3. Groupnexus gave PCN for delivery job to residences in flats... (fight in court?)
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Groupnexus gave PCN for delivery job to residences in flats... (fight in court?)  (Read 2222 times)

0 Members and 356 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Groupnexus gave PCN for delivery job to residences in flats... (fight in court?)
« Reply #15 on: »
Quote from: DWMB2 on May 30, 2024, 11:22:03 am
If the appeal(s) to date haven't been the strongest, then there could be some merit in doing this.
Going from the 'response to evidence' posted above, I think the original and POPLA appeals will be pretty poor.
Logged
There are motorists who have been scammed and those who are yet to be scammed!
Re: Groupnexus gave PCN for delivery job to residences in flats... (fight in court?)
« Reply #16 on: »
Quote from: DWMB2 on May 30, 2024, 11:22:03 am
Quote from: The Rookie on May 30, 2024, 10:34:38 am
You could write one more letter putting your case in a better (legal basis) way, it would be ignored as an 'appeal' but may have some effect on there decision on court action if you now appear better informed and not such a soft target.
If the appeal(s) to date haven't been the strongest, then there could be some merit in doing this.

2 posts above from yours, a random guy comments for some reason. can you delete posts on my thread to do with him pls
Logged
Re: Groupnexus gave PCN for delivery job to residences in flats... (fight in court?)
« Reply #17 on: »
You have exhausted the appeals process. there is nothing more you can do, for now, unless you want to pay the charge. My advice is not to pay the charge and to wait and see if they decide to take you to court over the alleged debt.

What is going to happen and you need to be fully aware of this, is the storm of debt collector letters you are now likely to receive. You can safely ignore all debt collector letters. They may appear to be threatening and full of scary words like "bailiff" and "CCJ" but those are there solely to try and scare the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree into capitulating and paying up, the now inflated charge.

The debt collectors cannot do anything. They cannot take you to court. They are a third party to the contract you allegedly breached with the PPC. They offer their service to the PPC on a no-win, no-fee basis. Ignore them.

If they intend to take this further, they will either themselves or through a roboclaim firm of solicitors, send you a Letter of Claim giving you 30 days to pay or face the prospect of a county court claim. After those 30 days, they are at liberty to issue a county court claim at any time up to 6 years after the date of the alleged contravention.

A court claim is what you want to get this over and done with. A judge is a truly independent arbiter and they will decide whether you owe the PPC a debt. A judge will take all the facts into account and if you can show that delivering packages is not parking, as was described in the persuasive appeal in Jopson v Homeguard mentioned earlier, as well as other legal arguments which will be advised if/when a claim is issued, then you have a very good prospect of winning.

Even if you were to lose, it is likely that you would pay less than the original claim amount as this is the small claims track and they are not allowed to add fake fees/damages and the costs are fixed. There is no chance of a CCJ even if you lose as long as it is paid within 30 days of judgment. That is a worst case scenario.

So, you now have to wait and see. Ignore any debt collector letters. Come back if/when you receive an LoC.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2024, 12:03:33 pm by b789 »
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Groupnexus gave PCN for delivery job to residences in flats... (fight in court?)
« Reply #18 on: »
Quote from: b789 on June 02, 2024, 12:01:36 pm
You have exhausted the appeals process. there is nothing more you can do, for now, unless you want to pay the charge. My advice is not to pay the charge and to wait and see if they decide to take you to court over the alleged debt.

What is going to happen and you need to be fully aware of this, is the storm of debt collector letters you are now likely to receive. You can safely ignore all debt collector letters. They may appear to be threatening and full of scary words like "bailiff" and "CCJ" but those are there solely to try and scare the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree into capitulating and paying up, the now inflated charge.

The debt collectors cannot do anything. They cannot take you to court. They are a third party to the contract you allegedly breached with the PPC. They offer their service to the PPC on a no-win, no-fee basis. Ignore them.

If they intend to take this further, they will either themselves or through a roboclaim firm of solicitors, send you a Letter of Claim giving you 30 days to pay or face the prospect of a county court claim. After those 30 days, they are at liberty to issue a county court claim at any time up to 6 years after the date of the alleged contravention.

