Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


1 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Got my result yesterday for the parking sly windscreen pcn at asda,Long Eaton.Successful.The assessor was Alex James. Operator Information and Evidence Submitted 17/05/2022 Verification Code 6061302323 We have received your comments and we will begin your assessment in due course Operator Name Parking Eye Ltd including Car Parking Partnership (CPP) - EW Operator Case Summary OP Case Summary POPLA assessment and decision 22/06/2022 Verification Code 6061302323 Decision Successful Assessor Name Alex James Assessor summary of operator case The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) due to parent and child only. Parking sly could not supply any evidence that the driver did not have any children. Alex did say that other points I challenged the pcn on were not taken into account as he came to his decision on this one point. That makes it 87-0 to me since the mid 1990's.3 in a row with parking sly.
  2. This is the letter I sent to P.E.on behalf of my friend, who is a work colleague. P.E.sent nothing that was requested, and instead sent a letter which is the one posted in this read. here is what I sent to P.E. Dear Sir/Madam, Before I am in a position to decide what to do with this pcn, please supply me with the following documentation, no later than 10 calendar days from the receipt of this letter. 1.Please supply a full unredacted copy of your agreement with the land owner allowing you to enforce parking regulations. Unless of course, CEL are the legitimate landowners, in which case I require a copy of that proof as registered with the land registry. If however,CEL are not the legal landowner of the said land, then you will have failed to constitute a contract with the land owner giving you the rights to enforce parking on the site. When considering wether you are the legal land owner, and entitled to the stated fee, please bear this in mind:- 2.If CEL are not the legal land owners, then your penalty charge would be deemed illegal under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999,if you are not the legal registered landowner. It is also an unfair term according to the Consumer Rights Act 2015 regulation 62(4) October 1 2015. 3. I require you to provide me with a breakdown of how you reach the claimed figure. Please be aware of Judge McIlwaines comments in VCS v Ibbotson Case No 1SE09849 16.5.2012 (transcript in the public domain), where judge McIlwaine said “Parking charges cannot include business costs which would occur whether or not the alleged contravention took place”. Based upon that evidence, I suggest that the amount claimed is excessive and is being enforced as a penalty for allegedly parking. The parking charge does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss, and therefore is unfair as defined in the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. The charge is also, nearly double that of what a council parking charge would be. I believe there is no contract with the landowner that gives CEL the legal standing to levy these charges nor pursue them in the courts in their own name as creditor. 4. Supply me with documentation showing how or where I formed a contract with CEL.I don’t recall entering into a contract wether fomally, verbally, by phone, text, email, or in person. Signs do not help CEL and drivers to form a contract.CEL, I believe, are only an agent who may or may not be the legal landowner as registered with the Land Registry. Excel -v-HMRC 2012 is the binding decision in the Upper Chamber which covers this issue with compelling statements of fact about this sort of business model. 5. CEL have not said wether the pcn is for damages for trespass, or a contractual sum. Please specify which it is. 6. I do not believe that CEL have planning permission to erect signage (or the cameras) at this location),required under section 2a, town and country planning act,as defined in the Information Commissioners code of practice, book, updated October 2017.Here is the section you need:- “Given the significant amounts of information that ANPR systems are able to collect, it is important that individuals are informed that their personal data is being processed. The best way to do this is through signage explaining that ANPR recording is taking place and, if possible to do so, the name of the data controller collecting the information. While it is a challenge to inform motorists that they are being monitored, there are methods you can use, such as the Town and Country Planning Act (control of advertisements) Regulations 2007, to help provide this information (see section 9.1.2 for further detail)”. You will find this on page 34, section 5 of the said handbook. If however, you do have planning permission from the local council to erect cctv/anpr cameras and signage,, then please forward me a copy of the planning permission granted. I also require a copy of the approved planning application, approved site plan and schedule of installation and maintenance of the signs, and cameras. 7. Do not try and frighten me into paying by quoting the Supreme Court case of Parking Eye V Barry Beavis. Here is some information before and since that case.:- Parking Eye actually pay a fee to the landowners of the car park in question in the SC case, which is why no other cases using this case have gone to county court. Furthermore,Judge J J Maloney did say in his case that he is “ only a district Judge and each case would be different depending on its issues”. Either provide me with all the documentation I have requested, in the time scale stated, or simply cancel your actions. Yours Sincerely Obviously i changed the name from CEl to Parking Eye. Attachment removed docx shows personal details please use pdf (BN)
  3. The driver totally ignored the windscreen pcn, and got a NTK some 23 days later.Parking Eye are lying when they say the driver has been identified.The driver has not been identified to this date.
