 14 Jul 2018 - 22:01


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


QUOTE
The driver made an appeal to APOCA


really ? ?
or did acpoa lie about knowing who the driver was
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1399083 · Replies: 16 · Views: 666

bama
Posted on: Tue, 3 Jul 2018 - 19:40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


QUOTE
Box 3
Please tell us about any circumstances surrounding the breach that you feel we have not taken into account.



ROFL
Do people fall for that screamingly obvious 'and when did you stop beating your wife' claptrap
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1395848 · Replies: 25 · Views: 4,013

bama
Posted on: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 22:59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


QUOTE
The parking company’s principal is the freeholder.

Who is the principal of the Managing Agent ?
Am struggling to think who it can be as the MA has the Freehold
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1393771 · Replies: 150 · Views: 8,542

bama
Posted on: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 - 13:48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


QUOTE
That is correct the freeholder is also the managing agent.


then who is the Principal ?
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1393140 · Replies: 150 · Views: 8,542

bama
Posted on: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 - 11:20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


Do they do Declarative Judgments in haggis land ?

would that be an easier/cheaper/less risky way to put Bogy's question before the bench in big boys court ?
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1389435 · Replies: 60 · Views: 1,568

bama
Posted on: Sat, 9 Jun 2018 - 14:24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


Bogsy was all over the towing regs some time ago.
worth a look IMO
I don't have a link - apols.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1388968 · Replies: 60 · Views: 1,568

bama
Posted on: Fri, 25 May 2018 - 15:35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


because it conflicts with the evidence of a believeable but mistaken witness (or the person making the allegation) would be one obvious way.
Conflict/ disagreement/who is lying or mistaken - police investigate.

Do not relieve the claimaint/accuser of their burden. And for sure don't say anything that could disagree with the details of the complaint - and as the complaint has not been seen then offering any unasked for facts is foolhardy.
the complaint must allege something 'bad' - how bad know one knows.
if the Bib have enough evidence already then they can bring a charge, if not then don't open any doors.
never play 'he said - she said'
'he siad - silence. thats all we got' is better.
anything you say (even before being arrested) especially in writing can and will be used.

  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1384989 · Replies: 23 · Views: 2,832

bama
Posted on: Thu, 24 May 2018 - 17:23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


QUOTE (peterguk @ Thu, 24 May 2018 - 13:43) *
QUOTE (bama @ Thu, 24 May 2018 - 13:01) *
if it is in fact a NIP then replying is in order.


No reply is ever required to a NIP..


Apols, i used the shorthand for the usual combuined NIP and S172. I should have been more
explicit.
Same point though - is it a letter or a NIP or just a S172 on its own.

QUOTE
If he is genuinely unaware of any incident, his reply should say so

have to disagree on that. he could end up with a careless/more serious charge being thrown into the mix should it get to court.
never offer facts that have not been asked for - they will get used against you (just like 'the anything you say').
The Bib is not writing to make a new pen friend.
the approach of @I have done nothing wrong, it can't hurt me to tell them things/talk to them' is mistaken. People whi have done that have ensed up with convictions, some of them lawyers who though they were smart enough to do it without risk.
there is zero knowledge of the details of the alleged incident.
To assume this letter is benign is foolish.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1384756 · Replies: 23 · Views: 2,832

bama
Posted on: Thu, 24 May 2018 - 14:28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


QUOTE (Fredd @ Thu, 24 May 2018 - 13:16) *
QUOTE (bama @ Thu, 24 May 2018 - 12:52) *
Fairy typical response when there is legislation that creates accountability and the risk that someone may the carry the can.

It's fairly typical when government introduces new legislation that deals largely in principles, offers little guidance as to what will be acceptable and what won't when endeavouring to comply, and threatens crippling penalties if you get it wrong - you play it safe. It's reminiscent of "cookie consent", but on steroids.


Spot on. Wooly stuff but explicit on the penalties. Reminds me of the TMA smile.gif
and loads of others..

Also creates plenty of opportunities for Clifford Chance, Slaughter and May type firms.
I have been on the recieving end of Clifford Chance stuff regarding EU stuff and am familiar with the quality and usefullness of their output in this regard.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1384706 · Replies: 32 · Views: 1,942

bama
Posted on: Thu, 24 May 2018 - 12:08


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


QUOTE (666 @ Thu, 24 May 2018 - 12:59) *
QUOTE (bama @ Thu, 24 May 2018 - 12:31) *
As you are paying by card you already have the money to pay for the insurance (or the card will be declined) so why get credit ? there is no reason at all - for the consumer.


