Complaint to land owner re; breastfeeding

jessw640

I feel like I'll just cry if I speak to someone in person but I guess that's not always a bad thing. I've just been in such a vulnerable place and my anxiety has been through the roof hence me ignoring the letters which I know was silly but my brain just wouldn't let me deal with this rubbish.
Okay so, visit store manager, if no luck, include the store managers unhelpfulness and send to CEO. send letter to met parking and DRP...then run a nice bath and drink some wine.

Redx

yep , you got it , plus you will always get the right help here , for free

you can also choose to IGNORE DRP, I wouldnt give them the time of day , they are powerless in this

Fruitcake

jessw640 wrote: »

I feel like I'll just cry if I speak to someone in person but I guess that's not always a bad thing. I've just been in such a vulnerable place and my anxiety has been through the roof hence me ignoring the letters which I know was silly but my brain just wouldn't let me deal with this rubbish.
Okay so, visit store manager, if no luck, include the store managers unhelpfulness and send to CEO. send letter to met parking and DRP...then run a nice bath and drink some wine.

Or ignore DRP as Redx says. Why waste your time and a stamp when they will probably ignore you anyway?

jessw640

if anyone would be so kind to review before I send off.






I wish to challenge this notice as keeper of the vehicle on the following grounds:

1. The sum does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss, nor is it a core price term. It is a disguised penalty and not commercially justified.
2. As keeper I believe that the signs were not seen, the wording is ambiguous and the predominant purpose of your business model is intended to be a deterrent.
3. There is no evidence that you have any proprietary interest in the land.
4. Your 'Notice' fails to comply with the POFA 2012 and breaches various consumer contract/unfair terms Regulations.
5. There was no consideration nor acceptance flowing from both parties and any contract with myself, or the driver, is denied.
6. The driver of the vehicle was delayed in returning to the vehicle due to breastfeeding a newborn baby. To discriminate against the driver on these grounds is a breach of the Equality Act 2010.

Equality Act 2010 (c. 15)
Part 2 — Equality: key concepts
Chapter 2 — Prohibited conduct
9 (2) A person (A) discriminates against a woman if A treats her unfavourably because of a pregnancy of hers.
(3) A person (A) discriminates against a woman if, in the period of 26 weeks beginning with the day on which she gives birth, A treats her unfavourably because she has given birth.
(4) The reference in subsection (3) to treating a woman unfavourably because she has given birth includes, in particular, a reference to treating her unfavourably because she is breast-feeding.
(5) For the purposes of this section, the day on which a woman gives birth is the day on which—
(a) she gives birth to a living child, or
(b) she gives birth to a dead child (more than 24 weeks of the pregnancy having passed).
(6) Section 13, so far as relating to sex discrimination, does not apply to anything done in relation to a woman in so far as—
(a) it is for the reason mentioned in subsection (2), or
(b) it is in the period, and for the reason, mentioned in subsection (3).

Direct discrimination
(1) A person (A) discriminates against another (B) if, because of a protected characteristic, A treats B less favourably than A treats or would treat others.
(2) If the protected characteristic is age, A does not discriminate against B if A can show A’s treatment of B to be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.
(3) If the protected characteristic is disability, and B is not a disabled person, A does not discriminate against B only because A treats or would treat disabled persons more favourably than A treats B.
(4) If the protected characteristic is marriage and civil partnership, this section applies to a contravention of Part 5 (work) only if the treatment is because it is
B who is married or a civil partner.
(5) If the protected characteristic is race, less favourable treatment includessegregating B from others.
(6) If the protected characteristic is sex—
(a) less favourable treatment of a woman includes less favourable treatment of her because she is breast-feeding;
(b) in a case where B is a man, no account is to be taken of special treatment afforded to a woman in connection with pregnancy or childbirth

I would also like to inform you that the landowner will be made fully aware of this matter and your response, which I will forward to their CEO when I complain in writing and via social media, as appropriate.
The purpose of this communication is:
1. Formal challenge
There is nothing whatsoever to prevent your company from considering a challenge at any stage. Refusing access to your industry's alternative dispute resolution procedure would be unreasonable and a breach of the Civil Procedure Rules.
As far as I am concerned, I have made a valid challenge on 26th January 2015 and the clock is running. If I do not receive a clear rejection along with a POPLA code within 35 days of the above date, I will regard the challenge as accepted and the matter closed.
2. ''Drop hands'' offer
The extravagant 'parking charge' is baseless but I realise that you may have incurred nominal postage costs. Equally, I have incurred costs to date, for researching the law and responding to your junk mail dressed up to impersonate a parking ticket. It is clear that my costs and yours, at this point, do not exceed £15. Therefore, this is a formal “drop hands” offer. I remind you of the duty to mitigate any loss, so withdraw the spurious charge within 35 days without further expense and I will not pursue you for my costs. If you persist then I will charge in full for my time at £18 per hour plus my out-of-pocket expenses and damages for harassment.
3. Notice of cancellation of contract
I hereby give notice of withdrawal from this alleged 'contract' which was never properly offered by you and certainly was not expressly agreed. This 'contract' is hereby cancelled and any obligations now end. If you offer - and if I decide to use - POPLA, then the contract ends immediately on the date of their decision (whatever the outcome) so my notice of cancellation still applies. The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation & Additional Payments) Regulations apply now to every consumer contract, save for a few exemptions, which parking contracts are not. It is the will of Parliament following the EU Consumer Rights Directive, that express consent is obtained for consumer contracts now - not implied consent - and that information is provided in a durable medium in advance.

By replying to the challenge you are acknowledging receipt and acceptance of the points above. If you do not accept this challenge, I require the validation code to refer the matter to POPLA. Iamfullyawareofthe 28 day‘deadline’ thatyourcompanyplaceforappealshoweverIamalsofullyawarethat POPLA donotissueanydeadlineforwhentheircodescanbeissued and your refusal to issue this will only further prove your inability to comply with the industry ombudsman. I would also like to refer you to the consequences of Halsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust if you refuse to consider a challenge outside your normal deadline. If you refuse to accept this challenge I will require you to produce the contract that you claim has resulted in a payment of £100 by you to the land-owner.
I have kept proof of submission of this challenge. I look forward to your considered reply within 35 days.

jessw640

Ignoring the strange formatting...

Redx

looks ok to me

to avoid forum formatting errors , copy and paste from word into notepad and save it , check the notepad file is ok , then copy and paste onto here

this will avoid formatting errors as you go from one medium to another

also complain to the local mickey dees MANAGER (not lackey) - if they do nothing , get their name and do a full on complaint to head office, including the lack of action by this local manager - also threatening an LBC and MCOL under the EA 2010

ps:- remove your personal details like name on here, we dont need any personal info or references , plus we dont want you identified by other forum watchers

you can easily edit your posts using the edit function

jessw640

Thank you, I am heading there today for a chat (my approach is much more damsel in distress than angry mother) and have drafted a letter ready for the corporate big guns.
I shall update when I have my letter stating the charge is cancelled! :j

jessw640

I went. I cried. They're contacting them for me and saying it was a staff error, that it was agreed for me to stay and they forgot to send my reg.
:j

Redx

well done

hopefully you will get a cancellation letter from the PPC, but ignore DRP anyway

keep your eye on this too, dont let it slide , make sure you have the head office complaint ready with this latest info , in case they dont cancel

Fergie76

jessw640 wrote: »

I went. I cried. They're contacting them for me and saying it was a staff error, that it was agreed for me to stay and they forgot to send my reg.
:j

Email the manager and try and get that in writing, just in case it's not cancelled at some later stage they try court.