  4. The info I have to date is that the driver of the vehicle was shopping in Asda and parked in a mother and toddler bay. When the driver came back to their car, there was the pcn on the windscreen. The driver ignored the pcn, and later received the NTK. Neither the driver/RK, nor myself have named the driver. Parking Eye have obviously got the RK details from DVLA, and assumed the RK and driver are one and the same. I tried to answer the sticky, but it won't let me type anything in.
  5. The driver received the parking eye pcn on the windscreen of the car whilst shopping in Asda.Date of event was 21/04/22.Date issued was 11/05/22. docs1.pdf
  6. Can someone with some legal knowledge please inform on this letter?. My friend got a pcn in Long Eaton Asda from Parking eye. I challenged the pcn for them as I challenged 2 from Parking eye.1 was Asda Long Eaton, the other Asda Arnold. Both were won at POPLA. I requested a copy of Parking Eye's contract with the legal land owner. They failed to send it, and refused to appeal. It went to POPLA, and I am now awaiting their result. I also requested Parking eye's planning permission to Erewash Borough Council to erect and use cctv/anpr cameras and signage. I based this on the ICO code of practice, page 36,section5 which reads:- Page 36,section 5.updated Oct.2017. Given the significant amounts of information that ANPR systems are able to collect, it is important that individuals are informed that their personal data is being processed. The best way to do this is through signage explaining that ANPR recording is taking place and, if possible to do so, the name of the data controller collecting the information. While it is a challenge to inform motorists that they are being monitored, there are methods you can use, such as the Town and Country Planning Act (control of advertisements) Regulations 2007, to help provide this information (see section 9.1.2 for further detail).Parking Eye replied saying they do not need planning permission. Parking Eye also stated, they enforce for Loading bays ,verges, hatches etc, but no mention about disabled badge holder bays or mother and child bays. They also refused to send a copy of a contract between Parking Eye, and the legal land owner where Asda is situated. It is Midland Street, Long Eaton. Parking Eye also said in their info. pack to POPLA that they have authority to enforce parking regulations, even though they have not submitted this to POPLA. Doesn't the BPA ,section 7 say that parking operators have to have a contract with the landowner to enforce parking regulations?. Parking Eye ended up sending this letter to my friend, so I said I would post it on CAG for advice. Are Parking Eye acting in a legal capacity or not?. Do they have to abide by the town and country Planning Act?. As they are offering a service. Do they have to submit material requested in a FoI request?. Any help, advice, legal knowledge would be greatly appreciated.
  7. I have a friend who has to have a chaperone whenever she needs to see dentists, specialists, etc. She is a vulnerable adult. To cut a long story short, she visited a dental specialist in Sheffield (I drove her there). The specialist said he would contact her local dentist in Nottingham. Which he duly did. He said that he has sent all her X rays to her local dentist. However, her local dentist said he has only received a few X rays. The Sheffield dentist was contacted again, and again he said he sent all the X rays to her local dentist .Again, the local dentist is denying that he has all the x rays. My friend needs to get copies of all her X rays. How does she go about getting all the X rays?. Would there have been copies from the Sheffield specialist sent to the local NHS, which I am guessing would be Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham?. What legislation would she use to request the X rays?. Is is a SAR request? Any help would be greatly appreciated, as she thinks her local dentist is trying to pull the wool over her eyes, as a dentist from his practice messed up big time a few years ago with dental treatment.
