Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

1 Follower

About looplotty

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Change the record, if you have nothing constructive to say then its simple - keep quiet.
  2. Nothing to do with time or other, the draft document on private parking in relation to parking charges is actually dated 2nd June. (I cant comment on your document, if it exists at all) We will see in the Autum what comes of the proposals, if anything.
  3. The good thing about the proposed legislation will reduce the overall charges but from reading the document we had approx 4 weeks ago indicated the keeper would be liable for the charge so overall revenue would increase. It is doubtful if the legislation in its proposed format will go through, but we will wait and see.
  4. a) approx 8% (including non UK registered) b) approx 78% c) to date 96% All the cases we have had where motorists ignore the PPC have always been criticised by the Judge and resulted in a win for ourselves when the defendant has refused or been 'unable' to confirm who was driving .. Judges state they have 'selective memories' and on balance of probaility go a long way to avoid paying when if it was someone else they would just advise and get on with their life. Its not for me to give advice if someone should ignore/appeal or otherwise but I can only repeat what is said in courts
  5. GCR, get a grip on reality. If a case is lost it has to goto appeal to a higher court, as we all know the PPC did not lose the case it was merely ordered to re-submit the POC, this was done and the full case was heard in the same court witha judge at the same level thus showing the case was NOT lost, come on even you can understand that GCR. The defence submitted initially and the final defence was in essence the SAME document (a few additions to the second document after the Excel case). I would suggets you read the judgement, the driver issue was 1 of many the judge had to consi
  6. Ermmmm ... The Thomas case. (Dont go on about 'we only helped with the first bit and that resulted in a win' - when we all know the judge just wanted a more indepth POC that was not possible under the moneyclaim, the POC was resubmitted within the 14days set by the court and the claim continued and resulted in a win for the PPC). You all know the defence submitted by the defendant was the same. Thomas covered everything you normally say are unfair, signage, unfair contract terms, penalties etc... The ONLY difference here was him admitting being the driver then disputing it - BUT the
  7. eddie069uk is a real person and the documents provided are in the public domain as a court is a public place. The OP also posted various documents on the internet previously. I dont think any personal/sensitive information has been posted that is not already in the public domain. (this site is very quick to remove any such information and/or links)
  8. Wake up My Real Name, read and understand before responding. An FOI to HMCS (thats the court service) asking how many claims a company has made, how many default judgements, defences have been submitted will get a response. The FOI does cover HMCS. If I am a liar, then you are clearly an idiot.
  9. HEY .. GCR ... I have just seen a funny article about you/your family .. Whats Hells Kitchen Foods Limited, any one knows its simple to make cash out of the food game, yet you and your other cronies failed to do it. Grow up, concentrate on your real business you are not capable of running multiple ones... Your sham as 'Central Ticketing' who everyone knows is a toothless dog, never sue .. so just ignore ! Your bitterness is amazing and actually brings the whole business into shame - We all know the reason you could not operate SECURICLAMP is once the SIA rules came into ef
  10. I come from Birmingham, What about you Mr Rooster ?
  11. Its a good job then no one actually values what you say !! As for my offer, its over to one of the siteteam to PM and we can get this whole thing rolling.
  12. Of course its a setup, I mean every case that a PPC wins is always a setup !!!!! If you take the time to read threads, they always advise the OP not to say antyhing in open forum and await their savior to email them (Thomas, Purdy to name 2). yadder yadder yadder, same old .. "The PPC won, all go quiet, close ranks and pretend we havent had anything to do with it". The same happened with Thomas and Purdy on here (unless you are also stating those 2 cases were made up also, if so you need to seriously take some medication). I am sure that the 'eagles' who assisted will be me
  13. Thank you for your adult and constructive input.
  14. The case has been going on since last year, I think thats the reference he made to Xmas and this being on his mind. I will happily post the judgement when it is received, not sure what the relevance of this is as the only think it will show is the court date, number, parties involved and stating who was present and the order made - hardly an interesting read. As for you keep saying Unsubstantiated claims .. read the posts in this and his other one, people saying good defences coming. The strangest thing is the word disingenious, hardly an everyday word but ever since the Caggers/PePi
  15. 1. Normal advice given to defendant - CHECK 2. Advice to defendant not to say anything more in public and only by PM - CHECK 3. Silence until court date, if win tell everyone, if lose deny helping - CHECK 4. Court hearing take time with helping behind scenes - CHECK 5. Same old advice given by 'experts' totally useless in court and the defendant loses and instead of paying £60 now pays 4x more - CHECK 6. People who helped him, stay silent and just await the next case when they will do same and hope for a different result - CHECK I feel sorry for the defendant,(edit)but still thi
  • Create New...