Soobee, What I am saying is that I don't think you will have much chance in appealing against footway parking unless you can categorically show that where you were parked was both private land and that there can have been no reasonable expectation of the public to use it. Where I do think you may have a chance is in possible irregularities in both the PCN and, if you appeal the NTO. To comment on detail we need to see scans of both sides of the PCN.

Are you in London? If so S14 of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 applies. This says: Basically, if you park across a dropped footway in London you can get a ticket unless it is not a shared crossover and is for a private residence and the occupier has not requested it. So in your case, if you are in London you can contact the local enforcement people and ask them to issue your neighbour with a PCN. Outside London, you need to find out from your local authority. In any event, I would persist with talking to the neighbour first!

This is what the dft say: In London It is also relevant that:

The position in and outside London is different. Even where footway parking is generally prohibited there may be exemptions and where exemptions end signage has to be adequate. The PCNs that I have had for footway parking have been cancelled on appeal for inadequate signage. The argument that "it is not part of the footway" gets nowhere as it is not being on the carriageway that is the contravention. The PCN itself and the NTO are likely to be more fertile grounds for appeal.

It is very difficult to challenge a PCN for "footway" parking on the grounds that where you were parked was not footway. There may be other grounds that give you a greater chance of success. Post a copy of the PCN so we can look at it. BTW I assume this is a LA PCN and that you are actually in an area where footway parking is prohibited.

Convention has it that you start your own thread. Do not be surprised if a mod moves your post. If they don't have your reg no, how will they find you?

So the economically advantaged (afford a mobile phone, have a credit card, be prepared to pay the premium) only have to pay while the rest of us not only have to pay but also display. Which b'stard dreamt that one up!

I think the relative merits and inclusion issues are fairly plain. Really what I'm interested in is whether a LA can enforce a "failure to display" contravention when they operate a system for payment that gives you nothing to display. (ie When they are operating both systems in parallel.)

Lost at LA level or has the adjudicator ruled?

A local LA to me (in London) has started to accept payment for parking by text. The motorist has the option of buying a ticket and displaying it in the conventional way or sending their reg no by text. In the latter case I understand the PAs use their machines to check if payment by text has been made in the cases of "no ticket displayed". Anyone any experience of this? I can see issues, not least of which is that texts are not instantaneous but what about the contravention of "failing to display". Could they have stuffed themselves on this as if everyone paid by text there would be nothing on display so failure to display cannot be a contravention! These are the people that run the scheme. Just a thought.

You can't form a purported contract. I prefer short and sweet but if you go with this suggestion change the relevant paragraph to:

The RK should write back: Dear Sirs, Thank you for your correspondence. This is a matter you need to take up with the driver of the vehicle. Yours faithfully

Forget the phone. Write to them asking them to put their valuation in writing, to provide evidence of their allegation of prior damage badly repaired and evidence that their valuation represents a true indemnity (ie examples of comparable cars at that price). Tell them that unless and until they do you are in dispute over their valuation.

Well, well, well! It's a significant step in the right direction. darceyp, do not agree to any confidentiality requirement. Let us know how you get on. It's only fair to Daniels Silverman to set the record straight!

I'd write to the company and ask them to send you 35 stamped adressed envelopes and explain that you (your son) will pay it back at the rate of £10 per week (£12 final week).

Well done and congrats bmwman! Of course it would be wonderful to know if the real reason was because of the arguments on their documentation and they just did not want that to be tested! A win is a win!

Bianca, Fantastic, well done! Was your appeal to TfL or the independent adjudicator? Did you use my model argument?

I would write: Dear Sirs, Thank you for your letter of dd/mm/yyyy. I'm afraid that your purported evidence is not conclusive of my car leaving your carpark at the time stated. In any event, could you please quote the statute and/or case law to support your claim that the owner is liable for any charges you claim you are due. Absent conclusive proof, I'm afraid this is a matter you will have to take up with the driver and I will be unable to enter into any further correspondence with you. Yours faithfully

Sadly, if these are local authority tickets then it is you, if you are the owner who has responsibility for them. You may find that some of them were not compliant with the legislation and so you may be entitled to a refund but you will need to get true and complete copies of the tickets. Any reason why you cannot go after your ex for the cash?

I know it wasn't meant that way but absolutely do not invite them to your home. I stand by what I said earlier about reporting it to the police. I doubt, however, that there is sufficient for them to investigate here but that does not mean that it is not worth reporting. Trading standards might be a good idea too. What I would do is to write back to them and say: Dear Sirs, I will be quite happy to see you in court on this matter. I absoloutely do not wish you or any actual or apparent agent or representative of your organisation coming to my property without a valid court order. If you do I will contact the police immediately. Yours faithfully

Scan and post both sides of the ticket. Obliterate personal details. More sets of eyes are better than one!

The ticket is not the big issue at the moment. The big issue is that your car may have been "cloned". I would suggest you report this pronto.

Cream70, for some reasons the images are very big making it difficult to study well. But I think that your best course of action is to write to the council explain that you were loading and enclose a copy (not the original) of the evidence. These would be informal representations. If they reject them they should give you a further period of time to pay at the reduced rate if you wish (and if you wrote to them within the first 14 days). They do not have to do this but it is widespread good practice. Should you chose not to pay, you then have to wait until the Notice To Owner has been served on you. You have no formal right of appeal until it has. Once you have received it, tick the box "the contravention did not occur" and give reasons including a copy of the evidence. If that appeal is rejected, you have the right to go to the independent adjudicator. At this point, come back here for advice. You will have nothing to lose and it will not cost more money at this stage. One final point. Are you the "owner" of the vehicle? If not, I suggest you talk to the owner and/or the keeper and advise them that you have this ticket and will be appealing it. Ideally put it in writing.

Sorry, this is not the fault of insurers it's the fault of politicians.

Dear sirs, I deny that I have any obligation to advise you of who the driver was, even if I had that information. I further deny that I as keeper have any liability to you in the event that you are not able to identify the driver or for any other reason, including but not limited to actual or alleged trespass. Should you disagree with the above, please respond citing relevant statute or case law. In the absence of this I will be unable to respond to further correspondence from you or anyone acting on your behalf. I remind you that it is for you to prove your case not for me to disprove it. Yours faithfully