A court claim is what you want to get this over and done with. A judge is a truly independent arbiter and they will decide whether you owe the PPC a debt. A judge will take all the facts into account and if you can show that delivering packages is not parking, as was described in the persuasive appeal in Jopson v Homeguard mentioned earlier, as well as other legal arguments which will be advised if/when a claim is issued, then you have a very good prospect of winning.

Even if you were to lose, it is likely that you would pay less than the original claim amount as this is the small claims track and they are not allowed to add fake fees/damages and the costs are fixed. There is no chance of a CCJ even if you lose as long as it is paid within 30 days of judgment. That is a worst case scenario.

So, you now have to wait and see. Ignore any debt collector letters. Come back if/when you receive an LoC.

Still not received any contact from groupnexus about next steps. How long does it usually take?
Logged
Re: Groupnexus gave PCN for delivery job to residences in flats... (fight in court?)
« Reply #19 on: »
How long is a piece of string? You have exhausted the appeals process. It is now up to GroupNexus to take the next step. They have up to 6 years from the date of the alleged event to decide whether they want to take you to court.

As already discussed, the most probable sequence of events is that you’ll receive a bunch of debt collection/final reminder letters which you can safely ignore. The alleged debt will increase to around £160-£170 as they add on fake “debt recovery” costs.

The next stage, which may or may not ever happen, would be a Letter of Claim and then a claim itself. Even then, if it is defended robustly, with advice here or from MSE, there is a high probability that they will discontinue once they realise that you are willing to fight this all the way.

Until a court claim is filed, which may or may not ever happen, all you can do is wait and see what they do. You could try and find out who manages the properties at the location as it is likely they are the ones who contracted GroupNexus and ask them to get the PCN cancelled. Explain to them how this could affect their clients if delivery drivers blacklist the location.

If there’s a FaceBook group or similar group of you who are delivery drivers, perhaps arrange to have canvass of the properties at the location explaining how they are about find that they can no longer receive their home deliveries because of the unfair actions of their parking management company who were contracted by their management company. Ask the residents to raise the issue with the management company and unless any outstanding PCNs from delivery drivers are cancelled, they face the prospect of being blacklisted by delivery companies.

Do you get the idea? Otherwise, it is just a waiting game to see if GN decide to pursue you further, or at all.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Groupnexus gave PCN for delivery job to residences in flats... (fight in court?)
« Reply #20 on: »
OP, you have still not addressed the key issue which IMO is your only defence both now and ultimately in court: So i worked for amazon flex delivering parcels on this day,

While these matters are fresh in your mind...:

How many parcels of what size to how many residences on a site with, to be confirmed, a single car park and these residences were how many metres away from the car park and how does delivery take place e.g. to obtain a signature or leave at the front door or designated location etc. and was/were the resident(s) in/had they been pre-notified of delivery and how many return journeys did you make while stopped in the car park?

Others may have other questions.

IMO, unless you make a deliberate and accurate record now then in possibly several years' time a judge would be sceptical about your recollections because as far as we can see none of the necessary specifics has been put in evidence so far. 
Logged
Re: Groupnexus gave PCN for delivery job to residences in flats... (fight in court?)
« Reply #21 on: »
Quote from: H C Andersen on June 08, 2024, 05:12:07 pm
OP, you have still not addressed the key issue which IMO is your only defence both now and ultimately in court: So i worked for amazon flex delivering parcels on this day,

While these matters are fresh in your mind...:

How many parcels of what size to how many residences on a site with, to be confirmed, a single car park and these residences were how many metres away from the car park and how does delivery take place e.g. to obtain a signature or leave at the front door or designated location etc. and was/were the resident(s) in/had they been pre-notified of delivery and how many return journeys did you make while stopped in the car park?

Others may have other questions.

IMO, unless you make a deliberate and accurate record now then in possibly several years' time a judge would be sceptical about your recollections because as far as we can see none of the necessary specifics has been put in evidence so far.

I had about 4 parcels in one concierge, and a couple that went to other separate flats.
Walking to the delivery point once I had finally found it from my car would take less than one minute.
I left it at concierge, the others the customer wasn't in so I rang neighbours flat number and left it at the lobby.
I returned to my car to pick up more deliveries more than once. Maybe like 3-4 times.
Logged
Re: Groupnexus gave PCN for delivery job to residences in flats... (fight in court?)
« Reply #22 on: »
OP, if this gets to court you would need evidence.

So you had 'about 4 parcels'.

