No dont send it signed for or recorded, just get proof of postage, PPcs often wont sign for recorded , although i suspect parking eye would

yes let us know when you get it

Just write bk and demand the code

Yes but just double check your letters. Tell them you are under no obligation to name the driver as it is quite clearly stipulated tht the rk can appeal

So there is no verification code.? In that case, write back. Stating you have nothing further to add and you require a popla code. You will also be complaining to the bpa as this Is a breach of their code etc

Have they sent you a popla appeal code in their letter? If they have you need to look round on how to win at popla. If not you need to write back and demand one

And what are the further developments?

Yes and tell them to issue you a popla appeal code if they reject your appeal

It's the second bit. Complete crap..do nothing

Parking eye lost in court today , the judge gave LPC lady a right bollocking for not producing a proper contract but just a contract variation , case dismissed , hardly had to say a word

There's a funny thing about radioactive spiders on there from last year:)

You can find a letter chain here: http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=2214803 but its a bit out of date tbh However i wouldnt give the impression these days that its ok to just ignore, ok most do give up but ignore is no longer then answer....

Well done you,

Could you post up copies of what you have received?, are they letters from N martin saying how he feels it wouldnt be prudent to take this to popla.....

their contact centre are useless, but least you got it all in now

good on you!!! Always good to do it on the ground so to speak

send email to [email protected] and [email protected] Stating with your popla appeal number at top of subject,that you wish to add further evidence and ask for the hearing to be delayed and send in the following: 1. No valid contract with landowner It is widely known that some contracts between landowner and parking company have ”authority limit clauses” that specify that parking companies are limited in the extent to which they may pursue motorists. One example from a case in the appeal court is Parking Eye –v- Somerfield Stores (2012) where Somerfield attempted to end the contract with Parking Eye as Parking Eye had exceeded the limit of action allowed under their contract. In view of this, and the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice section 7 that demands that valid contract with mandatory clauses specifying the extent of the parking company’s authority, I require the parking company to produce a copy of the contract with the landowner that shows POPLA that they do, indeed have such authority. It has also been widely reported that some parking companies have provided “witness statements” instead of the relevant contract. There is no proof whatsoever that the alleged signatory on behalf of the landowner has ever seen the relevant contract, or, indeed is even an employee of the landowner. I require, if such a witness statement is submitted, that it is accompanied by a letter, on landowner’s headed notepaper, and signed by a director or equivalent of the landowner, confirming that the signatory is, indeed, authorised to act on behalf of the landowner ,has read and the relevant terms of the contract and is qualified to attest to the full limit of authority of the parking company 2. The amount demanded is not a Genuine Pre-estimate of loss The wording on the signs appears to indicate that the parking charge represents damages for a breach of the parking contract - liquidated damages, in other words compensation agreed in advance. Accordingly, the charge must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss. The estimate must be based upon loss flowiing from a breach of the parking terms. This might be, for example, loss of parking revenue or even loss of retail revenue at a shopping centre. The parking company submitted that the charge is a genuine pre-estimate of the losses incurred in managing the parking location. The entirety of the parking charge must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss in order to be enforceable. I require the parking company to submit a breakdown of how these costs are calculated. All of these costs must represent a loss resulting from the alleged breach at the time. Note:- the charges demanded by the operator as "genuine loss" are those allegedly incurred at the point of issuing the charge, and can not include speculative future costs relating to internal appeal procedures or mounting a POPLA defence. For example, were no breach to have occurred then the cost of parking enforcement (for example, erecting signage, wages, uniforms, office costs) would still have been the same and, therefore, may not be included. Equally, as the claim is being made for estimated losses at the time of the alleged contravention, then any costs included by the Operator that relate to accumulated amounts post that date are obviously invalid. Should such cost heads be included in the claim, as well as any profit element, then POPLA must reject the charge. It would, therefore, follow that these charges were punitive, have an element of profit included and are not allowed to be imposed by parking companies.

That picture is frankly irrelevant, in fact anything that happened on the day is irrelevent Did you appeal on the grounds of not a genuine pre estimate of loss or no contract, it is likely that you will loose if you didnt. Even you may be to late, it may be worth asking Popla (by email) to delay the hearing (likely to be delayed anyway, the date is just a guide) and ask them to include the extra times of Genuine pre estimate of loss and no contract Get searching round what that means and get it email accross Eveni if you loose, i wouldnt worry to much with this bunch, so dont think about paying if you do

CitizenB The problem with CAG up until recently(as i dont post much on here now so cant comment if things have changed) is that people were giving advice that Popla is a waste of time etc and saying ignore was still the way to go. This is clearly not the case. Also you need to remove the attuide about dealing with things of forum. Most parking eye court cases are dealt off forum by email and this important as you dont need everything to be in the public eye. Documents that Parking eye serve need to be challanged and people need one to one advice, how on earth can you do this when you want everything on a thread. People get regular assistance now in court hearings, this can not be done all "on forum", its silly to think otherwise. Obviously people still have to be aware of who they area dealing with, but we are all adults at the end of the day. Its a shame that the parking section doesnt offer the same high quality advice that other sections of the forums do, such as debt/benefits etc, I would recommend people use CAG any day for those sort of matters but until the style/attitude changes a bit on the parking then i am affraid i would never recommend anyone uses CAG for a parking issue, esp if they had a court claim.

You are starting to sound like a British Gas engineer lol "hmm your system needs a power flush", thats £500.00 please . The problems of sludge/debris etc in the system really only affects the heat exchanger People have a misconception about a boiler service, servicing normally only invovles things flue check, Co2 check and tightness test etc, visual checks etc, the fact a boiler is "serviced" doesnt really affect wheather it will break down

Well if it resets again then dont cancel the call again

No the is no requirment for this Hope they get someone out quickly for you though

Exactly, asking to diagnoise any Gas appliance is like asking the pied piper to look after your kids

Right i will be frank with you. The fact you have young children does not make you in anyway any form of priority. The fact you have a private landlord means you may be lucky if you get a Gas safe Engineer this side of valantines day. This of course depends on your landlord. I used to work many years ago for a major contracting firm who held contracts with large councils and housing associations, the fact someone had small kids made no difference what so ever, we would tell them to use a heater, put the gas fire on, how did people cope years ago I hope you get this fixed asap, but dont be surprised if you have to wait, you are quite simple not a priority (i know that sounds harsh but its true)

Thats a big call there uncle bulgaria