Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'gateway'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Campaign
    • Helpful Organisations
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - you need to register to access the CAG library
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
  • Work, Social and Community
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
  • Motoring
  • Legal Forums
  • Latest Consumer News

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries
  • Shopping & Money Saving Tips

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Quit Date

Between and

Cigarettes Per Day


Cost Per Day


Location

Found 4 results

  1. After parking in the rooftop park of the Gateway Shopping Centre in Trowbridge (Boots, New Look and Next), my wife received a parking charge notice from Smart Parking. At the time she parked there, she went looking for a machine, and found one with a cover saying "not in use". She went further and found a second, identically covered. She assumed all the machines were out and without walking the full area of the car park trying to find another machine, went about has business in Next for about 30mins. The charge would have been 80p. I appealed the charge to SP on their website (as her). They unsurprisingly rejected it. Two points here: 1) in the appeal text submitted online, I referenced Ref Prendi - v- Camden - Case 2100346960 "...the Enforcement Authority cannot expect motorists to tramp [around] trying to find a machine in working order". 2) In their reply letter, they say that all 4 of the original *council* machines were covered, and that there were another 4 SP machines, *of which only two were working*. Let me repeat: Of 8 machines total, 4 were covered and marked "not in use", and 2 of the remaining 4 were not working. My wife then appealed to POPLA who have rejected her appeal: Summary from POPLA: Given that the majority of the machines at the site were not working or were covered the appellant deems it reasonable of her to have assumed the paring[sic] charges were on[sic] in place on the date of contravention. The appellant states that as there were no signs pointing out where or how to pay she deems the parking charge to have been issued unfairly. The relevant sections of the response (they also state the signage meets requirements - which we must accept): Even if a motorist presents extenuating circumstances setting out reasons why they did not keep to the parking conditions, POPLA cannot allow an appeal if a contract was formed and the motorist did not keep to the parking conditions. While I appreciate the appellant’s comments and have no reason to doubt her version of events the terms and conditions of the site, require payment to be made when parking. On review of the signage in place at the site I am satisfied that the operator does clearly offer a cashless payment option for motorists at this site. Fundamentally, it is the motorist’s responsibility to check for any terms and conditions, and either adhere to them or choose to leave. The appellant chose to stay, therefore accepted the terms and the parking charge that the operator subsequently issued She's very annoyed about this because fundamentally, she wasn't trying to get away without spending 80p! Her "fault" appears to be not noticing and pursuing the cashless payment option (she didn't see any signs offering this, but does accept she may have missed them). Should we pay up or push on?! I presume the next step pushing on would be writing to SP telling them we intend to challenge?
  2. Later this month, the long awaited Mersey Gateway will open to the public. The Mersey Gateway and the Silver Jubilee Bridges will both be tolled. The tolling system is called Merseyflow and will be operated by Emovis who operate the Dartford Crossing. In the same way as the Dartford Crossing, if payment of the toll is not paid by midnight the day after the crossing a Penalty Charge Notice will be issued for the amount of £40 (plus the unpaid toll fee). This sum will be reduced to a discounted rate of £20 if paid within the first 14 days of being issued. If the Penalty Charge Notice has still not been paid after this 28-day period, then the fee that must be paid is increased to £60 if it is paid within the following 14 days. If the Penalty remains unpaid beyond this 42-day period, then the penalty will be registered as a civil debt and if unpaid after another 36 days, recovery action will begin. In the same way as the public can open a Dart Charge account, motorists using the Mersey Gateway will need to open a Merseyflow account. Their website is below https://www.merseyflow.co.uk
  3. Assistance needed! I've read the multitude of threads re parking tickets on this site and am hoping for the same useful advice from the regulars as I'm a bit confused re the best course of action On 08/06/2016 at Gateway Plaza, Barnsley I received a parking charge notice on my windscreen. The ticket stated it was issued for the reason of: No Ticket Displayed. The enforcement company is SIP Parking Limited I did some brief research online and decided to ignore the ticket. I did not appeal or make any contact with SIP On 14/07/2016 I received a NTK. The NTK did not mention Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) On 15/08/2016 I received a final reminder. This also did not mention PoFA I have today (23/09/2016) received a Letter Before Claim from Gladstones Solicitors which has had the desired effect of finally making me concerned re the charge. The letter requests a payment of £150. The letter refers to the 'Practice Direction for Pre-Action Conduct under the Civil Procedure Rules and in particular paragraph 13-16 of the same which concerns the Court's powers to impose sanctions for any failure to comply.' The letter stipulates I have 14 days to pay or reply. Please advise! May be worth noting that on this occasion, I simply forgot to pay. I used the car park on dozens of occasions previously and paid using one of the mobile phone apps but on this occasion when I was called in to work early, I forgot. Thanks in anticipation for your advice
  4. Veterans Gateway went live on 3rd April 2017 READ MORE HERE: https://www.veteransgateway.org.uk/
×
×
  • Create New...