OP, a judge would want to know how many because this is your defence i.e. that your time on site was properly and only spent delivering parcels in the course of your business or employment.

So not 'about' but 3,4,7 parcels - see attached worksheets. 

These were delivered to X separate properties which necessitated Y trips.

The service standard is that the courier is required to carry the parcel to the property and not a central collection point. The location was a block of residences spread over N floors and Z rings must be given before looking for alternatives, sometimes specified by the recipient but often not, such as trying to find a neighbour.

OP, I could go on. But this is your defence and frankly if you cannot put these details together with evidence now then your chances won't improve over time.

I'm a courier and I refer you to Jopson v Homeguard won't win the day IMO.
Logged
Re: Groupnexus gave PCN for delivery job to residences in flats... (fight in court?)
« Reply #23 on: »
Quote from: H C Andersen on June 14, 2024, 10:13:02 am
OP, if this gets to court you would need evidence.

So you had 'about 4 parcels'.

OP, a judge would want to know how many because this is your defence i.e. that your time on site was properly and only spent delivering parcels in the course of your business or employment.

So not 'about' but 3,4,7 parcels - see attached worksheets. 

These were delivered to X separate properties which necessitated Y trips.

The service standard is that the courier is required to carry the parcel to the property and not a central collection point. The location was a block of residences spread over N floors and Z rings must be given before looking for alternatives, sometimes specified by the recipient but often not, such as trying to find a neighbour.

OP, I could go on. But this is your defence and frankly if you cannot put these details together with evidence now then your chances won't improve over time.

I'm a courier and I refer you to Jopson v Homeguard won't win the day IMO.

How the hell do i prove this when it was 6 months ago+... The guys here all persuaded me to let it go to court but didn't mention this at all. now I'm ****...?
Logged
Re: Groupnexus gave PCN for delivery job to residences in flats... (fight in court?)
« Reply #24 on: »
Nobody here has (or should) persuade you to do anything. The role of this forum is to advise you of your options. The course of action you take is yours to decide on. By the time you posted here, you had already exhausted the appeals process, so the only options open were to pay promptly, or see if they sue. You seemed to prefer the second option.

Your testimony as a witness counts as evidence (although would be stronger if you can supplement it with additional evidence), and will demonstrate your argument. Jopson vs Homeguard isn't necessarily a slam dunk in this case as has been said already, but could be referred to as a defence point.
Logged
Re: Groupnexus gave PCN for delivery job to residences in flats... (fight in court?)
« Reply #25 on: »
OP, this is still good for you. If this ever goes as far as a hearing in front of a judge, it will be your word against that of a third party who was not even at the location. The burden of proof is on GeoupNexus to prove, not yours to disprove.

Whilst, your “evidence” may not seem to be overwhelming, if/when it comes to a claim, you will have good defence based on many points. You can also, guarantee that any claim filed will also contain errors and breaches on their part that you can use against them.

I am currently assisting someone with a similar claim which has so many breaches of the Civil Court Procedures that it is a total abuse of process and we can’t wait for it to get in front of a judge. We are confident that they are unlikely to let it go to a hearing because they would get spanked in court.

Of course no one knows exactly what is going to happen. There is always the chance that it doesn’t win. However, if it is well argued, you are unlikely to pay as much as is in the original claim. With that knowledge and situation you are in at this moment, you have little choice anyway. You can either pay the already inflated charge, which is what they are hoping you will do or wait and see if they are going to take it to a court claim. Even then, it does not mean that they will go all the way. They rely on their victims being gullible and ignorant of their rights and the process. You are here, so neither of those two things.

For now, keep your notes on what happened on the day. Keep all the other paperwork you received. Ride out the threatening debt collector letters that are going to come. Those you can file or discard, they are not what they seem. They are powerless to do anything that they threaten.

What you are waiting for, is a Letter of Claim. That will come from a firm of bottom-dwelling solicitors, such as DCB Legal (not DCBLtd), BW Legal or Gladstones and will give you 30 days to pay up. Any other letter that gives you anything less than 30 days is not a Letter of Claim and we don’t need to know about it.

Show us the LoC if/when it eventually arrives and we’ll take you through the next steps.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2024, 10:04:15 am by b789 »
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »
  3. Groupnexus gave PCN for delivery job to residences in flats... (fight in court?)