Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

11 Good

1 Follower

About battyboomboom

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Hi, hope this is in the right section, and I'll try and keep it brief I had a small monthly direct debit that was used to fund a monthly PayPal subscription. Last month I had an unexpected yearly subscription payment (thought it was supposed to be done in January) charged to my PayPal account. At the time I did not have sufficient funds in my bank account to complete the payment. Soon after, I was sent just over half of the required amount into my PayPal account, and then the yearly payment was made, putting my PayPal account into a negative balance. As far as I was concerned, the year
  2. Eh? From posting hardly anything we're meant to conclude it was a bad defence??? Get a grip mate, the only conclusion I can come to is that you're irratating git of a troll, winding us up, and making spurious claims many of which you haven't backed up - and that's a factual report from me...
  3. With regards to 1 and 3, they would be able to take you to court to try and claim damages from you, but not penalties. But in the case of PPCs, they don't as they'd be claiming only very small amounts.
  4. Fraud Act 2006 (c. 35) Just incase you CBA to read it, here it is: 2 Fraud by false representation (1) A person is in breach of this section if he— (a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and CHECK (b) intends, by making the representation— (i) to make a gain for himself or another, or CHECK (ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss. (2) A representation is false if— (a) it is untrue or misleading, and CHECK (b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading. CHECK (3) “Represen
  5. To continue on the subject that Buzby brought up, as a photographer myself, I ensure all of my images have IPTC meta data in them, which I was asked to do by a picture editor for a sunday newspaper - as they read the meta data in the photo for title, caption, copyright etc. While I don't know your setup with the website etc, watermarking can be done easily through various programs (the one I use to sort pics, apply IPTC data, and upload to websites with watermarks is called Photo Mechanic, I'm sure others do the same), so consider doing that and ensuring your pics are watermarked and your
  6. It would also make photography of anyone in the street illegal - which it most certainly is not.
  7. I know on other forums you can email people through their profile, but you never see the person's email address and it comes with more than just the message, it also has "this is a message from xxx forum sent by abc". But as far as I can see, there's no way to email members here - so was it a PM, did they get the email from here by illegal means or did they get it some other way?
  8. A magistrates court does not deal with DPE, so it can't be involving PCN, NTOs etc. It could be a FPN, or it could be an ECN under RTR 84. We can't give you advice without facts, so please scan the letter/documents in (removing all personal details) so we can give you advice.
  9. I knew about the case, and knew about the fact that this guy was a repeat offender, and that the Uni was not trying to extort money out of him by fraudulent means, which is what most PPCs do. Nit picking? Well if you go in the cream when we ask a few questions and bring up a few points then that's your perogative. I mean, if everyone on here (and Pepipoo) didn't take any ACTION or FIGHTBACK when presented with what is in your view a very open and shut case for the PPCs then what would be the point? And if you can't see what lamma is on about, then get a grip - you come on and say
  10. Well we'll give you all the info you need, if you give us enough info to help you out!
  11. Eh? Why not just go to court? You will probably win, and will have a better chance of winning that just giving them your money!
  12. Is there anything in that which has the same content as s40 of the AJA?
  13. Leniency means they were going to do something about the non-payment. We know thats not the case ;-)
  14. Jason, your username is spelt wrongly. No one's arguing over any money, there will be only letters from the PPC which I'm sure highlandhelp knows can't harm him. The Administration of Justice Act does not apply to Scotland, but the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 does. However, the stuff covered by the AJA s40 (d) is to do with "uttering documents which he/she knows to be false", would come under the new Fraud Act 2006, s1, "fraud by false representation".
  • Create New...