Jump to content

HSB

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    403

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Posts posted by HSB

  2. Posted · Report reply

    Not really relevant, You aren't buying anything there and that is the opposite - People would rather avoid the letter and there's no tracking on them at all.

    If you want to reference NZ Law, How about the Consumer Garuntees act?

    Anyway, Probably pays for me to read ECS' terms of use;

    So sounds like I wouldn't get a refund, but "notifying them within 21 days of expected delivery date" they would lodge a claim before sending replacement parts.

    It is absolutely relevant.

    What that comparison shows, is that in that instance, if something is sent it is deemed delivered regardless of actual delivery.

    Furthermore, good luck with trying to get the Consumer Guarantees Act to apply to an overseas country, you know considering jurisdictions and international law and all that.

    • Like 1

  5. Posted · Report reply

    Let me put it another way which might make it easier to comprehend M3AN's position.

    s 210(2) of the Land Transport Act relates to service of infringement notices: "If any such notice or request is sent to a person by post, then, unless the contrary is shown, it is to be treated as having been delivered to him or her when it would have been delivered in the ordinary course of post, and in proving the delivery it is sufficient to prove that the letter was properly addressed in posted"

    So?

    If an infringement is sent to you and the sender (Police, Council etc) can prove it was sent, it is automatically considered received.

    Why?

    To avoid parties refusing responsibility by claiming "I did not receive anything in the post".

    Of course seems unfair as we all know sometimes the post as a matter of fact does not turn up (see: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10876193 and see: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/1396748/Postie-accused-over-missing-mail-items ) but it is contrary common sense to blame, for example, the Police (as the sender) for the nondelivery of an item by the service provider (NZ Post).

    • Like 1

  8. Posted · Report reply

    The only legislation around traffic infringements that I can see is the Land Transport Act 1998 and the Summary Proceedings Act 1957, both in relation to service of an infringement on a person - does not give any specific time frame for service once an act has been committed in respect of speeding infringements. One would think however that the notification period would have to be "reasonable" (aka 365 days later to the average person is unreasonable).

    Legislatively imposed timeframes are as follows:

    post-51309-0-30340000-1424144060.png

    From experience that sounds like a pretty standard time frame from date of offence to service of infringement. Out of curiosity I always request a photo; you are entitled to have this - if they cannot produce you should not pay :)

    • Like 1

  15. Posted · Report reply

    Thanks Allan thats really comprehensive advice.....if only i had outstanding debts in the motor industry hahaha!!

    Perhaps the TM one could be an option, but I'll go to a bumper repair place on Monday - anyone have any go-to's in WLG?

    Also any ball park figures for the expected $$ of this damage would be appreciated.....

    post-51309-0-99832600-1423899865.jpgpost-51309-0-65387200-1423899866.jpg

  16. Posted · Report reply

    Agreed. I was being lazy with my terminology.

    I don't know what statutes and requirements are in place for a towing company, but they don't seem to fussed about adhering to anything that might say 'check validity of parking before removing vehicle', for example. Of course, there's no profit in that.

    Don't be lazy :P

    Land Transport Rule: Operator Licensing 2007

    see: http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/rules/docs/operator-licensing-consolidation.pdf

    10.10 Restriction on moving of vehicles by vehicle recovery service

    10.10(1) Subject to 10.10(2), a person may not move a vehicle using a vehicle recovery service vehicle unless the tow authority has been signed by:

    a. a driver or a person claiming or appearing to be the owner of the vehicle, or a representative of the owner; or

    b. an enforcement officer or parking warden; or

    c. the owner or a representative of the owner of any land or a building, if the vehicle is being towed from his or her land or building that is not a road.

    10.10(2) If a person listed in 10.10(1) is not available, the driver of the vehicle recovery service vehicle must record the name, address, and contact telephone number of the person who requested that the tow be undertaken.

    So in vtgts' case the tow company will be relying on 10.10(1)(c.) representative of the building company, towing from land that is not a road. ....which appears factually problematic.

  17. Posted · Report reply

    It is a form of legalised theft.

    No such thing exists - theft is defined in s 219 of the Crimes Act and the term theft, by its own definition, is an illegal act - you cannot have a legal illegal act if you get my drift.

    What tow companies have is the capacity to "right a wrong". In other words they can move a car if it is somewhere it is not supposed to be (circumstances permitting etc etc). If they do not have the authority to "right the wrong" then they indeed act illegally.

    The problem with the term theft is this part "intent to deprive any owner permanently of that property or of any interest in that property" - a tow company does not purport to deprive you permanently, rather you pay the fee and you get access to your car.

    This is where the argument starts to go in circles, should you have to pay the fee, where they have had no ability to "right the wrong"? Of course the clear answer is no - and the building company has acknowledged this by paying the fee.

    But the damage inflicted to the car.... well I have clear views on this which I will PM you OP.

    • Like 1

  18. Posted · Report reply

    I need some advice please...

    I have long needed to get a new front bumper because there is a big dent in the front left hand corner (no idea - its a solid dent too). Was looking online and found some different overseas import options but doing a bit of research this involves sanding/priming/painting if i was to go down this route correct?

    So have seen this: http://www.trademe.co.nz/motors/car-parts-accessories/bmw/exterior/auction-846011039.htm and will do the trick i suppose.

    But now my bro is telling me to bog up the dent hahahahaha he's a good boy but a bit loose

    So can some-one tell me of those three options above what I should do? (If its the TM-link is that a fair price?)

    Thank you :)

×
×
  • Create New...