Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form. ( Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to. 29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM   1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack  Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached   2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00.  The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month.   3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement,   Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us.   Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement   9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate   4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:-   a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement number 756050. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     Thw total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by Firrst class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges ]= 5.  A the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or  alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage.   Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs.   Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024   What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg
    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
    • Commentary June 2024 WWW.ELECTORALCALCULUS.CO.UK Interesting article about just how bad it could be for the Tories.  Also Tories could be hoping on Reform not having candidates in many seats, as they were not ready.  
    • Even a Piers Morgan is an improvement and a gutless Farage Piers Morgan calls for second Brexit referendum WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM Piers Morgan and Nigel Farage have faced off over Brexit and a second referendum in a heated reunion on BBC Question Time.   “Why don’t we have another referendum about Brexit?” he questioned. “I seem to remember when 2016 came around we were told there was going to be control of our borders and it was going to be economically beneficial to this country. And eight years later we have lost complete control of our borders… and economically it seems to have been a wilful act of self-harm.”   ... Piers missed off : after all somebody said a 48/52 decision would be "unfinished business" by a long way - was that person just bul lying (again)  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Help - Parking Charge from PPC in Scotland


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5597 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

My car got a ticket from Combined Parking Solutions, when parking in a private residential car park. It was night when it was parked there, so the driver wouldnt have been able to see the warning signs. So i'm not going to pay it.

 

I just need advice as i haven't seen any posts of people experiencing these vile wretched companies in scotland. And i was wandering if there was anyone out there that does know more on this subject and can suggest how i play this. Can i use similar remarks as mentioned previously on other posts. Deny the claim as they charge is towards the driver of the vehicle, not the registered keeper. Or is there a fancier way where i can deny the claim as the act they quote has no relevance in scotland (or does it have more power).

 

I spoke to pete jones, got his email off his great post, but he was not confident in giving me the advice as it would fall under scots law. Where the law of contracts are slightly different. However, there is also the fact that this company is based in England and their lawyers will also not have any clue as to how scots law is applied in these matters.

 

Any help would be appreciated.

 

Craig

 

ps I also had a little idea for the future, how about a red sticker that can be stuck on your windscreen informing whoever wishes to put a ticket on your car enters themselves or the company they represent has entered into a contract whereby if they are not acting on behalf of the police or the local authority they are in breach of contract. Thi breach will result in a fine of £135 (£85 if paid for within 14 days). FAILURE TO PAY WILL RESULT IN SUMMONS TO THE SHERIFF/COUNTY COURT. The company will get photo's sent to them by their "agents" proving they are in a contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 139
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Well if Pete Jones is not confident to state a view then it is a bit presumtious for the rest of us to comment. PJ is held in very esteem here for very good reasons. His paper: Private Parking Companies - a guide to an effective defence, has helped innumerable people to understand their rights and stand up to the [problematic].

 

There have been lots of postings from Scotland, the tactics used to deter the [problematic] seem very much the same. Although contract law is different, it doesn't seem to be that different. There is still the concept of privity of contract, penalty clauses are still deemed unenforceable, there are Scottish equivalants to England & Wales unfair contract terms contract terms legislation. Scotland is obviously a more civilised country than England in that you don't allow private companies to clamp. It just needs a Scottish PJ to pull it all together - any takers?

 

I would think that the template letters can still be used - "take it up with the Driver etc". They are short, sweet, and do not mention specific legislation.

 

BTW Nice to hear that it is Combined Parking Solutions - This crowd are based in Wolverhampton. What are the chances of one of them coming up all that way just to lose a case at a Sheriff's Court in Scotland.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/119802-private-parking-tickets-template.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes pj certainly desserves his high regarded reputation he is very eager to help which is admirable in this day and age. He suggested that they would not come up to the sheriff courts am i right in assuming that an english solicitor can't act in an official cappacity in scotland? It would be great if there was a Scottish PJ.

 

Thanks

 

Craig

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hello fellow victims, I received a parking ticket in Dundee's Old Mill Complex, where I had popped into the cafe for a quick snack. The company who are pursuing me are called Central Ticketing. Their HQ is in Birmingham, but I beleive they have an office in Edinburgh. I have read all these websites about this problem, and the more I read, the more confused I get. Tried to email PJ but no reply so far. Have tried the three most recommended courses of action, with disasterous results.

1.Phoned police who said they would send someone out to get all details and proceed on the basis of the Administration of Justice Act, Sec40. I while later they phoned back saying that although this act is relevant in Scotland, Section 40 does not apply here. I find this VERY difficult to beleive. Can anyone verify this???

