Combined Parking Solutions...GAH

[stormforce9]

your understanding is incorrect. where on earth did you get that idea ?

My appologies, I must have you mixed up with someone else.

[stormforce9]

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 ?

 

The original post on pePiPoo was back in May .... To my knowledge Glacier2, Bama, Legaladviser (or one of his egos) and Southpaw82 were involved in the defence from there - Together with users on here.

 

Most has been done via PM on PePiPoo.

 

I think we can go around and around, You ask for 1 more case please to prove it, then another then another then another.

 

Maybe, Just maybe these 'unenforceable invoices' as you all call them are, when issued correctly with the correct signage in place are enforceable after all.

[lamma]

When will Perky take on the challenge of a (legally qualified) big name from pepipoo ? never by the look of it. I wonder why... and why was the victim posting yesterday for help ?

[Steve__M]

While I've usually taken the view that small businesses with tiny car parks do have some issues with regard to protecting these for their customers, in this case you've basically bullied a woman parking in an empty industrial estate on a Sunday into paying a £60 fine just to try and make a point.

 

She has stated that up to the day before court she had not been in touch with PePiPoo members for months. And she only posted 26 times to the two forums.

 

Still, for £260 minus court costs, 400 miles travel expenses, a day's work and presumably hours sat at your PC it's not much of a pay-off. But hope you had a jolly time anyway.

 

PS. lamma, I hope I don't upset Caryl by pointing out that it has been a Perky tactic in the past to reawaken threads for spurious reasons the day before a development.

Edited November 14, 2008 by Steve__M

[lamma]

well summarised. thats how I read it also. lets see Perky take up the pepipoo challenge. To take such a scalp would settle a lot of issues so why not do it. perky seems very sure of his case so he can't lose ? Can he ? ?

[stormforce9]

The defence was dated 12th June 2008.

There is nothing else to do then until the court date.

 

I presume she contacted PePiPoo again yesterday for some last minute 'hints and tips' .. which I understand she got via PM from some members - There has also been some behind the scenes activity.

 

As for taking on 'setup cases' .. PePiPoo have had 2 attempts at it, how many do they want ???

 

This is getting away from the issue of this case, start a new thread about setup cases if you want (I Know that hijacking a thread is useful to deflect the attention from what people consider to be another bad result for these forums, but it does not help the general public who come here for advice and a balanced approach)

[lamma]

at the risk of being boring - lets see Perky take up the pepipoo challenge. To take such a scalp would settle a lot of issues so why not do it. perky seems very sure of his case so he can't lose ? Can he ? ? surely he doesn't just choose easy prey ? His case is strong he says - but he won't test it in such a contest. As I recall Perky says he is legally qualified, how could he lose against the pepipoo challenge ? Step up Perky !

[Steve__M]

Why would someone post the following when they are already receiving so much help.

 

I am in court soon over a ticket given to me by a PPC.

Any advice gratefully received.

Edited November 17, 2008 by Steve__M

[stormforce9]

at the risk of being boring - lets see Perky take up the pepipoo challenge. To take such a scalp would settle a lot of issues so why not do it. perky seems very sure of his case so he can't lose ? Can he ? ? surely he doesn't just choose easy prey ? His case is strong he says - but he won't test it in such a contest. As I recall Perky says he is legally qualified, how could he lose against the pepipoo challenge ? Step up Perky !

 

You are starting to sound like a stuck record, so let this be the LAST post on the subject.

 

When a ticket is issued, no one knows who it is issued to - so to assume only easy targets are issued with tickets is absurd.

 

One day Perky will lose, the law of averages and the uncertainty of the county court system will make that a certainty .. then what ... was that a fluke ? What will it mean in legal terms .. nothing/didly squat.

 

All these 2 cases have demonstrated is it is perfectly possible to have a parking charge, have a 'great defence' and the court find in favour of the parking company - something that sites like this (and you included lamma) have said said would never happen.

 

I think this (and PePiPoo) would serve people better by asking the circumstances the ticket was issued in, the wording of the signage, the ticket and a photo of the vehicle at time of issue BEFORE giving advice.

 

In both cases the court was not impressed with sending template letters and in the Thomas case called him 'Disingenuine' and in this case "evasive" .. something they could not have done if an open appeal was submitted when the ticket was issued and all facts shared.

[Steve__M]

I think this (and PePiPoo) would serve people better by asking the circumstances the ticket was issued in, the wording of the signage, the ticket and a photo of the vehicle at time of issue BEFORE giving advice.

 

Are you reading all their PMs and emails then.

 

Victim claimed otherwise empty carpark on an industrial site on a Sunday. Is that worth £60?

[lamma]

"When a ticket is issued, no one knows who it is issued to - so to assume only easy targets are issued with tickets is absurd." far from absurd Perky seems to pick his targets very selectively based on forum postings. But he won't pick up the challenge of issuing to the pepipoo name by appointment. 'Disingenuine' and "evasive" seem to be Perky traits to me. It is not a stuck record but a sticking point for Perky - sounds similar but very different things. And no last minute PMs to the victim via pepipoo according to the post above. another evaded point.

[stormforce9]

Are you reading all their PMs and emails then.

 

Victim claimed otherwise empty carpark on an industrial site on a Sunday. Is that worth £60?

