Jump to content

User6809

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1 Neutral
  1. Yes Jamberson, that last sentence was intended for irony Although if I send a pound of flesh as well do you think that would get their attention? Or maybe that's a little melodramatic?!
  2. Thanks for your responses guys, even if they are a little disappointing. For something that is supposed to be a legal term, it seems to have a rather fuzzy definition and to be open to interpretation. For example, what leeway would be allowed to this imaginary line - should we be expected to get out a protractor and tape measure to work out exactly where "outside No.20" starts and 1cm over this vague line is an offence, assuming we've laid it out correctly? Anyway, we'll take your advice and pay the reduced rate. Now to compose a letter to the council to complain about the number of suspended parking areas that we have had to put up with this year and to request a refund on the resident parking charge. Regards.
  3. Hello. We recently received a PCN for parking in a suspended bay or space and have had our initial appeal rejected (not yet received a "Notice to Owner") and were wondering our best course of action is from here. We live in a street that has residents parking as well as pay-and-display (we have a residents parking permit which we pay a yearly fee for). There are no actual "bays", you can park in the first space large enough for your car in the local area. The only road markings related to parking is a dashed white line parallel to the pavement within which you have to park. A week previously, one or more signs appeared on the lamp post outside stating that the parking was suspended on the day in concern "Outside number 20". We live next door and as I was leaving for work that morning I looked at our car and felt it was legally parked outside our house (number 18). When my wife went to get in the car later that day she saw the PCN attached with contravention 21s "Parked wholly or partly in a suspended bay or space - shared use bay". When we looked at the pictures provided by the council we could see that approximately 1/3 of the car (at most) could be said to be outside No.20 the rest outside No.18 - so in our view the car was parked outside No.18. When I had left in the morning, and when the pictures were taken by the traffic officer, the car was also blocked front and back my rubbish bags and bins as the waste collection was that day and they pre-empt the cart by pulling the bags and bins out into the parking area for collection later. We made the initial appeal on the grounds that the suspended bay/area was undefined and required you to imagine a line drawn from where the 2 houses join to work out where "outside no 20" actually meant and that I was unable to move the car due to the rubbish bags and bins in front and behind it. This was rejected. Interestingly the rejection letter refers to "parking bays" and also seems to reject our appeal because we had a previous appeal upheld. Is there any precedent that we can use here as to what would qualify as being "outside number 20" when there are no marked bays? Is an imaginary line drawn from where the houses join a valid qualification? Also if our car was blocked by rubbish bags and rubbish bins so that it was not possible to move is it reasonable to expect us to move them so we can move the car? Any help or suggestions in this would be appreciated. Even if it is to just pay the reduced (paid within 2 weeks) penalty. Thanks
  4. Wish I'd read this thread earlier. Just got my latest fuel bill which includes an estimate of the usage made at the point the prices went up. The Gas bill in particular is extremely skewed - the estimated daily usage rate after the price increase is 3 TIMES the estimated daily usage rate before the price rise. They claim that this is based on previous usage over the August to December period - ie from last year. But this year has been a lot warmer than last year and our gas heating has only started coming on in the last couple of weeks - so it all seems a bit biased to their side (was the price rise made when it was because they knew a warmer autumn was coming up perhaps?). This is supposed to be allowed as part of their terms and conditions - so I'll be digging these out tonight to check! I'm also currently working my way up the complaints ladder to see if they are willing to adjust the bill but at this point it seems unlikely.
  5. In my case they seemed to send out a letter every 6 months or so - although I did make the mistake of writing to them. So you may have a few to go yet. Anyone know if any progress was made in getting OPC declared a "vexatious litigant"?
