Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • youdontsay
    • By youdontsay 5th Feb 18, 6:19 PM
    • 83Posts
    • 60Thanks
    youdontsay
    Six year old ticket
    • #1
    • 5th Feb 18, 6:19 PM
    Six year old ticket 5th Feb 18 at 6:19 PM
    About a week ago I received a claim form telling me I was about to be taken to court for a ticket I allegedly received 6 years ago., and that 262 is payable by me.This was the first knowledge I have of this and have no recollection of it even happening.
    Over the last week I have scoured the internet and have read lots of advice I believe Im more limited as to what I can do because Excel who operate the car park are not a member of the BPA?
    I have also been to the Citizens advice bureau who I believe said that I was limited as to what I can do because court proceedings are already in the pipeline.
    I am quite frantic as I cannot pay this amount and even this morning as I was again searching on this site and various others, I received a letter from BW Legal who represent Excel to say I will be going to court.
    I rang BW legal to request the evidence and they have instructed me to contest the claim due to having no knowledge previously, and also to request the evidence myself.
    I think the most likely scenario is that the car may have been driven in and straight back out without parking as very few people use this particular car park as it is widely known in the area for its unfair practices.
    I have written the letter and sent it today, but is there anything else I should have done in order to get this turned around?
    The letter was worded as follows
    'I received a claim form from Northampton Courts approx a week ago, stating that I was being taken to court for an alleged parking offence. This is the first knowledge I have of this as the parking ticket was nearly six years old. There is an issue with postal services as there is a house nearby which has practically an identical address but, having scoured the internet for advice on this matter, I understand that there should have been many steps prior to this action, and I fail to believe that all correspondence would have gone astray. I request that you send me the evidence that you hold which has led you to believe a parking offence has been committed, without which this issue cannot go forward. Please send me the necessary evidence. Thank you'
    The date of the ticket was 12th Feb 2012, so actually just under six years.
    Last edited by youdontsay; 05-02-2018 at 10:32 PM. Reason: Wording error
Page 5
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 8th Feb 18, 9:13 PM
    • 58,460 Posts
    • 71,971 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    It's because I copied some words from a previous defence from months ago. Think I've sorted it now.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Redx
    • By Redx 8th Feb 18, 9:36 PM
    • 18,352 Posts
    • 23,237 Thanks
    Redx
    so to the OP

    you print it , sign and date it as a statement of truth , scan back to pc and add to and save as a pdf document (add to word, save as a pdf file)

    then you email it to the ccbc email address and add it as an attachment , putting your name , address , MCOL reference etc in the main body of the email and add name and mcol ref to the subject

    do this before the deadline day next week

    there are other ways of signing it on a pc and there is always the option of posting it in good time as well , but I do not wish to complicate matters further in explaining what a digital signature is

    so as long as you or a friend or relative can print it and scan it back to a pc or laptop , then print sign and date it, scan back , save as pdf , add as an attachment to your email

    the point is that it has to be signed and dated by the person who received the MCOL (ie:- you most likely) and alll relevant details have to be added to that email so they know who sent it and what case number it is so they can add it to your file

    it is no good emailing it as is because it is NOT signed and dated at the moment
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • youdontsay
    • By youdontsay 8th Feb 18, 10:46 PM
    • 83 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    youdontsay
    Six year old ticket
    IN THE COUNTY COURT
    CLAIM NO. XXXXXXX
    BETWEEN:
    EXCEL PARKING SERVICES LIMITED
    Claimant

    and

    XXXXX XXXXXXX
    Defendant


    Statement of
    DEFENCE




    1. This claim purports to relate to a parking charge relating to an identified vehicle in 2012. As the registered keeper of that vehicle, the Defendant has no knowledge of any 'parking charges' and received no correspondence at all until this sudden claim. The Defendant has no idea of the circumstances or contravention alleged, and the Claimant has given no explanation for the lack of previous correspondence, nor has the Claimant supplied photographic or other evidence.

    1.1. The Particulars of Claim do not fail to disclose any reasonable grounds for bringing the claim and as such, are an abuse of the court process or otherwise likely to obstruct the just disposal of the proceedings. The particulars fail to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4 and Practice Direction 16 by failing to provide a copy of the contract or details of any agreement by conduct. The particulars also fail to describe how the amount claimed has been calculated.

    1.2. The alleged incident pre-dates the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (Schedule 4), before which there was no lawful route to hold a registered keeper liable for the actions of an unidentified driver.

