Combined Parking Solutions...GAH

[lamma]

running another case asap is probably Perky's idea of 'balancing the scales'.

 

A proper defense is in order for this Caryl.

[scottish_mark]

caryl, it is not appropiate for you to discuss or disclose details of an ongoing case in a public forum

 

I understand your comments have been printed but you should refrain from discussing a case or its specific particulars in public.

[Rob S]

Mark, perhaps you would care to back up your assertions that the case should not be discussed with the relevent legislation that prevents further discussion?

Edited May 14, 2008 by Rob S

[lamma]

not more thought police posts purleeze !

 

what ongoing case ? - have papers been issued to Caryl from the Court.

how on earth could you know ? ?

 

wow a print out from a forum - what a weapon !

I wonder if it is as informative as a print out from Perky's website site ?

Too late all safely captured . . .

 

have no fear though Mark - all the good stuff won't go onto the forum - not until fat lady sings...

[GuidoT]

caryl, it is not appropiate for you to discuss or disclose details of an ongoing case in a public forum

 

I understand your comments have been printed but you should refrain from discussing a case or its specific particulars in public.

 

Subject to compliance with site rules, anyone can discuss anything they like on this forum. This is after all what this forum is all about.

[Caryl]

caryl, it is not appropiate for you to discuss or disclose details of an ongoing case in a public forum

 

I understand your comments have been printed but you should refrain from discussing a case or its specific particulars in public.

 

Whereas it is in fact ok to fabricate a story, pm someone that story and attempt to dupe someone into providing information? My friend the police officer doesnt seem to think that is ok, and my friend the lawyer says its definately dodgy ground...

[Caryl]

Should also add that in previous correspondence I was informed I was now liaible to pay over £250 if this went to court. Funnily enough the Court claim is for alot less than that...

[Steve__M]

Should also add that in previous correspondence I was informed I was now liaible to pay over £250 if this went to court. Funnily enough the Court claim is for alot less than that...

 

You probably have advice coming out of your ears by now.

 

I would hope that demanding what is more than lawfully due would count as inappropriate conduct. You should also point out that £25 is used to "compensate" the landowner according to the CPS terms of business. If the landowner would otherwise have received nothing then this is surely an unlawful penalty.

[RogerHarris]

What happened to this thread? Perky up to his usual tricks?

 

It would be a good idea to carry dark glasses and a hat, in your car, to put on anytime you enter a PPC control area. Then exit the vehicle from another door.

 

These people are determined and for sure will be planning how to get over the prove you drove the car problem, by upgrading cameras and software, sufficiently to capture an identifiable image of the driver within a vehicle.

[lamma]

pictures alone do not 'identify' anyone. why do think passport photo are sealed and stamped over ?

It would cost the PPCs a fortune to go this route and it is still very questionable. and a two edged sword for them, well three edged when I think about it.

besides the who parked the car thing is only one hurdle they have to overcome.

 

its gone very quiet on here about CPS lately - have we been 'de-trolled' ?

[pin1onu]

its gone very quiet on here about CPS lately - have we been 'de-trolled' ?

Licking their wounds after the Oldham debacle?

[Hobbie]

To embarassed to come here now, that Perky and his Scottish Rep was so sure of a win. How do we know Perky & Co. are embarassed?

 

'We just do'

[lamma]

they were very active shortly after the oldham decision when the wounds were freshest so I don't believe it is that.

As for embarrassment - I can't see that ever affecting any PPC never mind CPS.

It is nice to be quieter .

[fridgedoor]

It's very noticeable how the constant trolling by PPCs has stopped since Monday. Seems to suggest a certain PPC was behind it all.

[Hobbie]

Or, due to the recent defeat, CPS and other PPCs are keeping the cards closer to the chest for future court cases.

 

As no doubt, a defeat in the court is damaging for the business, which potential land owner would want to employ the services of a company which, a) loses cases, b) publically talks about the cases in a totally unprofessional manner and c) assumes a win before even the prelim hearing and invites the press along.

 

It puts a bad name on all the PPC's and the BPA should take action against cowboys like CPS and other PPC's who act in unprofessional manners such as CPs have done in the past, just in this 1 case alone.

[Caryl]

Out of interest (having obviously never been to court before) How long after returning the claim form am I likely to end up in court? Bearing in mind of course that needs to be allocated to my local court?