  6. Because it was over so quickly, like a numpty I forgot to ask for costs . Once I know that the case isn't to be re-heard (I think they have 14 days to request that) I'll write to the court and ask if it is possible to have the costs awarded - but I fear it may be too late. One piece of advice I do have is that if you include the "I don't know who was driving that day" in your defence, then you need to have a good explanation why you don't know. The one thing the Judge did ask me was why I didn't know - fortunately I had a reasonably acceptable explanation (and it didn't make any difference anyway).
  7. Well - what an anti-climax! There I was at court, with all the legal arguments ready to shred OPC's claim and, whether by design or accident, the b*****s didn't show up! Judge dismissed the claim and it was all over in 5 minutes! Could quite believe that it was all a bluff as the witness statement from OPC was rather token. However, apparently, they are able to relist the case if they so wish (anyone know how long they have to do this?) - but that would cause them extra cost. Many thanks to all on this site for their help - in particular AL27 who has always been willing to answer questions and review my docs. I'll post up any further information that I get on this case as I get it.
  8. Can someone just confirm - I know that I've read it somewhere in this forum but can't find it right now - that any contract for parking is with the landowner or their authorised agent? So if OPC were to produce evidence that they have a contract with the managing agents to manage the car park, but no evidence that the managing agents have an agreement with the landowner then doesn't that mean that they have failed to prove that they are entitled to issue PCNs?
  9. Thanks Guido. Would it be an acceptable thing to do to put this judgement into my bundle (in full)?
  10. When preparing to list precendents for your defence for a court hearing - which OPC may want to go ahead with if they want another defeat - do you only need to list the case (such as "Wilson v Love 1896, Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre v New Garage Motor 1915 et al") and a one line summary of the judgement which is relevant or do you need to list a more substantial part of the case? There may be a relevant thread on this site but I couldn't find one. Thanks.
  11. Unfortunately they can. I'm currently going through the court process with OPC and have found out that you don't even need to pay the £25 to the court system until 4 weeks before the case is to be heard. So they can use this to pressure their victims for some months before the case would be heard and then can even back out at no cost to themselves - unless they are classified as a vexatious litigant in which case they cannot use this online system. With the recent news of 8 losses :grin: lets hope that judgement is not far away. (Although I suspect they will just set up as a new company and/or sell the "debt" on.)
  12. Congratulations Mooki - that's great news! I'm wondering if I should create a new thread now and leave this one as completed. Or whether it is better to keep these two OPC related cases as 1 thread. Any thoughts anyone?
  13. Thanks Mooki. So just got back from holiday and have received a hearing date towards the middle of the year. Interesting point from my previous message is that OPC have still not paid the hearing fee - it is required 1 month before the hearing otherwise the hearing is removed from the list. So they can use the court service to pressurise victims and not have to pay anything until 1 month before the court hearing. We both have to prepare and send out documentation 2 weeks before the hearing. Can't wait to see the documentation that they will be relying on. If I have time I may look at the letters that they have sent out and possibly lodge a complaint against them with the British Parking Association and DVLA and add that to my defence documents.
  14. Just an update for this thread - sorry didn't mean to hijack it. If Mooki comes back then I can start a new thread. So the defence has been returned and the case has been referred to my local County court who have sent me an Allocation Questionaire - basically if I agree that it can be put on the quick track. It was when filling out this form that I realised that OPC would not have had to pay a fee for this claim until they return this questionaire - so it will be interesting to see if I (or the Court) hear anything further. Apparently the Court can censure them if they fail to respond. If I'd been feeling belligerent I would have made a counterclaim for time and costs - which would have forced them to defend or admit liability
  15. No probs. My responses so far have been that it is up to them to provide proof of who was the driver - as outlined in: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/119802-private-parking-tickets-template.html so I think that my defence should follow the same line. And I don't remember who was driving that day - the car was parked in the work's car park and I was at work at the time! However, it was not necessarily me that parked the car there that day. What I was thinking was whether there is some principle in law that I could quote which states that I am not required to inform them who was driving the car at the time that it was parked, and that they are obliged to produce proof of the driver.
×
×
  • Create New...