Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Nick Wallis has written up the first day of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence to the inquiry. I thought she was awful. She's decided to go with being not bright enough to spot what was happening over Fujitsu altering entries on the Horizon system, rather than covering up important facts. She's there today as well. The First Lady of Flat Earth – Post Office Scandal WWW.POSTOFFICESCANDAL.UK Angela van den Bogerd, on oath once more It is possible that Angela van den Bogerd and her senior colleagues (Rodric Williams, Mark Davies, Susan...  
    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Smart Parking ANPR PCN - 35 mins - Havens Bank Retail Park, Exeter


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1899 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all!

I have received a parking charge

- I had no idea I need to pay there, as it is a retail park and those are usually don't charge for parking

- I am never shopping there again, that's for sure!

 

We have been in the shop for about 35 min. And now they are asking for £54 or £90 if I don't pay by 14th October!

 

PCN's received through the post [ANPR camera capture]

 

1 Date of the infringement 22/09/2018

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] Date on the letter 01/10/2018

 

3 Date received - I don't know, hubby opened it and chucked the envelope out

 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [y/n?] No

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes, on entry and on exit of the car park

 

6 Have you appealed? {y/n?] post up your appeal] No

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up No

 

7 Who is the parking company? Smart Parking Ltd

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Havens Bank Retail Park, Exeter

 

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. I think it says to send appeal back to them, and if they reject, then POPLA is available - independent Adjudication service

 

Any help is greatly appreciated

Edited by dx100uk
format
Link to post
Share on other sites

ah the old not so smart parking lot

 

plenty of threads here to follow

I've moved your thread to the correct forum and slightly retitled [park spelling was wrong no A]

100's of threads here on this car park

 

have a read of these they'll guide you upon what you need to do

https://cse.google.co.uk/cse?cx=partner-pub-8889411648654839:6449422593&ie=UTF-8&q=Heavens+Bank+Retail+Park,+Exeter&sa=Search+CAG

 

but don't do anything before checking here first please

 

can you scan up the NTK to PDF please

read UPLOAD

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, read the other threads first and tell us a little more about your circumstances, for example where your vehicle was parked in relation to the entrance. We know that the entrance has rather confusing signage that applies to other premises and none that are clear that relate to the actual car park but I may be giving you old information so recent pictures would be useful.

 

 

Also pictures of the siganeg in the car park and of the blurb on the parking meter please.

 

 

Lastly, where did you shop within the centre as giving them some grief may get you a conversation with the management of the centre and they have a vested interest in Smart's tenure so any publicity that makes them look bad is good publicity for the motorist.

 

 

In short, try to get the retailers to get the ticket cancelled before you say anthing to Smart.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your reply.

I didn't notice any parking signs, but as I looked on Google Maps there's one small one by the entrance to the estate.

I didn't notice any parking machines either, but that maybe because it was raining heavily and I didn't expect it to be a paid-for carpark.

 

We got out of the car and run to the Range shop - we parked right next to the door, which is a way away from the turn where I saw the parking sign on Google maps.

 

I still have the receipt from The Range from that day, but they are not picking up the phone.

 

I will keep calling The Range and go there on Saturday to take pictures of the signs and parking meters

Edited by dx100uk
quote spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

the start by phoning the Range head office, they will carry more clout than a local store.

 

 

get us the pictures and dont forget we need to see the entrance from the public highway as that is where you are supposed to eb informed that you are entering private land under a contractual offer, not some time after you have aprked.

 

 

 

The Peel Center in Stiockport is famous for its garbage sigange so worth reading up on this place and the court cases from there to see what is expected from signs

Edited by honeybee13
Paras, typos
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I went there and took some pictures, from the street on the side I was turning from the sign is looking the other way, it's only noticeable if you are turning into the car park from the other side (but I took both pictures)

 

There are signs at the carpark, which I didn't see in the pouring rain and the dark, and no signs next to the shop, where I parked, but looking at the picture now

 

- there's a banner on the shop wall quite high that says about parking, but I wouldn't be looking that high up above the car when parking.

 

I found the parking machine, and took a picture of that, just in case - but I did not see it at the time.

 

Also attached in the next post 2 PDFs - one of the original letter from Smart Parking, the other one is from DRP Debt collectors, which arrived yesterday, asking for £150.

 

The DRP's letter says the Reason for Issue: Insufficient parking time.

 

Also it says - the person liable for this parking charge is the person who was the driver when it was issued.

 

I haven't replied to them so far, and their pictures from the initial letter don't show the driver, so there's no chance for them to know who was driving.

 

Shall I keep ignoring them or reply something, like that I don't agree with their charges?

Or by doing this I will admit that I was the driver?

 

Thank you

 

here is everything in one PDF

docs1.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't time to write to them as your case may not be strong enough yet to get them scurrying back into their rat hole where they reside But whenever you do write all you have to say is "the driver did not " rather than "I did not". But the longer the letter the more likely one is to forget and include "I" in there somewhere thus giving away one of your strong points-who the driver is.

 

At the moment all they do is try and scare you with stupid letters and escalating the amounts they are demanding hoping you will pay before the price goes even higher.

 

These fabricated amounts have no basis on law.

You will know when they are close to giving up when they start bringing their stupid charges down.

Usually that's getting on for the time to write to them telling them what a bunch of crooks they are and you have no intention of paying them a penny.

 

You give them a good kicking and they realise that they have wasted all that time and money on you.

Life can be so sweet at times.

 

For now just relax and let them waste their money .

 

Who knows, by that time maybe that supine bunch at the BPA might decide to act in a vain attempt to clean up the stink that is their business.

Oh I just saw a pig fly past my window......

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

thread tidied

docs in post 6

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

try now EB I've sorted it.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hello everyone.

 

I received 3rd letter last week. I have made another PDF with all the letters and pictures.

I tried to make them as big as possible this time, so you can read.

I have ignored them so far.

 

I am thinking I need to write a reply to them now of some sort without disclosing the name of the driver?

What would the wise people say?

Heavens Bank Parking 3 letters.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry about about those unregulated twerps at DRP they are completely useless and can do nothing to you.

You're still a bit short of sending them packing but you are getting closer.

 

thank you. So - still not to reply them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

god no where are you getting the idea you need to reply yet?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been reading quite a lot of the other posts, but some people say that when they wrote a snooty letter back to DPR saying they have no right to impose fines as they are not the land owner, and that their signs are illegible, and their charges are illegal etc- they stop pursuing you.

 

And some are writing complaints to the council too.

 

But some other people don't reply nor react to them at all.

I was just wondering which one was best, to be honest, as I have been reading other threads for about 2 hours yesterday, but there aren't any recent updates on those posts - so I don't know what happened to those people at the end

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

again shows you have not been reading carefully enough...

 

you wont find anyone on here being told to write a snotty letter to DR+...they are a DCA, they are POWERLESS, a DCA is NOT a BAILLIFF ..

 

then write to the Tame/fake paperonly SOLICITOR.... WHEN they get a Letter of claim.

 

you've also fail to understand it is NOT A FINE.. its a speculative invoice for breaking some imaginary contract you entered into by using the car park. only the police /council/courts can FINE you.

 

read and understand things carefully

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

the terminology you mention in your above posting shows the limits of your knowledge and send somehting like that and they will laugh at you and take you to court because they know the difference between a charge and a fine, unlawful and illegal and will think that you are easy meat.

Let us know what you get next, we will advise what to say at the appropriate time

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

As post 19

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...