In all honesty, I think the thread has generally been quite civil and has opened up quite a bit of debate. Its only when Maharg1 gets involved because he's clearly on a wind up. "Don't feed the troll" has never been more apt.

I just ran it through babelfish and it translates into english as " please consider agreeing to pay our client somehting as they dotn ahve a hope of winning the court claim especially with us working for them"

All I wanted was an answer to my question. Here are more Do you think the Brexit vote was down party lines or were there Tories who voted remain and Labour who voted leave. I doubt I will get answers to them either. I think before anyone celebrates we should wait to see what the consequences are. I fear there could be dire problems if a reasonable deal isn’t struck. There are still so many important unanswered questions. Again, for the record, I have no problem who voted leave if they have a coherent and considered reason for doing so (unless of course the reasons are racis

as it is a LBA, albeit a badly drafted one, you need to respond. somehting like: Dear simple Simon, I am fully aware of your past record of such vexatious claims regarding prohibition and your failure to understand it in a contractual offer context so I shall seek a full costs recovery order for your unreasonable conduct when you get your come uppance at my local county court. That of course assumes you dont pull the plug on your claim once it is obvious I am not goping to wet myself and pay you for nothing. Why dont you save a tree and just slink off back to the economically worst performing city in the UK where you come from

After countless emails from Hermes refusing compensation my final email was to inform them a small claim had been lodged with the courts. I followed this up yesterday with a freedom of information request for the last known details of the parcel to include vehicle and driver details and the action they took with the last known parcel recipient and details of their investigation, places searched etc. My local newspaper are also pursuing them as they will be publishing a story in the coming weeks. Out of the blue I had a phone call from Hermes today. They will be paying £160 in my bank. When asked

police can claim Crown Immunity for parking FINES but that wouldnt apply to a simple breach of contract. Now i think the police should play this along and then arrest the muppet who turns up at court to represent ECP for a number of offences including the Prevention of Terrorism Act for their processing of the images of the car, failing to assist an officer in the execution of his duty, wasting police time etc. Also If i were D&C chief plod I would be biting the backside of the head of the DVLA for the same. It only goes to prove that there is NO quality control by anyone at either the parking co or the DVLA despite the annual

I also have to say well done to AO in our dealings with them. On 2 occasions our tumble drier has failed(over 5 year period). On the 1st occasion it was repaired, on the 2nd they agreed to replace to unit, albeit we had to pay for an upgraded model as our model was no longer being produced, but only the difference between the original cost and the full cost of the newer model(approx. £80).

I would check the status again say next Monday

Really getting very personal this chaps...time to take a break ?

You've focused way too heavily on signage in my view, and you've only thrown in the point about the boundary map at the death - this being, arguably, your strongest point of defence. I'd be looking to get this point in straight away [having first set the scene and outlined the cause of action] - "The Claimant's assertion that a contract was created between them and the Defendant is denied. A contract cannot have been created between the Claimant and Defendant because The Vehicle was not parked on land managed by the claimant" - clearly indicated and supported by images. Then, say something like, "not wi