Jump to content

Fox247

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Fox247

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. If you are the same poster as the one on MSE. You had a phone record of your movements showing a 'double dip' , if that is accurate information use it. That is good evidence The info above will cut no ice with POPLA as it's standard stuff.
  2. Unfortunately most of the PPC's are as bad as each other but you have to hand it to PE they are very professional money extractors. You have to let the retailer know that they are losing sales by over-zealous parking management. Fit a dash-cam so you have a record of every visit to a private car park. Mine has saved the cost already in a bus lane case. Sorry if I'm being at bit negative but if you haven't time to deal timely and judiciously with these things, pay up and never use that car park and retailers again. The internet is far easier way of shopping anyway. (That's the sting in the tail for the PPC's who read these threads)
  3. The Hamilton defence will not work unless this is 'double dip' where separate drivers go into a car park contravening 'no return in two hours'. POFA 2012 brings keeper liability. You have to go through the NTK with a fine toothcomb. Read the POFA 2012 legislation. Period of parking etc. Prominent signage? With the BEAVIS ruling PE are hard to beat except on technicalities. Giving the retailers a hard time is the best thing with PE. Morrison's have given up trying to defend PE's antics and cancel easily as the landowner is entitled to do. I'm certain as soon as PE's contract is up with Morrison's they will be ditched as have Asda done with Smart (Asda sales down 5%, Smart won't have helped). Giving the CEO of a retailer a bad Monday morning is my favourite pastime. They need customers more than you need them, so first port of call is the retailer with copy receipts.
  4. I should have also added that avoiding PE car parks altogether is the wisest thing that a motorist can do.
  5. I have come to the conclusion that not reporting lack of planning permission is better as most PE sites don't have it and it is then an CoP failure that can be used at POPLA. Polyplastics arguments are valid but judges seem to ignore PE's lack of interest in complying with the law. PE signage is usually clear and they take no prisoners. Is it Morrisons or ALdi? Complaining to the store is the best initial action.
  6. For their own purposes and incorrectly VCS assume the name of and address given by DVLA is the driver. However the driver can be anyone mentioned on the insurance certificate (hopefully!). The signage at the site clearly states their contract is with driver only so if VCS don't know who it is, tough! That's why the driver or keeper should never own up by inferring or stating who the driver was. So many people make this very mistake by phoning the PPC and not awaiting the NTK. Sorry I don’t have Doncaster Airport byelaws but search this forum, MSE and Pepipoo and I’m sure they will come up. Peel Holdings are in business to make money which I’m certain they are very good at and probably care very little how they make it. Unfortunately the only answer is to avoid any of their sites or be very vigilant. I always use a dash-cam and when leaving a private car park save the file. I have recovered the cost very soon on because PPC’s use any trick in the book to get your money.
  7. Although VCS don't claim keeper liability they assume the driver was the keeper (in most cases they are less than 50% correct). However as this land is not relevent for POFA 2012 they have a double hurdle to jump if they try court. It's like Liverpool JLA airport where no defended case have come to court and if it did they would pull out on the court steps. BW legal though are acting a debt collectors but might be inexperienced or just unaware that this is not relevant land and try to move it further on. VCS do do court but in less difficult more straightforward cases. The important thing here is under no circumstances give a hint who was driving.
  8. Part 3 Section 21 deals with parking and there is no mention of a licence to a third party (VCS) to carry out parking management. The port authority may be operating outside the remit of the byelawslegislation.gov.uk/ukla/1966/25/pdfs/ukla_19660025_en.pdf Copy this link to view in browser.
  9. I think you will also find that this car park is covered by Tees &Hartlepool byelaws and is not relevant land for POFA. Keeper liability cannot apply.
  10. The Beavis result from the Supreme Court will be known tomorrow morning so it's best to wait until then and the correct guidance can then be given.
  11. I think you need to read up about a then PE car park Fistral Beach where a judge threw out a similar case. That's why the BPA has introduced a mandatory 10 minute grace period. In a case where you have to tap in your registration the contract starts (in my opinion) at the point you enter your details at the pay machine. The purpose of the ANPR camera is to record the entry registration and the then exit time only. Appeal to PE and then win at POPLA. Straightforward I think.
  12. In ENGLAND AND WALES PE must never be ignored but challenged. Does the signage not say Maximum Stay?
  13. In SCOTLAND ONLY the advice is to ignore PE totally. Do not respond or reply in any way as POFA 2012(keeper liability) doesn't apply in Scotland.
×
×
  • Create New...