  8. I have all the meter readings, and past bills in my account.
  9. Long story cut short. I was paying £57.00 p.m.direct debit to Toto energy before they went bust. I had dual fuel but hardly use any gas as I have a multi fuel burner. Along comes EDF to manage my account. I was then in credit by a large chunk, 2 months later EDF amend my d.d. to £41.00 p.m. Last week, I gave a meter reading for gas and one for electricity. I was previously in credit by around £38.00. This week, I had an email from EDF saying that they were increasing my d.d. in november to £70.00. I was also allegedly in debt to them to £92.00. I use around the same amount of electricity each day. I am out from 06:30 until around 17:30,5 days a week. How can I go from being £38:00 in credit, pay £41:00 p.m.d.d., yet the following month be £92:00 in debt to EDF??. I have contacted them and am awaiting a reply. If I don't get a satisfactory answer I will take the matter up with ofcom. Has any one else on here had a similar experience??. ,and if so, how was it resolved.
  10. My brother-in-law passed away suddenly a few weeks ago.It left my sister on her own. she has a bank account in her married name.She wants to open up a bank account using her maiden name and use it as a savings account.Can she legally do that now that she is a widow, and what i.d.would she need,like passport, birth certificate etc?.
  11. Can anyone answer this please? According to the Bill Of Rights 1689, Parking Charge Notice's (PCN) are illegally and unlawfully issued. There is a provision in the Bill of Rights Act 1689 which states: "That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of a particular person before conviction are illegal and void." It was stated in the case Thoburn v City of Sunderland, the decision commonly referred to as the "Metric Martyrs" Judgment. This was handed down in the Divisional Court (18 February 2002) by Lord Justice Laws and Mr Justice Crane (I will paraphrase, but you may view the judgment's relevant sections 62 and 63). 62. "We should recognise a hierarchy of Acts of Parliament: as it were "ordinary" statutes and "constitutional statutes." The special status of constitutional statutes follows the special status of constitutional rights. Examples are the . . . Bill of Rights 1689 . . ." 63. "Ordinary statutes may be impliedly repealed. Constitutional statutes may not . . ." This was upheld by Lords Bingham, Scott and Steyn in an appeal which went to the House of Lords on Monday 15 July 2002. I am not aware that the Road Traffic Act 2004 makes express reference to repealing the Bill of Rights Act 1689 therefore there can be no fine except for one that is imposed by a court. Has the Bill of Rights 1688 & 1689 been superceded by the TMA 2004?. Has the TMA 2004 been passed by Parliament or the House of Commons, or both?. Is the TMA 2004 lawful legislation? Is the Bill of Rights 1688 & 1689 still lawful?. I can only assume that councils use the term Parking Charge Notice, rather than Parking Fine, so that the section in the B of R act,mentioning fines are illegal unless a conviction is obtained, fro being the get out clause. If I am issuing pcn's illegally, then I shouldn't be doing it.If however,I am not issuing pcn's illegally then I am happy continuing in my role as a Civil Enforcement Officer.
  12. I now know the person who has been saying they do not ever pay council tax, parking fines, gas, electricity bills, tv licence etc. I will not disclose their name. Apparently, the person involved is using the Bill of Rights Act 1688& 1689. I think I have found what they are using. Here is a copied and pasted section:- Provisions of the Act[edit] The Declaration of Right was enacted in an Act of Parliament, the Bill of Rights 1689, which received the Royal Assent in December 1689.[20] The Act asserted "certain ancient rights and liberties" by declaring that:[21] the pretended power of suspending the laws and dispensing with[nb 3] laws by regal authority without consent of Parliament is illegal; the commission for ecclesiastical causes is illegal; levying taxes without grant of Parliament is illegal; it is the right of the subjects to petition the king, and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal; keeping a standing army in time of peace, unless it be with consent of Parliament, is against law;[nb 4] Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law; election of members of Parliament ought to be free; the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament; excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted; jurors in trials for high treason ought to be freeholders; promises of fines and forfeitures before conviction are illegal and void; for redress of all grievances, and for the amending, strengthening and preserving of the laws, Parliaments ought to be held frequently. The main piece I believe they are using is this section,third line from the bottom:- "promises of fines and forfeitures before conviction are illegal and void"; I am assuming that they believe they do not have to pay a parking charge notice, unless they have been convicted.If they do not admit to being the driver of the vehicle that had a council parking charge notice placed on it, then they have not been convicted and therefore do not have to legally pay the fine.The council will not take them to court, because the council know that a civil court cannot try them and so cannot get a conviction.Am I guessing correctly?.The same person is making comments on facebook saying that they have dealt with councils for many years, and won every case that they try to bring against them. I worki as a Civil Enforcement Officer.I once put a pcn on this persons car for parking on the pavement, adjacent to the double yellow lines. I was told a few days later by my supervisor not to issue to that particular vehicle.I can only assume that it is because of this issue regarding not being convicted,so no monies can be extratced from that person. I don't want to see people looking at the FB posts, and thinking they don't have to pay parking fines, council tax, etc, until they are convicted,then end up being taken to court,losing,then owing £hundreds. Does the TMA 2004 supercede the Bill of Rights?. Is the Bill of Rights the get out clause?. Do parking fines, council tax etc have to be paid under a given law?. Incidentally,it makes no difference to me wether a person pays a parking fine or not, as I am not on commission, and I get paid regardless of any outcome from a parking fine. I just don't want people to read into this persons FB posts wrongly, and end up with egg on their face so to speak.
