Jump to content

deadthings

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    71
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About deadthings

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. I didn't see your last response, so didn't get that you had suggested ignoring them until after I had responded. They did have photographs of the car, and the driver. Popla has denied the appeal, which I fully expected, because they state that it was daylight when she entered the car park, and so she could easily see the signs. They ignored the claims about their being positioned in such a way that she could not get close enough to see them in order to see them. I am not surprised that it was denied, I believe Popla is a waste of time. I also haven't ignored all what h
  2. OK, I will attach here pdfs of first the original appeal, which is as it was, using no identifiable terms, and was not signed. It had a photocopy of the PCN, that was all. Also attached their useless response. Then the Popla appeal we used, and then our comments to their defence documents. their defence did include photographs of the drivers face, so they have that anyway, plus all her information. I do fully appreciate what you're saying about the legality of the signs being the most important element, and will for sure read more about it now. However my position is lookin
  3. OK I didn't see your response to this until it was too late. Sorry. I did do an appeal. I will attach what I wrote, and their response here. We have also appealed to Popla too. What I'm saying is reasonable though, because the signs are all over 7 feet above ground, and anyone in a wheelchair honestly has no chance whatsoever of seeing them. Which I would imagine if it came to a court case, surely would have to be considered by the judge. A person in a wheelchair has no chance whatsoever of being able to read the small print. Absolutely impossible. Surely if you can't po
  4. Thank you for that very kind reply. I was thinking along the same lines. Obviously dealing with disabled people a lot, I do tend to be very aware of discrimination, and looking at the signs, and their height, I am certain they are inappropriately positioned for disabled users, especially wheelchair users. There are no low signs whatsoever, and all of the signs are in areas that are very poorly lit. In respect of that small car park, one sign is stuck the other side of where cars park, and the other is blocked by trees and a trolley shelter. The disabled parking bays are right
  5. OK. well I have attached photos. I'll add an explanation for each page to the pdf, which explains what each photo represents, and you can decide if you can figure out what is meant. This isn't my ticket, I am simply supporting and caring for a disabled person, one of several I support. I live in Warrington, she lives in the area the ticket was given, but the Council for that area is actually Wigan, so it is complicated, and I struggle with time to deal with this. Making comments such as stop waffling and giving attitude isn't the least bit helpful. I Showed her your response, and she g
  6. I'm a bit confused by this response. Waffling? You asked for photos, and I went and got them, and added them as a post above yours. Then you say stop waffling, and then go on about having identified the driver. Where did I do that? Sorry but this reply makes no sense. I did post each image individually, and noted what each meant, in relation to where we parked and how well lit it was etc. Have you not even seen the post above yours? I mean look at this: "However the signs are tiny, 30cms wide and 60cms tall, they are attached to the large street lighting, and have no proper ligh
  7. OK, can I first apologize, but the signs actually say 5 hour time limit. The disabled person had never noticed a time limit or signs before, most people around there had no idea they were there. I only ever saw a large sign outside the far front of the cinema and thought it said 3 hours, but that sign no longer exists. There are a lot of smaller signs all over, as my attached photos will show. However the signs are tiny, 30cms wide and 60cms tall, they are attached to the large street lighting, and have no proper lighting above any of them. They are very hard to see, and at night
  8. OK, I will take photographs on Thursday, and upload them here. I can't be 100% certain, but I'm sure the car park we went into, the small one at the side has no signs, and besides has little lighting, and it was very dark and raining, so wouldn't be clear anyway. I'll double check, photograph the whole area, and upload them and take it from there. Thanks.
  9. OK, that sounds great. I will take photos of the signs at the site, but no there aren't many there. I can only ever recall seeing one sign, and that is right outside the cinema, but I will double check. Going into the lot, there is Tesco petrol station, and slip road to side of that, and I'm pretty sure there are no signs on entry, but I will double check and photo if so. I think I will write to Cineworld manager in Leigh, and to their head office, as well as Tesco local manager and head office, so I have a written record that I have complained. I will chase up with Council also abou
  10. Thank you. I was thinking it was odd that they didn't provide any photographs, but upon leaving it was very dark and raining heavy, so they may not have it clearly. It also does seem odd that they got the details so quickly, but I guess they have to to comply. I figured I would go through the appeal, in the manner I described, and also request photographic evidence that the car was parked in violation of their terms. We will try to find out the landowner, and will complain to Cineworld head office and Tesco head office, about the 3 hour time limit, not to mention the several restaurants
  11. Hopefully this is correct. I have edited out all the information. It has her correct name and address, and full vehicle information. This is the only letter she received, no photos or anything else. Hopefully it is legible. Any problems let me know. Thanks. There are no barriers in the car park, anywhere. It is a free customer car park. parkingticketce05032018.pdf
  12. It is an NTK, sent in post, and arrived around 11 days after the date when we were parked there.
  13. Hi, I am writing this on behalf of a disabled friend, who has received a Parking Charge Notice through the post from Civil Enforcement, mid last week, around the 26th of Feb. Some info: Date of infringement: 15th Feb 2018 Issue Date 22nd Feb 2018 Date Received 26th or 27th Feb 2018 No photo evidence mentioned, but possibly auto cameras. Cannot see any Section 4 mention on the letter. Just says Maximum Parking Allowance Exceeded. Not appealed yet, we will, and I will detail in a moment what we are thinking to say. Parking Company is Civil Enforcement Spinning Gate,
  14. Thanks for that kind reply. Since I got involved they had pretty much folded on all issues. Admitting they didn't realise they had actually fitted a meter, and then not reading it for 18 months, which they acknowledge. They further admit they overbilled her, and UU have offer just £25 compensation. I figured I might as well push it to the Ombudsman, because the primary issue for us is that neither side is willing to issue proper, itemized bills. Also they refuse to allow us access to an online water account, to check our billing. I am pushing this because I see it as discrimination, that all o
  15. I've actually been embroiled in this for years! My LA is Golden Gates Housing Trust, they have a deal with United Utilities where they handle all water accounts and payments and charges. I am close to taking the matter to the Housing Ombudsman, and am in the process also of complaining direct to UU. It will likely also go external with that complaint. What has happened is my disabled mother had a water meter fitted in her bungalow, as did I in my flat. She was still being charged the old rateable value on the property, so I cancelled her direct debit, and mine, realizing we were
×
×
  • Create New...