 

Victim, hardly .. a person who parks in daylight in front of a big red sign stating "WARNING - PERMIT HOLDERS ONLY" is hardly a victim of the parking company ... now a victim of thinking the ticket was unenforceable and having a good defence supplied here and by PePiPoo members would mean she would not have to pay and has now cost her 4 times more that the original ticket ... then yes I agree she is a victim.

 

The carpark was obviously not empty as it was a self managed site, therefore the owners of the units were around.

 

Just because something is empty does not give others the right to park, regardless of the time or day of the week. The responsibility lies with the driver to ensure they are legally entitled to be there and need to ensure they have made reasonable efforts to establish conditions for parking.

 

In this case, a bid red sign in front of the car in mid afternoon was enough to show that they did not make reasonable efforts (if the ticket was issued at 23:00 in total darkness then thats a different story)

[lamma]

so many questions unanswered. speaks volumes. Perky needs to step up and prove his point in a case with a qualified victim. He fails to take the field of battle in such circumstances. No change and nothing different. Now that is a 'broken record'.

[Al27]

Yawn. If a person losing £60 isn't a victim, because it's their 'own fault', I would assume £10,000, limb removal or murder would be equally allowed?

 

There was a red sign after all!

[pin1onu]

It strikes me that in both this case and the Thomas one that Perky got a big leg up by obtaining information as to the identity of the poster and an admission that they were the driver.

 

This is a big thing as they can at least claim or try to claim privity of contract. If they can't prove this the chances are that the case will be thrown out.

 

It all goes back to what has been said before and at the risk of sounding boring being careful about putting anything that will allow the PPC to identify you. (Dates, times, location, VRM to name some).

 

I think that given the level of monitoring by Porky, his minions and other PPCs of these forums that perhaps something should be put in a sticky to warn posters of this fact.

 

BTW there are some defenses to the Vine case that the pork meister appears to be using but I will not post them on open forum.

[robin9342]

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.

 

Well, if thats true, why don't you and all PPCs start charging £1000 on your "correctly issued" mickey mouse invoices, take every single case to court, win, then retire to the Bahamas for a life of luxury??????

[gwc1000]

I suppose that perky and his like know that £1000 would be considered excessive. Easier to go for £60, a Judge may find that amount reasonable.

I have to say that I am amazed at the effort perky puts into persuing these small amounts, travelling up and down the country to go to Court to obtain piddling sums. I would say that anybody in business on their own account would value their own time at a minimum of £500 per day.

[Al27]

Exactly. Now he's made his point, he'll be unlikely to try it again anytime soon. He knows his chances of success are not changed by the Thomas case ie. very low.

 

Excel have been stung and appear to have toned it down.

 

Now UKCPS are trying their turn, no doubt in cahoots with Perky (going by their similar claim documents).

[jasmin2008]

He clearly has no business acumen.

 

3 challenges to Perky on Pepipoo now.

[lamma]

he won't get into the ring with the big boys despite his proclamations. says it all.

[stormforce9]

With respect he has...

 

He has taken on 2 cases that PePiPoo/CAG 'experts' have had a hand in.

 

CAG/PePiPoo experts always stated a good defence WILL ALWAYS SEE OFF THE PPC

 

In 2 out of 2 cases it has proved to be WRONG information.

 

The facts speak for themselves, we can argue about 'what ifs' but lets face facts ... they said it could not be done and it has not once but twice.

[stormforce9]

I will also add...

 

With the Thomas case he also had someone from the forums with him (Stephen Large), now we all know hes not man enough to admit in open forum - as both defendant and 'adviser' have been SILENT since their massive loss.

 

The Thomas case, when it was wrongly reported CPS had lost you all started moo'ing that you had won ... then the REAL case was before the court in all its 3+ hours of glory.

 

The Forums sent their person to speak on behalf of Thomas .. It was all debated and YOU STILL LOST !!!

 

Perky has won 2 PePiPoo cases, the proof is there ...3,4,10,100,1000 be honest with yourselves there will ALWAYS be an excuse.

 

Caryl & Thomas need your help now (financially) to recover from the absolute CRAP advice they have been given and the even worse defences .. Instead of planning your next win/lose ... maybe help the people who have lost out as a result of the BAD advice on these forums.

[lamma]

and yet still he won't get into the ring with the big boys. playground behaviour in my view. Step up Perky.

[jasmin2008]

He is obviously a chicken.

[peternet]

What amazes me is the number of regular contributors to these forums who suddenly become 'too busy' , 'not legal experts' etc etc when somebody seeking help and genuinely expecting to find it from the so called experts on this forum asks for it. I would suggest that all the people who are asking for advice carefully consider that so often the advice shrinks away once the PPC gets serious and chooses to take legal action to recover monies owing. Lets keep this debate serious and sensible - silly comments, abusive comments are not helpful to those genuine people who need help in understanding why they have been issued with a parking charge and how they can appeal. For the record I have spent most of today issuing refunds and canceling tickets where I feel they have been incorrectly or mistakenly or unfairly issued. However i have also issued court proceeding against several people who blatantly insist in parking in disabled bays or on private land without permission. They will appear in these protesting their innocence or the alleged fact they were not driving. many forum contributors will spit out the standard answers - tell them you weren't driving - igonore the letters they ont go to court. So it goes on - well yes we do go to court yes we do receive success yes we will continue going to court. Our advice communicate with us come to a settlement early on court is expensive - not for us but for you