2.Contacted Trading Standards who didn't want to know--they couldn't do anything about this firm??? but did say that the complaint would be forwarded to OFT. What response are you guys getting from TS???

3.Visited CAB. They were completely out of their depth here and said they would ask around within the organisation and get back to me. They printed out info from their own site saying that in Scotland, harassment of debtors is not a specific crime. So where do I go from here??

In the meantime, Central Ticketing have sent a final demand saying that if I don't pay up before 12th May, they will take out a decree against me.

Please, any advice would be most welcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In reply to Ledgey81, they would employ a Scottish (Local)lawyer to act for them up here. They are chasing me for£85, but it costs£44 to iniciate court action.

More help please--I have lost thread on main site about the crime of Malicious Communications Act & also what to do if Sheriff officers/debt collectors call at home. Please guide to relevant threads. Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I too have a ticket from central ticketing for parking in the old mill complex dundee. I have until 10th May to pay it at the reduced rate of £60. I'm not sure what to do however, I am tempted to wait until they write to me and ask if they have evidence of who was driving the car.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The legal references for private parking in Scotland are clearly defined following the case of University of Edinburgh and Daniel Onifade.

 

Parking tickets on private land is perfectly legal and the Sheriff Principal who heard the appeal is/was a very well respected Sheriff Principal and now sits on the Scottish equiv of the High Court, he writes for various legal authors.

 

The case above is binding on the lower courts.

 

Just google on the parties names and many sites have the judgement including the scotcourts site.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This case is hardly typical - this was a repeat "offender" - some 29 times in fact. The repetition is mentioned throughout the judgement.

 

The contract was acknowledged also, as were the contracting parties. The crux of the case was about the use of the word "fine" and the level of charge - £30 plays £10.

 

I don't think that a one off incident at your local aldi or tesco would be anything like covered by this case.

 

Was there a contract?

Who was it with?

£85 plays £nil

Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect Barnsley Boy the appeal stated that the driver in this case accepted the conditions and did create a contract by parking and therefore accepted the "fine", In Scotland we are the same as England in relation to penalties thus the debate over the use of the word "fine"

 

The fact he continued to park was in defiance and in essence stating the terms on display were not legal, this turned out to be misguided and even if he had 1 ticket then it would be the same.

 

If the case would have proceeded this high for 1 ticket is questionable. But it does not change the findings (this was an appeal by Daniel so the original sherrif also found against him)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The legal references for private parking in Scotland are clearly defined following the case of University of Edinburgh and Daniel Onifade.

 

Parking tickets on private land is perfectly legal

Well the circumstances here regarding ledgey 81 are a little different than the case you quote to put it mildly. In the case of The University of Edinburgh against Daniel Onifade "on numerous occasions between 7 June 2001 and March 2004 the defender parked a vehicle on property belonging to the pursuers although he was not the holder of a parking permit. On each occasion there was displayed on the property a notice in the following terms:

 

UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH

PRIVATE PROPERTY.

PARKING BY PERMIT ONLY

- - -

PERSONS PARKING WITHOUT

A PERMIT WILL BE LIABLE

TO A FINE OF £30 PER DAY

- - -

PARKING REGULATIONS APPLY

VEHICLES ARE PARKED

AT OWNERS RISK

The defender was aware of the terms of the notice."

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

indeed - not to mention the badly worded appeal. Anyone who reads the case (thanks for pointing it out Mark) can see that it lacks applicability - so thats one more down.

 

If this was as portrayed by mark then every PPC invoice issued in scotland would go to court with a sure fire win for the PPC.

But they don't do they... QED.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rory32, you are correct the signage must be clear as no person can agree to something they did not see if a sign was so clear they ought to see it.

 

For the record Daniel Onifade is also a very highly respected lawyer so I don't agree it was a badly worded appeal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the bench sure thought it was badly worded !! - and went to some length of say so and then to substitute the questions. You can't have it both ways mark.

'Ought' to see it means nothing - there is sufficient well known case law about that.

 

 

How many slam dunks wins in scottish courts for scottish PPCs based on this judgement... QED still !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark, as usual the pro PPC quoting of case law fails to impress.

 

"What the Summary Cause Rules 2002 require, however, is that the stated case should contain 'appropriate questions of law' (rule 25.1(3)(b)). That means, in my view, that the questions stated must be appropriate to 'the point [or points] of law upon which the appeal is to proceed' which have been specified by the appellant in his note of appeal, as required by rule 25.1(1)(b). The questions should accordingly be so stated as to require the Court's opinion on these points. I shall therefore decline to answer the question stated and substitute two other questions which raise the issues specified:"

 

SO how many slam dunks wins in scottish courts for scottish PPCs based on this judgement... zip

QED still !! (still).

Demonstrated very simply and not sidetracked.

-------------------------

the number of pro PPC posts on this board is amazing - are we getting so many hits on google that we are affecting their revenue ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Scottish driver. In my mind there are three positive courses of action open to you, depending on how much "Balls" you have.

1.Write CT and tell them that they should address their claim to the driver of the vehicle, when this alleged parking offence took place. (law is that driver is responsible, not owner/registered keeper). They got your name and address from DLVC, which states that you are registered keeper. Under no circumstances admit you were driver. It is up to them to prove who driverwas.

2.Get in touch with Evening Tele and ask them to do article on this problem. (i am about to do this, and two or more people would add credence to complaint)

3.Contact Dorothy Thomson of Old Mill Cafe and ask her for contact details of all her customers who have been ticketed. I believe her daughter was one!! I have asked her to get all victims to phone me, in order to get a united front to fight this injustice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reply to scottish mark. This sheriff guy must be really something, when everyone knows that these parking tickets are not enforcable in law as no crime has been committed. If you know differently, please reply with relevant legislation. Our local police solicitor is not aware of this law!!

Much revered as this sheriff apears to be, they are not infalable, and occasionally get bogged down in the law as to forget the practicalities of the matter to hand. I'll take my chances with him anyday in court on any subject relating to motor vehicles, especially HGV's. I have had several charges against me dropped, as I have been able to baffle them with technicalities relating to vehicles.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reply to scottish mark. This sheriff guy must be really something, when everyone knows that these parking tickets are not enforcable in law as no crime has been committed.

This sheriff guy was a sheriff principal - you do understand the difference, right? Appeals in civil cases go first to the Sheriff Principal, or the Court of Session, and then the House of Lords. I would suggest you at least read the case refered to if you wish to make such sweeping remarks. The case is not relevant to the circumstances of the OP. Nevertheless it is a sheriff principals ruling.

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lamma, I am neither pro or anti ppc, there seemed to be many people asking questions specific to Scotland to which no one knew the legal answers to which I posted so it would be clearer and they would have facts in order to answer their questions.

If by posting a quoted case makes a person pro something, then this site has a strange way of looking at things.

 

Rory, I agree this case is different as the original poster claims to have parked at night and did not see signs, I would suspect if he parked in daylight next to a sign the case would be of more relevance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

lamma, I am not sure which website you are reading the case from but you have posted half a paragraph in relation to the question asked by the original sheriff and not the defendant or claimant.

 

The sheriff stated a case that the sheriff principal considered to be too broad and as a result the sheriff principal substituted it with 2 more specific questions.

 

If you have access to the westlaw library then you will find 3 pages in relation to the case and looking at the scotscourt site the FULL paragraph is under [3].

Link to post
Share on other sites

from the scotcourts site just as you recommended - and the number 1 hit on google. stunned that you could not find it - or am I ?

THE UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH v. DANIEL ONIFADE, 24 December 2004, Sheriff Principal I.D. Macphail, Q.C.

 

so where are all these slam dunks for PPCs in scotland based on this case ?

QED still (still) ((and still)).

 

End of.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't understand this, I place a link to a case that no one seemed to know about, to answer a question and all certain members can do is pick arguments - I will not bother in future, I have come across a similar case that was dedlt with by the court of session but I can do without the nit picking.

Consumer Action Group, more like Consumer Argument Group.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"The legal references for private parking in Scotland are clearly defined following the case of University of Edinburgh and Daniel Onifade."

is quite a statement and clearly misleading IMV - and that of others here. Correcting this is not nitpicking. Sorry you think it is.

 

Still no list of scottish slam dunk wins for PPCs based on this referenced case (singular)...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't understand this, I place a link to a case that no one seemed to know about, to answer a question and all certain members can do is pick arguments - I will not bother in future, I have come across a similar case that was dedlt with by the court of session but I can do without the nit picking.

Consumer Action Group, more like Consumer Argument Group.

 

I knew about the case, and knew about the fact that this guy was a repeat offender, and that the Uni was not trying to extort money out of him by fraudulent means, which is what most PPCs do.

 

Nit picking? Well if you go in the cream when we ask a few questions and bring up a few points then that's your perogative. I mean, if everyone on here (and Pepipoo) didn't take any ACTION or FIGHTBACK when presented with what is in your view a very open and shut case for the PPCs then what would be the point?

 

And if you can't see what lamma is on about, then get a grip - you come on and say

Parking tickets on private land is perfectly legal
yet provide us with a case which does not even have a parking ticket involved, and haven't yet shown us wins in the lower courts by PPCs in Scotland - now I wonder why that is? :rolleyes:
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...