-
Posts
561 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11
Gick last won the day on May 30 2021
Gick had the most liked content!
Reputation
714 ExcellentRecent Profile Visitors
The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.
-
I'm sorry Andyorch, I don't think that it is clearly stated not to agree to mediation. For 'newbies' the first words are 'YES to nediation. Yes it does add a caviate but this can be lost in the plethora of information.' I have long thought that DX should create two templates, one being specific to Parking issues, clearly stating 'NO to mediation', thus avoiding an error which is increasingly common. I note that dx has highlighted the section in red in his above post, this was not highlighted in his previous posts It is easy for regulars to forget how confusing it can be for those new to CAG to digest the nuances, when filling in forms that they have never before faced.
-
Whilst I concur with 'ignore', please bear in mind that if you revisit Italy with the same vehicle, it is possible that their system could flag up your visit with possible clamping. I do not know the mechanism in Italy, but it is something to bear in mind should a subsequent visit be contemplated. Perhaps someone more familiar with Italian procedures could advise?
-
Can I point out to Billy Williams that the Bulk Centre in Northampton is not a County Court in the normal terms, it is merely and Administrative office situated in St Katherin's House with a number of computer terminals and operators. It is a means of streamlining civil claims relieving County Courts around the country from having to deal with the repetitive initial claims of some types such a parking which can then be dealt with through Money Claims Online (MCOL). All that I can see from your thread is that you have picked up, from some unknown sources, a hash mash of terms, many of which do not apply to Private Parking . Much of this could have been dealt with had you complied with the repeated request to 1) read other threads here, in particular the Success thread, which will answer much that you are asking (we have seen these questions many times, the site is self help too) 2) Scan any paperwork that you have, redacting all personal information and reference numbers, posting to give the experienced Caggers a chance to see what is applicable to your situation. Most of your questions seem to be hypothetical. I would remind you that all of the team, (site team and members alike) on Consumer Action Group are volunteers and we just like to help.
-
One of the main reasons for not appealing to a PPC is that it is easy to inadvertently identify yourself as the driver and thus lose the protection that you as registered keeper have under Pofa 2012. (referred to by Lookingforinfo @#11) So if you write to a landowner or occupier, it is important to only refer to "the driver did this or that, " NOT "i did this or that"
-
DX can be quite cryptic in his replies! You are correct in that you do not have to disclose whom is the driver. Unless the PPC complies with the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 in all respects, the indebtedness of the driver cannot be transferred to the Registered Keeper. The fleecers will still try to claim (often by assuming that they are one and the same - something that the Courts do not allow) so, providing that you do not identify yourself as the driver by use of 'I parked' or similar, the claim can be batted off.
-
Lookinforinfo As Nicky Boy said they sent out the Notice to keeper in time to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. This means that only the driver is responsible for the debt and should the driver not pay, the charge cannot be transferred to the keeper. I think that you meant did NOT send the...... in time etc
-
When you write to MOTO, be careful not to disclose that you were the driver as they could well forward your letter to the fleecers. Something like :- "On (day date) a party in my vehicle (Reg) visited your premises for a period within the published permitted limit. The following day we were returning home and also visited. Unfortunately CP plus have confused the two visits as one continuous stay. I do have evidence that the party were elsewhere during the intervening period. I ask that you use your kind offices to have CPplus cancel the PCN and I would suggest that you request that they update their system to avoid other of your valued customers having the stress of being wrongly accused in this manner."
-
SNOWS PEUGEOT OF BASINGSTOKE FAULTY VAN
Gick replied to gavino76's topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers
Worry ye not. The fact is that you informed the seller of the vehicle that it had a problem within the 6 months, so that has preserved your rights under CRA 2015
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS
The Consumer Action Group
×
- Create New...
IPS spam blocked by CleanTalk.