alchresearch Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 (edited) I really think in view of your (now) admitted ignorance you might shut up? Hmmm, you'd like that because then you wouldn't have to address the valid points that Truman, Mumkin and I have made, nor post up where you claimed to have "criticised Rustybum for parking where he liked.". I've not said anything different to what I've said in the past. If you think I have then please post it. Its nothing to do with "ignorance", other than you ignoring valid points put to you, and making the discussion go round in circles. ---------- Post added 02-10-2013 at 11:52 ---------- The problem isn't - for the one thousand seven hundred and twenty-eighth time - about parking properly. What a joke you are. You claim this isn't about parking properly, then go on to quote the post from "wapntake" who didn't park properly because of his own failings - failing to read the signs and taking advice from people in the pub and staying three hours. Every parking "violation" is different. For example Cyclones is very unfair, but isn't the same as Rustybum's or Wapntake's, but you don't seem to grasp this. Edited October 2, 2013 by alchresearch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walkley Dave Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 Hmmm, you'd like that because then you wouldn't have to address the valid points that Truman, Mumkin and I have made, nor post up where you claimed to have "criticised Rustybum for parking where he liked.". I've not said anything different to what I've said in the past. If you think I have then please post it. Its nothing to do with "ignorance", other than you ignoring valid points put to you, and making the discussion go round in circles. ---------- Post added 02-10-2013 at 11:52 ---------- What a joke you are. You claim this isn't about parking properly, then go on to quote the post from "wapntake" who didn't park properly because of his own failings - failing to read the signs and taking advice from people in the pub and staying three hours. Every parking "violation" is different. For example Cyclones is very unfair, but isn't the same as Rustybum's or Wapntake's, but you don't seem to grasp this. I grasp it perfectly. Try going to court saying it isn't fair..... Private parking companies cannot "fine" people. That is precisely what I am fighting against. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 But I've no problem with that. Ages and ages ago I've said on more than one occasion that I don't agree with underhand tactics of making them look like fines, or not giving "grace" for being just five minutes over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penistone999 Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 It says "Parking Charge Notice" because the short version PCN also stands for PENALTY Charge Notice (remarkably also PCN!!) but one is private parking companies - the other one is councils and police who are allowed to fine people. I would suggest the similarity is deliberate. . Of course its deliberate , its a very cynical calculated way of trying to deceive motorists ,trying to make us think their worthless invoice`s are enforceable in law . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walkley Dave Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 Of course its deliberate , its a very cynical calculated way of trying to deceive motorists ,trying to make us think their worthless invoice`s are enforceable in law . Since October 2012' PRotection of Freedom Act they can, and do enforce their worthless invoices in the Small Claims Court against the Registered Keeper. They win against people who have ignored their hamster bedding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geared Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 The law hasn't changed to make them more enforceable tho, it's only allowed them to go after the registered keeper. The increase in court activity is probably because clamping is illegal, so they need to do something else to con people out of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosey Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 The law hasn't changed to make them more enforceable tho, it's only allowed them to go after the registered keeper. The increase in court activity is probably because clamping is illegal, so they need to do something else to con people out of money. It's also due to a very unhelpful Court of Appeal judgment. Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walkley Dave Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 It's also due to a very unhelpful Court of Appeal judgment. Another Private Parking Company lost in court today to a person defending herself. _________________________ Case No. 3YK50188 Civil Enforcement Ltd v Ms Kerry McCafferty (£350 claimed) At: Watford County Court The Defendant uses this P&D car park on a daily basis, and on one occasion forgot to pay the £5 daily charge. I attended court today against CEL and the case was dismissed! ...... The Deputy district Judge was particularly influenced by the OBSERVICE v THURLOW case. A Mr Abraham attended for CEL with a female associate. The judge did consider there was a contract in place, but only for the £1 or £5 parking fee. He considered the onerous £150 term was not adequately drawn to my attention as it is in such small print. Also the £150 was not a genuine pre estimate of loss. They raised at court the loss was made up of salary, stationery, building costs ect but he was having none of that, saying that was the admin cost of bringing the case, not the pre estimated loss of me failing to pay £5. Where it to be the case he referred to Thurlow that CEL could not have offered a reduction for an early payment. It is possible to win on this basis. The POPLA service has (as far as anyone can tell) allowed all appeals saying that the sum demanded is a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss. And allowed appeals which asked for the production of the contract which for some reason (HA!) PPC's are reluctant to do. Put in both to POPLA and they are a slam dunk. Never gets to court and you have COST THEM MONEY! (About £120.00 in total) Which is an excellent idea IMHO. Why "ignore" when it is possible to cost them money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carosio Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 My car was parked briefly in a bay marked as disabled (apparently I have been informed, to drop an elderly infirm person off near the entrance) and the driver received a ticket from UKPC, then as Registered Keeper I received the follow up. I sent them a letter (not an appeal) asking: 1. Is it breach of contract or trespass 2. Is it a parking fee or a penalty charge 3. Who is the creditor entitled to the money 4. A copy of the contract with the landowner and their right to pursue legal proceedings if no payment is forthcoming. See attachment for their reply. http://i665.photobucket.com/albums/vv12/carosio/ukpcreply1.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graham101@ta Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 (edited) hi i recieved a parking charge notice at the manchester infirmary renal unit i parked in the renal unit carpark displaying my blue badge and when i came out i had got a parking charge notice. it is free parking for blue badge owners so i cant see how they can expect me to pay the charge notice i registered on http://www.moneysavingexpert.com and got some valuable advice i have now sent an email to pals at the hospital expressing my concerns and that i am being harrased by the parking company. i have also been advised to write to the bpa about the parking company the BPA Code of Practice Disabled motorists 16.5 If your landowner provides a concession that allows parking for disabled people, if a vehicle displays a valid Blue Badge you must not issue it with parking charge notices. so the cpp are breaking the code of practice graham Edited October 4, 2013 by graham101@ta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts