Hi Sorry to hear that. Did they give you a reason why they believed Lowell and not you? I don't suppose you asked if you could appeal did you? It would have made the judge give written reasons or so I believe.

I can only say poor Bobby. He has now been told he must verify his identity , stop using HMA and send a photo of his clamped vehicle. Of course now he has bought the templates thriugh paypal he is stuffed or can he get his money back?

Hello wonkey nice to meet myself.

Goodmorning Tomtubby . Apparently I am now talking to myself as you and me are the same person. All I can do is repeat the old saying Just because I am paranoid doesn't mean you aren't all out to get you.

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee681792(v=office.15).aspx Do you have an older version of office on your computer ? Have you tried doing an uninstall then reinstalling the 64 bit

I suppose a headline is a headline regardless of the actual facts. The headline is excellent however there is little detail. As far as it says the following is the judgement Storage costs returned but is that all or some. It could be 1 day it could be all the days All costs awarded- I am assuming it is the standard court fees which I think are awarded anyway Loss of earnings - Is that for the hearing or longer I wonder what the real answers are

Well it will be interesting. All we can do is wait and see.

I was wondering just how much has actually been awarded compared to the claim. We all know that you can go to court and win but actually get very little in the way of money. I am still confused how it can be claimed that this is the manchestergate case when it seems totally different. If anyone gets the judgement I would love to see it

From what I can work out and having read what goes as manchestergate this is totally different in that it is repayment of excess charges so not a form 4 at all. Thanks for the info though.

Can I firstly apologise for bringing this up but I am trying to understand it. On another forum there is a post about something that was allegedly referred to on here as manchestergate. On the post there is someone bragging that the hero of the site has won a case over car storage fees. I can find no mention of it here so is the person concerned unusually twisting the truth? The claim is also that they are considering making a complaint before a magistrate under the fraud act. I always thought that complaints such as that were made to the plods or is he talking about a private prosecution and if so is the burden of proof the same as criminal court? Thanks in advance

They seem to have started up again but hopefully in a less aggresive way. I know Noddy has been contacted by them, couldn't happen to a nicer man

From what I understand a panic attack can give many of the same symptoms as a heart attack. I am not medically trained but if you had a massive heart attack that went on for over 3 1/2hours I would suspect you wouldnt be here to be complaining. I am not saying for one minute that mistakes weren't made and that there isnt a case to answer but as said before your language seems very confrontational and sadly that can be counter productive. The words heart attack are used generically as well . In laymans terms they cover a huge range of symptoms. If however your GP is saying he thinks there is negligence and NAH are willing to proceed then I think you should. If not do you have legal expense cover on your household indurance? Do not expect it to be a quick resolution though , it could take a long time.

If these debts are off your credit file and you do want to pay them a small full and final may save you money in the long run. However if there is no ccj and they are pre 2007 I would be inclined to send a cca request first. Just a request to any mods, if a post is moved can you set up a redirect . I saw the question tagged onto an old thread

I know they are the same parent company but do they yet have joined up systems. For example RBS and Natwest do not have joined up systems when paying cheques in. As for the dispute letter I would never tell them exactly what is wrong but something like it fails to comply with S78 or S61. Different people have different approaches but personally I would reply to letters asking questions , even if its to say I refer you to my letter of xxxxxx. You could set up a dispisable email address for that as well. Any letter that contains a specific threat . Some people also pre empt doorstep and phone calls by sending the letters

Maybe if you are going to throw insults you should read back and not sound so arrogant. Yes it is embarrasing , happened to me in a works vehicle but if the site was busy and as usual understaffed the last thing a cashier would want is to fill out all of the paperwork. I think that taking it on the chin is the best option