I am more concerned about the fact they are saying it is an "incorrect installation". They are using this as an excuse. Nowhere on the instructions does it say not to pass cable thru backplate.

I installed a new triton shower and 4 months on, one of the heating elements failed. When the engineer arrived, he said he would not fix it, because i had not used the supply cable entry, I had drilled a 1cm hole in the centre of backplate, as the cable was buried in the wall, and it was easier to drill the hole and feed the cable thru, rather than remove tiles etc to reroute cable. There are no electrical/plumbing safety issues involved here,nor does it weaken unit and i feel that this is a deliberate ploy to con people who have fitted their own shower. Not only would he not fix it, but he told me i would be getting a £68 bill as well. Would like to fight this, but not sure of my position. Rip off Britain.

I have just switched to BT from Talktalk. However, i notice that t/t have not closed my account, and have billed me for February (switchover was 28/01/11). They say that i did not inform them, so i am liable for the charges until i do. I thought new provider did this, so phoned BT, who said they did inform t/t. Whose responsibility is it?

Just found Consumer Advice Sheets, issued by Lancashire Trading Standards. In the section about PPC`s, it states that fee levied should be proportionate to loss suffered and not a penalty. It goes on to say that after being provided with the DVLA information,, the subsequent communication from the PPC should point out the contractual nature and justification of the claim and ask for confirmation that the keeper was using the car at the time the unauthorised parking occurred. The best bit is: "The BPA has advised its member firms (June 2008) to ENSURE that correspondence MAKES IT CLEAR that the CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY lies with the driver who parked inappropriately.They also mention the fact that these "invoices" mimic the genuine article, and that is why they need to make it clear that it is contractual liability. Funny that, on my invoice there is no mention of the word "contractual", nor do they ask who was driving. Also, at the top they mention the Date of OFFENCE. Offence? Could this be yet another blooper.

Thanks for reply.Very interesting. Its just that apparently the BPA issued instructions to its members, stating that they must ask the keeper to tell them who was driving at the time. It would provide peace of mind for me, if i could see that in writing from the horse`s mouth, so to speak.

I have looked on the BPA website, but cannot find any reference about PPC`s having to ask who was driving at time of "offence". My Parking Charge Notice states that i, as registered keeper am responsible for charge.Any idea where i can find it in black and white? Cheers.

Rooster, thanks for advice, much appreciated. What i`m suggesting, is if Fred Bloggs is driver (on the day),and owner of vehicle, and DVLA send PPC photo of owner, then PPC can compare that with their footage of driver.

With a new style driving licence, you have to send DVLA a passport type photo so they could make the credit card part of the licence. If they send PPC a copy, they could compare,potentially, to see if driver on their CCTV is also owner.

Just a thought. Is it possible that the DVLA provide scumbags with photo I.D. so they can compare with any CCTV footage they may have.Also, unless scumbags send correspondence by recorded delivery, if it does reach court, you could say this is the first time you`ve heard about it,as they would not be able to prove that you received any of their mail. Sneaky,eh?

Forgive me if i appear thick, here, but how can debt collectors get involved prior to a ccj? Surely they can only start getting heavy after the "accused", has been found guilty, and still refuses to pay? Thanks again.

So who actually applies for a ccj? is it the parking firm or the debt collectors? do they have to accuse me of being the driver (which would be a guess on their part), and then hope that they are right, when they get to court?

It says: " On the specified date, you were the registered owner, keeper or hirer of the vehicle in question. As such, you are responsible to ensure that the terms and conditions for parking, as set down and clearly displayed in the car park, are complied with". They make no mention as to who was driving.Thanks for any advice. I really object to lining these scumbags pockets.

just got a pcn from parking eye. they say that the owner/keeper is responsible for adhering to terms and conditions.

I have held a full licence for 9 years, but have never owned a car. For the past 3 years, i have ridden a motor scooter.The scooter was stolen 18 months ago, and i made a claim. I now wish to sell my scooter, and get a car. Do i have to declare claim on application form (for car), and does the time elapsed since claim count towards ncb? Thank you.