Not if it's a credit card. If you use a credit card, and don't pay it off in full, then you'll almost certainly be paying a much higher interest rate than you would on the insurer's credit plan.

You will be paying both

On the wider issue, I have been insuring for many years through a variety of comparison sites, and have never had any difficulty in paying in full. Have I just been lucky?

"in full" ? you mean annually ? yes me too, I always do the annual premium (and with a debit card). Its the credit agreement with BFSL that you can't seem to avoid that is the issue

  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1384650 · Replies: 15 · Views: 682

bama
Posted on: Thu, 24 May 2018 - 12:01


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


Form ? ?

you said it was a letter (and that you don't consider it to be a NIP).
is it in fact a NIP or not ?

it could just be a letter if some member of joe public has phoned in a complaint.
In which cash the Bib are just fishing.
if it is just a letter with a request then I don't see there is any legal obligation to reply at all.
If I am wrong about that then I am sure the eagles here will jump on it,
if it is in fact a NIP then replying is in order.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1384648 · Replies: 23 · Views: 2,832

bama
Posted on: Thu, 24 May 2018 - 11:52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


lots of chickens seem to become headless over GDPR.
you wouldn't believe some of the claptrap things some companies are doing. nor the knee jek (some knee but mostly jerk) things some middle level managers are coming up with - not much clear coporate policy or understanding around on this one it seems. Fairy typical response when there is legislation that creates accountability and the risk that someone may the carry the can.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1384642 · Replies: 32 · Views: 1,942

bama
Posted on: Thu, 24 May 2018 - 11:31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


Yup. looks like direct line has no credit agreement in the background.

Thing is the on-line quotes that i am referring to (with unasked for and unwanted credit agreements 'thrown' in) all showed a "Cash Price" that excluded the credit costs.
Phone 'em up and tell them you will pay the cash price and they (well at least the RAC) couldn't do it. the software at their end lumped it in anyway. Lots of fun ensued whenIi asked why the extra amount (I wasn't up to speed on the 'credit in the background' thing. best he could come up with was 'all I can think of is its because you are beuy a car and you may not be used to it at first and so are a higher risk'. So either the phone bods ae not told about the credit agreement and that there is an illustrated "cash price" or they are told to lie their asses off about it. For sure (according to what he said) there was no way he could physically do it for the cash price using the software at his end. Quite a blockakage that to say the least.

As you are paying by card you already have the money to pay for the insurance (or the card will be declined) so why get credit ? there is no reason at all - for the consumer.
Look at BFSL's annual financial reports at Companies House and you can see why they want you to have it though....
I see the Insurance Act 2015 changed a few things but how that enables 'forced credit' I have no idea. then again I have't read the Act all the way through.

It should not be difficult to avoid a credit arrangement that you do not need and do not want ! But as far as car insurance goes (at least, there could well be other fields) it seems to quite a challenge. Thats just plain wrong IMO.
And if someone pays by credit card anyway why a second credit agreement ? - paying interest on interest from the git go.

then ponder the mechanics.
BFSL is the Creditor but who get the funds from your card payment ? Where does it go and who benefits from it ? I suspect it is BISL who are agents (who is the principal ?).
I suspect that even if you pay annually they amortise the cash monthly between themselves
thus spreading reveue out - regular meals rather than an annual feast i.e. cash flow. Plus why charge for something once when you can charge for it 12 times !.

And fo course BFSL is part of a group of companies and money gets sloshed around between them - significant amouts according to the Annual Reports they have filed.

interestingly their CFO is also a director of a major on-line price comparison company and a director of a claims settlement company. Talk about one hand washing the other.

If any readers are getting insurance soon via on-line system9s) then by all means look closely at the credit agreement side of it ! (the credit agreement docs in the backgound should be downloaded and read closely. You will see they are populated with the relevant amounts according to the quote your are chasing. Its not boilerplate, it is a customised agreement.)
then ring 'em up and tell them you have sufficient funds and will buy at the illustrated cash price and see if you get any joy.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1384635 · Replies: 15 · Views: 682

bama
Posted on: Tue, 22 May 2018 - 22:45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


allowing me to make a single payment ?
annual or monthly is a choice.
annual normally cheaper - less admin for Ins Co and they get full payment up front.
I can't see any reason at all for paying extra for annual payment.
will re-run/amed a quote to monthly to see what happens.
to me it looks like if the finance costs (and various slices of the cake for the numerous parties involved) that makes up the supriose extra whack at the end of the process.
abiout to find out...
Dug this out on the monthly plan

QUOTE
Initial deposit
£30.08
Amount of credit
£370.70
Total amount payable
£400.78
11 instalments of
£33.70
Cash price
£359.97
Charge for credit
£40.81
Applicable APR
26.5%


no tick box for I don't want effin credit of course.
so going forward and just entering the "cash price" on the payment screen and does that negate the Loan ? even when the link to Loan Agreement comes up on screen when you have selected aan annual payment ? I don't think it does but to find out you have to pay and find out afterwards.
Even after picking "annual" the Loan Agreement is there - policyholder name on and a scanned sig from the lender - and you are explicitly agreeing the Ts and Cs.
Boilerplate is one thing but a completed Loan Agreements that isn't wanted is another.
Having said that I suppose it could bjust be sh1tty web design (a common code base can have drawbacks) but how that got through any kind of audit/QA/the use cases etc is beyond me. Screen changes aplenty happen and the screen gets changed. Presenting the Loan Agreement on screen along with text that says 'by paying you are agreeing to these Ts and Cs)
QUOTE
By completing your payment details you are confirming that you have read and accept the terms and conditions in the following documents About Us | Full Policy Wording | Pre Contract Credit Information | Credit Agreement | Terms & Conditions

to be exact is beyond the pale.

Just went back to Annual on a quote from the Post Office
Linked to the "Pre Contract Credit Information"
which has this for the anuual option
QUOTE
The type of credit.
Fixed Sum Credit
The total amount of credit.
This means the amount of credit to be
provided under the proposed credit
agreement or the credit limit.
£329.89.
How and when credit would be provided.
When you enter into an insurance policy (the Policy) together with any
related products purchased at the same time (together with the Policy,
the Insurance Transaction), we will advance the amount being financed
under the credit agreement to BISL, who will be responsible for arranging
the Insurance Transaction on your behalf.
The duration of the credit agreement.
12 months from the Policy commencement date.
Repayments.
The first instalment due will be £33.70 followed by 10 monthly payments
of £33.70.
The total amount you will have to pay.
This means the amount you have
borrowed plus interest and other costs.
£400.78.
The proposed credit will be linked to the
supply of specific goods or the provision
of a service.
Description of goods / services / land (as
applicable).
The credit agreement will finance:

The premium payable for the Policy, with the Number xxxxxxxxxx

Breakdown cover, Motor legal protection, Guaranteed replacement
car and Keycare
Cash price.
The cash price for:

The Policy is £359.97

Breakdown cover is Included, Motor legal protection is Included,
Guaranteed replacement car is Included and Keycare is Included
Security required.
This is a description of the security to be
provided by you in relation to the credit
agreement.
As security for the payment of all amounts that you are at any time
required to pay under the credit agreement, by signing the credit
agreement you will agree to give us a first ranking mortgage over all
rights to and interest in all sums payable under the Insurance
Transaction (including refunds
The rates of interest which apply to the
credit agreement.
12.37% per annum, fixed for the term of the credit agreement.


looks to me that your payment pays the creditor who then pays the insurer (or some other intermediary) monthly anyway.
Run a quote or two at the Post Ofice site and see the docs.
I am all quoted out for the day, am so cross eyed now it could be aliens doing it -or perhaps the cat.

Of course there may be some uplift for the the 'you don't own it yet' but I fail to see why

And of course the loan is an asset for the lending company - and a known and quanitifiable risk to them - don't pay the monthly charge (or it gets snafud) and the Insurance is cancelled.
We are not talking CDO level risk with these loans (though I bet they do get packeged up in the background but thats another matter)

This should make things a tad clearer (Not before time you say)

Creditor is BFSL
Customer (poor gink trying to buy the policy)
Credit Intermediary) BISL (same address as BFSL of course)
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1384254 · Replies: 15 · Views: 682

bama
Posted on: Tue, 22 May 2018 - 21:40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,898
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323


Do you have aloan (that you may not even know about) at the back of your Direct Line policy ?

of course getting to the bottom of this does change the competitiveness of quotes/insurance companies.
so they won't make it easy.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1384238 · Replies: 15 · Views: 682

1107 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

New Posts  New Replies
No New Posts  No New Replies
Hot topic  Hot Topic (New)
No new  Hot Topic (No New)
Poll  Poll (New)
No new votes  Poll (No New)
Closed  Locked Topic
Moved  Moved Topic
 

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Saturday, 22nd September 2018 - 17:50
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.