Jump to content

scumbags

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    1
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It seems I am unable to reply ("*** Forbidden. Private list deny. ***") to others kindly helping with

    so I'm bothering you with my apologies extended to all.

  2. I have wangled a demand from Civil Enforcement Ltd (CEL) down from £100 to £20 - the vehicle in question was registered by a hotel to one of their guests who had booked, and paid, for accommodation on the basis that guest parking was free (not that the car was parked for the 15 minutes claimed anyway). CEL claim "this situation is considered a major keying error" under paragraph 17.4 though all four examples of 'Major Keying Errors' there include "entered", which in this case nothing was. As far as I am concerned if a principal grants permission then whatever the principal's agent says that conflicts is between the two of them and no liability for a guest who has already paid for services including free parking without any condition. I'm interested in any example from POPLA where not entering anything was considered "a major keying error" but mainly whether, at the £20 'reduced payment' stage "If you are not satisfied with our decision, you may appeal to the independent appeals service via www.popla.co.uk …" counts as predatory or misleading tactics, since in 9.5 of the British Parking Association Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice: "You must not use predatory or misleading tactics to lure drivers into incurring parking charges." given that POPLA state (in an FAQ) "If the operator has offered the reduced payment and you choose to appeal anyway, we will refuse the appeal and the operator will expect you to pay the full parking charge amount."? (my emboldening) [First post here, appreciate the answers I've seen.]
×
×
  • Create New...