[Bookworm]

Sorry, when you say "claim form", which part are you referring to? (having deleted your posts makes it a little difficult to work it out, LOL)

 

If you mean you were served with form N1 and you sent back an acknowledgment denying all of the claim and your intention to defend, you have 28 days from the date of postal service of the N1 to lodge your defence. It's very important you do not miss that deadline or the claimant will be able to claim default judgment against you.

 

If you have sent your defence already, then the claim (came from MCOL in Northampton, I presume?) will get transferred to your local court and local judge for allocation, and you'll get something called an Allocation Questionnaire, which has a 14 days deadline. Once that has been returned to the local court, the judge will determine how long to allocate to the hearing and which track is the right one, and allocate a hearing date from that info. Depending on how big and busy your local court is, you're probably looking at 2-3 months down the line?

[stormforce9]

Hi All,

You will all be pleased to hear that this case today was heard in a FULL hearing at Southampton County Court.

The case was heard before District Judge Grand under case reference 8QT50123 - The hearing lasted approx 90mins.

This was the second case with a defence fully prepared by CAG/PePiPoo and submitted to the court by the defendant.

Remember that CAG/PePiPoo defences would always see off a PPC and show their charges were unenforceable.

[lamma]

is this the one Help Me! - FightBack Forums

[stormforce9]

Sorry .. forgot to post the report from the court !

 

The defence when submitted was a standard one by CAG/PePiPoo users (we now know exactly who offers to help and who is involved with the defences) ..

The defendant was very nice and pleasant and I have to say a complete opposite of the last one they provided (Mr Thomas – who was arrogant and rude) .. She appreciated this was nothing personal but a business decision.

The lady never admitted being the driver and in fact stated it could have been her mother or bother as they often used the car – The judge asked her the direct question “who was driving” and she stated she did not know.

The other parts of the defence (ie, It’s a penalty) together with the case law they normally provide were heard by the court.

Judgement was given to CPS as the judge found on the balance of probabilities the defendant was driving and that she had a very ‘selective memory’ and ‘evasive’ when answering questions. (this referred to the ID of the driver)

The judge heavily criticised the defence used (provided by the so called experts at CAG/PePiPoo) .. He stated the selective use of case law references showed it was not professionally done, this was a reference and their total mis-understanding of the Vine case.

So here it goes again, another case where the defendant did not admit to being the driver (even when asked by the judge), the normal things about it being a penalty and not enforceable were tested and found to be rubbish.

This case AGAIN shows that tickets if issued correctly are 100% enforceable and they are a legally enforceable parking charge and that by parking the defendant consented to the conditions.

So it goes CAG/PePiPoo 0 CPS 2 (100%) – I suspect they will say its another fluke of a result, how many do they need ??? Funny when they were misinformed about Thomas back in May they were all singing from the rooftops about the solid basis of their arguments.

I did speak with the defendant afterwards and she admitted going onto the forums asking for advice and being railroaded into fighting it on promises it would fail etc..

The total payable by defendant is £263.30 (original charge £60.00) so more than 4 times the original amount.

I doubt the helpers will be brave enough to stand up (they have all been silent since Thomas) … It just leaves another person who came to CAG/PePiPoo very disappointed and heavily out of pocket.

The forums really should open up and allow both sides of the argument to be heard, this person went along for help to see everyone agreeing with each other and thought ‘they must be right’ … only to find out they were very very wrong.

[stormforce9]

is this the one Help Me! - FightBack Forums

 

Yes thats the one lamma.

[lamma]

care to post up the paperwork - suitably washed of course.

[stormforce9]

I understand that you are on the 'inside' and have the relevant contacts to get the paperwork.

 

Are you trying to say the case didnt happen ?

Or the defence wasnt prepared by the 'experts' ?

[stormforce9]

I understand Perky has spoken to the local papers down there, so maybe in there also tonight/tomorrow - I am sure the link will end up on here or PePiPoo.

[lamma]

your understanding is incorrect. where on earth did you get that idea ? also this post Help Me! - FightBack Forums shows that as of yesterday afternoon no help had been forthcoming from pepipoo. As the defense must have been filed before yesterday that is why I asked to see the actual papers - not the newspapers. Does this second win mean that Perky will actually pick up the challenge that was given by one of the pepipoo mods ?

Edited November 14, 2008 by lamma