  13. I have always been suspicious of people wether male or female who claim they do not pay council tax, tv licence , gas/electricity etc.Especially where they claim this law says this, and that law says that etc, which is why when I am asked if a person has to pay coincil tax etc, I say yes.
  14. Several times in the past few years I have been asked whether or not a person legally has to pay council tax? .I have been aware of something called a freeman of the land?. As far as I am aware, council tax is legally to be paid under a 1992 act which name I forgot. I think it is something like the government finance act 1992. Please correct me if i am wrong. I came across a Freedom of information request to Havant county council. The person concerned argued that he is not liable for council tax. The council argued that he is.Here is the askers reply to the council, who did not reply back to him " Only last week, I was told that someone does not pay council tax, gas/electricity, or tv licence fees?. Is this correct, and is there an obscure law that I am not aware of??. Dear Nigel Smith, Thank you for your reply. As you stated this tax comes under the Local Government Finance Act 1992. All acts require consent to be given the force of law, they are rules and regulations of society. They are not law. There is no law requiring anybody to pay tax of any kind. All taxes are made out to a legal body, Mr,Mrs whoever and not to the human being. This is why many judgements made in court with regards to council tax usually fall apart at the very beginning if the person defending themselves understands the law. Because the tax is against a piece of paper (birth certificate) and if there is no human to represent the legal fiction then there is nobody to pay. You presented many legal arguments for the tax but no lawful argument. As you are aware all acts fall under marine law (law of the sea) and have no power on land where common law (law of the land) is the power. These acts all require consent, and to say otherwise is being untruthful is it not? Your council is a registered company, with the objective one would assume of making money. If you wish to take money from somebody for a service under law that would require a contract, without a contract we do not know what service we are receiving for money paid. A company can only use company rules (legal acts) against another company (a person Mr.Mrs...)to enforce the collection of monies. Also as mentioned statutes are rules and regulations of society, and society is a group of like minded people acting together. A birth certificate is taken as proof of membership to the UK society, but should one wish to withdraw from this society as one can do from any group they are a member of, then the rules of that society no longer apply. If taken to court and tried under common law not statute law, you would find that the case would be short if it was heard at all. as has been the case with many people i know. Would you agree with what is stated? I look forward to your reply on this matter". Yours sincerely, David
  15. A good point that might be worthwhile remembering or looking int I asked for a copy of their planning application to Erewash Borough Council for the signage and ANPR cameras. I also contacted EBC myself asking for NPS's planning application. EBC's reply was that there was and is no planning application submitted to EBC from NPS. NPS themselves brought this up in their POPLA pack, saying they didn't need planning permission to erect their ANPR cameras, unless they installed new ones. Well, I can testify that their camera at the entrance to the car park, was situated on the corner wall of Barnados, was white, and way back last year, it was changed to brown. So there should be a planning application submitted to EBC for the new brown camera.
  • Create New...