    1.3. The Claimant has failed to produce any evidence regarding the identity of the driver, and there can be no lawful presumption that a keeper was the driver on any given date in the absence of evidence.

    1.4. The Claimant is known to seek to rely on the case of Elliott v Loake [1983] Crim LR 36, in order to mislead the court that this case created a purported precedent that amounts to a presumption that the registered keeper is the driver. In that case, the finding that the keeper was the driver was based on the provision of forensic and other evidence, none of which has been presented here. Elliot v Loake was also a criminal case, which has no bearing on a civil contractual matter, as decided in several county court decisions where the Judges dismissed Elliott v Loake as not applicable.

    2. The particulars fail to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4 and Practice Direction 16, paragraphs 7.3 and 7.5, by failing to provide a copy of the alleged contract (presumably, signage terms from 2012). or details of any agreement by conduct

    3. Practice direction 22 sets out who may sign a statement of truth. Para 3.10 states that ''A legal representative who signs a statement of truth must sign in his own name and not that of his firm or employer''. The claim is signed by ''BW Legal''.

    4. The Claimant's solicitor, BW Legal, is a notorious, serial 'robo-claim' firm, whose cosy relationship with various rogue parking companies, and unacceptable conduct in pursuing unjustified and inflated parking charges was recently 'named and shamed' in a Parliamentary Second Reading of the Private Parking Code of Practice Bill, where one MP revealed he had reported this firm to the Solicitors' Regulation Authority to investigate. The Claimants themselves have also been named and shamed by MPs on several occasions, regarding their predatory and aggressive business practices, woeful signage and lack of evidence of any agreed contract.

    4.1. The issuing of this baseless claim appears to be an attempt to intimidate the Defendant into paying an ancient and unsubstantiated 'charge' for which the Defendant is not legally liable. This shows a complete lack of respect for the court process and also demonstrates the failure of the Claimant to attempt to mitigate losses, by making an extortionate, unquantified and unjustified demand for 262.50.

    5. The claimant may seek to rely on the case of Parking Eye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 ('Beavis'). This claim can be easily distinguished from Beavis, which was dependent upon an un-denied contract, formed by unusually prominent signage forming a clear offer and which turned on unique facts regarding the unusually compelling legitimate interests of the landowner (at that location only) in encouraging a turnover of free parking spaces. Strict compliance with the BPA Code of Practice was paramount, and Mr. Beavis was the admitted driver who saw the signs and entered into a contract to pay 85. None of this is applicable to this case, and the Supreme Court was at pains to state that each parking charge case would necessitate individual consideration of the facts, and that the penalty rule was certainly engaged in such cases.

    5.1. Further, in Beavis at the Court of Appeal stage, the Judges held the case of a free licence to park under certain conditions, was 'entirely different' from most ordinary economic transactional disputes. Parking charges cannot exist merely to punish drivers and this claimant has failed to show any comparable 'legitimate interest' to save their charge from Lord Dunedin's four tests for a penalty, which the Supreme Court Judges found were still a relevant and adequate test in less complex cases.

    6. As a member of the British Parking Association (BPA) in 2012, this Claimant was banned by the DVLA for several months for 'a significant breach' of the Code of Practice.

    6.1. This ban was reported by the DVLA in a Freedom of Information reply in the public domain, as relating to unacceptable and misleading wording on their signs, which attempted to suggest a registered keeper could be liable, before the POFA was enacted. Implying that a keeper could be liable/responsible for the actions of a driver was identified by the DVLA as so serious a matter that Excel was banned from obtaining registered keeper data for three months.

    6.2. It is averred that this misinformation regarding liability is exactly what this Claimant is repeating now, in the hope that neither the Defendant nor the Courts will realise that there can have been no 'keeper liability' on the material date and that this Claimant was actually banned for making these same misleading statements, around the time of this alleged incident.

    7. No evidence has been supplied to demonstrate that the Claimant is/was the landowner of the land in question, or that they have/had any other right, standing or proprietary interest in the land on the material date. The Claimant is therefore put to strict proof that they were at the time of the alleged event in possession of sufficient authority to issue parking charges and issue enforcement proceedings in their own name and can demonstrate a clear chain of authority from the landowner.

    8. It is averred that this Claimant failed to make reasonable efforts to make the terms and conditions in any of its car parks clear and prominent then, or at all. It cannot be assumed that anyone entering the car park in 2012 - when Excel used particularly crowded and illegible wording on all their signage - was aware of or agreed to any 'parking charge' terms. The Claimant is put to strict proof that the driver (an unidentified party) saw, read and agreed to a contract upon which the claimant is relying.

    8.1. The court's attention is drawn to the words of Simon Renshaw-Smith (previously known as 'Captain Clampit') in Excel v Cutts (2011, Stockport County Court), where Excel's signage was held to be deliberately misleading and deceptive, hiding any 'contractual charge' in the smallest lettering.

    8.2. The unclear signage used universally by Excel in 2011/2012 was exposed in an article by the Plain Language Commission, which reported that Mr Renshaw-Smith wrote to Stockport MP Andrew Gwynne: ''The recent decision by Deputy District Judge Lateef, is an embarrassment to the judicial system. Such an off the wall judgment leads one to question if there was indeed an ulterior motive. DJ Lateef is not fit to serve the Civil Courts''. It is averred that this Claimant continues to demonstrate a complete lack of respect for the court process, and a disregard for the rights of registered keepers in 2018. What is plain, is that the repeated exposure in Parliamentary debates condemning this Claimant and their solicitor is wholly justified.

    9. The Claimant is attempting to claim additional charges such as legal costs of 129.00. The Defendant also has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has not incurred the stated additional costs and it is put to strict proof that they have actually been incurred. The additional sum claimed for interest is an insult to justice and evidence of the Claimant's wilful and vexatious abuse of the court process, given that this Claimant has waited almost six years to contact the Defendant.

    10. The Defendant denies the claim in its entirety, voiding any liability to the claimant for all amounts claimed. In the absence of strict proof capable of rebutting the above points of defence, I submit that the Claimant has no cause of action whatsoever against the Defendant registered keeper, and the Defendant invites the court to exercise its case management powers to strike the claim out without a hearing, since it has no prospects of success.


    I believe the facts stated in this defence are true.


    signed



    date
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad

    Could this be my actual defence? Could I send as is to the Courts?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 8th Feb 18, 10:56 PM
    • 58,460 Posts
    • 71,971 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Yes of course, I wrote it for you to use.

    Add your claim number and your name where shown at the top, remove the bits I crossed out, change it all to black (not red), print it out and sign/date it. Keep a copy for your own court file.

    email a scan of the signed/dated document to the ccbcaq email address, as explained by KeithP above.

    Job done, for now...bear in mind there are other paperwork stages to follow. You will win. Keep coming back here at each stage, don't assume a court letter needs no action.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 09-02-2018 at 12:03 AM.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • youdontsay
    • By youdontsay 8th Feb 18, 11:26 PM
    • 83 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    youdontsay
    Six year old ticket
    Yes of course, I wrote it for you use.

    Add your claim number and your name where shown at the top, remove the bits I crossed out, change it all to black (not red), print it out and sign/date it. Keep a copy for your own court file.

    email a scan of the signed/dated document to the ccbcaq email address, as explained by KeithP above.

    Job done, for now...bear in mind there are other paperwork stages to follow. You will win. Keep coming back here at each stage, don't assume a court letter needs no action.
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    I am quite bowled over! I never expected this level of input! Thank you so much Coupon-mad, I was so relieved to have found this site but never thought that someone would take the time and trouble to write a defence for me. I know its not over, but thank you from the bottom of my heart
    • Ralph-y
    • By Ralph-y 8th Feb 18, 11:34 PM
    • 2,658 Posts
    • 3,341 Thanks
    Ralph-y
    you have on your side some of the best minds in the country re private parking problems .....

    CM should have had a mention in any of the honours lists ... for the work she does ... as do many others on this forum ....

    You will win this and I am so glad to see you progressing from the timid poster of a few days ago

    when you do win then you can do your bit and pass this new found information onto family / friends / neighbours ..... and your MP ....

    keep it up ...

    Ralph
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 9th Feb 18, 12:29 PM
    • 2,759 Posts
    • 3,420 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    We really do mean it however - you MUST go and read up on the newbies thread, post 2, and bookmark it - you need to keep referring to it.

    Small claims has a well known, set process.
    • youdontsay
    • By youdontsay 9th Feb 18, 10:23 PM
    • 83 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    youdontsay
    Six year old ticket
    I have received a letter from the courts as follows -

    'I acknowledge receipt of your defence. A copy is being served on the Claimant (or the claimant's solicitors) The claimant may contact you direct to attempt to resolve any dispute.If the dispute cannot be resolved informally, the claimant will inform the court that he wishes to proceed. The court will then inform you of what will happen.

    Where he wishes to proceed, the claimant must contact the court within 28 days after receiving a copy of your defence. After that period has elapsed, the claim will be stayed. The only action the claimant can then take will be to apply to a judge for an order lifting the stay.'

    The defence they refer to is the very amateur defence I wrote on the claim form as per the advice from their solicitors. Can I assume that the phone call I made requesting that a note be made on the file of the claim that this was to be disregarded has not been carried out I wonder? Does this mean that that defence is the one which will stand?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 9th Feb 18, 11:20 PM
    • 58,460 Posts
    • 71,971 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Just email the defence I wrote (signed & dated) to the CCBC, and for good measure email a copy to the claimant's solicitors even though normally you don't have to in MCOL.

    That way, they can't say later they didn't see your defence, and they might see your emailed one first. Do not explain to the Claimant why you are emailing it, just state that out of courtesy you are sending them a copy.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • youdontsay
    • By youdontsay 10th Feb 18, 8:49 AM
    • 83 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    youdontsay
    Just email the defence I wrote (signed & dated) to the CCBC, and for good measure email a copy to the claimant's solicitors even though normally you don't have to in MCOL.

    That way, they can't say later they didn't see your defence, and they might see your emailed one first. Do not explain to the Claimant why you are emailing it, just state that out of courtesy you are sending them a copy.
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    Thank you for your quick reply. I will do as you advise today. Should I email the courts separately and mention that I had asked for my previous defence to be disregarded and that it was confirmed on two occasions via telephone calls that this was done, and that a note had been put on claim file. But for for some reason, my defence has been acknowledged before receiving the amended defence?

    Also I believe the defence should have been typed in Times New Roman font with 1.5 spacing, should I convert the defence prior to emailing? I have in my hand a copy of each version but thought I should check first

    I have just noticed that advice from Redx further up this thread advises to include MCOL references in the body of the email, but no mention of it more recently. Should I include MCOL details in email or not? There are several other reference numbers that Ive included in order to pinpoint my actual claim is what I am thinking

    Many thanks
    Last edited by youdontsay; 10-02-2018 at 10:32 AM.
    • Fruitcake
    • By Fruitcake 10th Feb 18, 9:33 AM
    • 36,810 Posts
    • 83,290 Thanks
    Fruitcake
    Don't forget to ask for costs, including those for unreasonable behaviour. Have you thought about a counterclaim for DPA breach and possible harassment in case the scammers pull out or don't turn up to defend?

    I'm not sure what you can claim, but I'm sure there must be something.
    Last edited by Fruitcake; 10-02-2018 at 9:35 AM.
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister.

    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
    • Fruitcake
    • By Fruitcake 10th Feb 18, 9:44 AM
    • 36,810 Posts
    • 83,290 Thanks
    Fruitcake
    I've just found this from the P-P website.

    The judge said,
    "Finally on to POFA. The judge noted that he is unsure why Excel choose to disregard POFA when bringing these claims. There is no basis to assume that the registered keeper is the driver and Excel should not turn up to court without evidence of who was driving the vehicle unless they wanted to make life difficult for themselves."

    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/07/excel-lose-in-count-witness-irrelevant.html
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister.

    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
    • youdontsay
    • By youdontsay 10th Feb 18, 1:19 PM
    • 83 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    youdontsay
    Don't forget to ask for costs, including those for unreasonable behaviour. Have you thought about a counterclaim for DPA breach and possible harassment in case the scammers pull out or don't turn up to defend?

    I'm not sure what you can claim, but I'm sure there must be something.
    Originally posted by Fruitcake
    To be honest Im more interested in getting a line drawn under this but I see your point and it may be worth thinking about. Im guessing that would be a separate procedure? Or does it get discussed at this stage ? It might deter them from harassing other innocent people if they have to pay out?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 11th Feb 18, 12:24 AM
    • 58,460 Posts
    • 71,971 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Thank you for your quick reply. I will do as you advise today. Should I email the courts separately and mention that I had asked for my previous defence to be disregarded and that it was confirmed on two occasions via telephone calls that this was done, and that a note had been put on claim file. But for for some reason, my defence has been acknowledged before receiving the amended defence?
    I would not. I would just email your defence with the claim number and 'defence' in the heading.

    Also I believe the defence should have been typed in Times New Roman font with 1.5 spacing, should I convert the defence prior to emailing? I have in my hand a copy of each version but thought I should check first
    Yes but then of course you will have to re-sign and date the copy before scanning it. You can't send an unsigned/undated document.

    I have just noticed that advice from Redx further up this thread advises to include MCOL references in the body of the email, but no mention of it more recently. Should I include MCOL details in email or not? There are several other reference numbers that Ive included in order to pinpoint my actual claim is what I am thinking
    The Claim Number is enough to identify the case for the Claimant and the Court.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • youdontsay
    • By youdontsay 11th Feb 18, 8:50 AM
    • 83 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    youdontsay
    Six year old ticket
    Thank you. I did all that you advised and have now sent it, and received an acknowledgement of my email. Ill do a spot of background reading as a I await the next step from the courts. I have written to Nick Smith after watching the Parliamentary debate. Lets hope and pray that these people get their car parks closed down Thank to everyone who has helped me, Im very grateful
    • youdontsay
    • By youdontsay 12th Feb 18, 10:01 AM
    • 83 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    youdontsay
    Six year old ticket
    Im not a happy bunny today as I have received an email from ccbc stating that they cant accept the second defence as they have acknowledged my first defence.

    As explained I telephoned them twice within hours of sending my original defence to request that it be disregarded and was assured twice, by two different people that a note was on my file to this effect.

    It seems that the only way I can amend the defence is to pay 100 up front.

    What an awful lot of court time, personal time, effort and money these cowboys are causing by their greed

    Should I leave this as is or pay to amend the defence?
    • youdontsay
    • By youdontsay 12th Feb 18, 10:04 AM
    • 83 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    youdontsay
    Six year old ticket
    Actually, looking at the email thats been sent to me, Im not sure I can make an amendment as the fee has to be paid by cheque or postal order, meaning a dependence on the postal system to get it there on time and the deadline for this is 14th Feb I believe.
    • youdontsay
    • By youdontsay 12th Feb 18, 2:19 PM
    • 83 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    youdontsay
    Six year old ticket
    I apologise in advance for this but Im not sure what would be the best way forward.

    I started this thread regarding a claim form sent recently which was for a alleged parking offence 6 years ago. Some very helpful people are giving me advice on it which Im very grateful for.

    Meanwhile I have received another PCN which allegedly took place a month ago. I wasnt the driver at the time and its likely that there was an overstay apparently.

    My question is, that with the 6 year old case still very much going on, should I do anything yet or hold fire until the older one is completed? Im thinking that if Excel realise another one has come in, will it jeopardise the outcome of the case, making me look like an irresponsible car parker, which I am not?

    Equally, I would like to nip this one in the bud, the thought of them hounding me for 6 years is unthinkable, as Ive read they are prone to do on these forums.

    And should I start a new thread about this or just read the general Newbie advice?




    You wait for hours for a bus and none come along, then two come at the same time
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 12th Feb 18, 2:41 PM
    • 35,908 Posts
    • 20,149 Thanks
    Quentin
    Yes if you need advice on the new charge start a new thread.

    Forget about this new one jeopardising the original one and just follow the steps set out in the Newbies FAQ thread on how to deal with this

    The only way to nip it in the bud is to pay it off!

    All creditors have 6 years to pursue you over an unpaid debt but once you have completed the appeals stage you can ignore their hounding and only respond to a lbcca or Court correspondence
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 12th Feb 18, 4:50 PM
    • 58,460 Posts
    • 71,971 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Already expected all of this, surely you did too? This was bound to happen, nothing different.

    That's why I suggested you email your actual defence to the claimant. Hope you did?

    Then let the case carry on, and in your WS you explain that the Claimant bullied you into submitting a form that didn't carry your full defence, but to mitigate that issue in good faith, you sent the court and the claimant the full defence within days.

    You will be painting this as a picture of unreasonableness, later. At WS stage.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

4,308Posts Today

7,961Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @LaraLewington: ...and mine suggested I'd achieved a lifelong ambition of being sawn in half by a magician - at our wedding. Wasn't. Don?

  • We are working on it - I think BA has behaved awfully on this. Those flight were no obviously a glitch. It should? https://t.co/8pvtXtUEqi

  • RT @thenicolabryant: Absolutely. We need mental health and financial health as advocated my @MartinSLewis , to be taught in schools. So muc?

  • Follow Martin