Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • and it will be also now written off under age related criteria anyway.
    • @dx100ukThanks for this! I'm still not clear if I'm facing more than 6 points on my license though. Can you explain any further please? When I accept the 2nd speeding ticket, will they just charge me £100 and 3 points, or will they be more severe consequences since that offense took place the following day of the 1st offense? Similarly, when I accept the 3rd offense, will they look at my record or just charge me with the £100 fine and 3 points? @Man in the middleI've been searching the forum and you seem very knowledgeable. Would you mind giving a look at my query please? Thanks in advance!!
    • Yes of course. That's why it says cc:: BIg Motoring World at the bottom. Don't imagine that this solves the issue. It doesn't. He not have to force the finance company and big motoring world to accept the rejection to give your money back. I suggest that you get the letter off tomorrow. And let us know what you hear but on Friday you should then send a threat to the finance company.   Have a look what I have said here about your options and read the whole thread as well.  
    • Been perusing the actual figures on the polls above wondering where the '16% claimed for deform comes from? I understand that there are 'weighted' end results based on secret calculations ...   Probably going to repeat this later, but remember that the ukip/brexit/reform/deform party has ALWAYS had poll speculation FAR better than their actual  performance at elections - by large margins. SO: The labor and Tory votes come largely from simply the people who say they will vote for them - sorted Lab 43% Tory 20%, with maybe another small 1-2% coming from the weightings of the 'not sures' Greens largely get what is declared from 'other' , although with another declared green bit from the 'pressed' question   So as the share of the voting displayed in 'other' granted to reform/deform is around 11%, where does the '16% too often being reported come from? Seems that reform has been granted as beneficiary of effectively ALL the don't knows and wont says, who when pressed didn't actually declare for someone else ... effectively adding 40%+ to their reported polling % - rather strange given their consistent under-performance compared to polling - or perhaps that is the cause of the higher rating eh?   Now I admit the possibility (probability?) of wingers being ashamed of declaring their support for the yuckey lemon end of the spectrum ... but surely  that should affect the 'Torys as well? Maybe the statisticians have simply weighted in that deform wingers are simply more likely to lie?   But - without 'weightings' and assumptions that faragits will get everything that isnt declared as a definite and unequivocal 'not that Piers Morgan' - reform is on around 11% it seems.   Add to that the history of polling a lot less than the hype - and the simple fact that faragit wingers seem to be spread across the country (presumably skulking in their moms spare room despite being 45+) and greens and lib dems seem to be community minded - I think two seats will be an epic result for farage. Hardly the opposition - far more raving wingnut party.   and importantly - Has farage got a home in clacton yet?
    • "as I have no tools available to merge documents, unless you can suggest any free ones that will perform offline merges without watermarking" (which you don't) ... but ok please upload the documents and we'll go from there
  • 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

Signs facing the wrong way


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5735 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

Here's chapter 3 but as previously mentioned, it is a draft:

 

http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/closed/trafficsigns2/trafficsignschapter3.pdf

 

Thanks. This is the relevant bit:

 

6.33 Signs should be erected parallel to the kerb,

facing the carriageway and sited at approximately

60 metre intervals. This will normally be achieved by

fixing the signs on every lamp column within the

restricted length of road. Where there are no lamp

columns or other suitable mounting points, posts will

need to be erected. Providing conspicuity is not

compromised, signs may be mounted at the back of

the footway on posts, walls or railings. This is likely

to be preferable where the footway is narrow. In

environmentally sensitive areas where the post is

sited at the back of the footway, consideration

should be given to painting it a similar colour to the

adjacent building (direction 41 allows a post to be

any single colour, including its natural colour).

 

While this is a draft, no doubt theref is a current version/equivalent which may say much the same thing.

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The signs further down the street (we didn't walk that way) were facing the correct way. I hope this doesn't jeopardise it but I would think not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

OK, just to update you all. I got a Notice of Rejection letter yesterday so I now have to take this to PATAS. Do you have any other recommendations for me at this stage as I have never gone as far as this before?

 

Also, is it better to have a personal hearing or a postal hearing? I would rather do the postal hearing as it means I don't have to take time off work and also I'd be pretty nervous to be honest as I've never had to go to court (or similar) before. If however, it's generally accepted that I'd have a better chance at a personal hearing then I would do it.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would always recommend personal hearing.

It is nothing to be nervous about. Nothing like a court at all. More of a chat in an office (once you get part the formal part).

Notionally it is in public in that members of the public can come in and listen but I have no idea if anyone ever does!

You can also request specific time/day slots.

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, just to update you all. I got a Notice of Rejection letter yesterday so I now have to take this to PATAS. Do you have any other recommendations for me at this stage as I have never gone as far as this before?

 

Also, is it better to have a personal hearing or a postal hearing? I would rather do the postal hearing as it means I don't have to take time off work and also I'd be pretty nervous to be honest as I've never had to go to court (or similar) before. If however, it's generally accepted that I'd have a better chance at a personal hearing then I would do it.

 

Thanks.

Yes, personal hearings are the best .

 

You can AFAIK ask for the attendance of the ceo under section 6 of the road traffic parking adjudicator regulations unless that has been changed aswell.

 

This way it put more pressure on the LA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, personal hearings are the best .

 

You can AFAIK ask for the attendance of the ceo under section 6 of the road traffic parking adjudicator regulations unless that has been changed aswell.

 

This way it put more pressure on the LA.

The Road Traffic (Parking Adjudicators) (South Lanarkshire Council) Regulations 2005

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK guys thanks again. I'll set up a personal hearing then. Any advice on what to do? It's just a case of resubmitting what I have already done in the first appeal to the council isn't it.

 

What's this bit about the CEO? Are you suggesting that I ask PATAS to bring along the CEO of Hammersmith and Fulham council? How will this benefit me?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My car received a "CPN" from Apcoa for not paying and displaying. It was parked in a what looked like a parking area of a road. Opposite was a clearly marked P&D car park outside a railway station. There were no signs on the side of the road my car was parked. On the opposite side of the road there were double yellow lines and beyond that was the fenced boundary of the car park. On that fence were signs with wording along the lines of obeying to the parking rules.

It looked as though, if you parked in the designated area of the road it was free parking. If you parked on the solid yellow lines you get a ticket. If you parked in the carpark it was pay and display.

I sent photographs of the signs and lack of signs to Apcoa. They have replied to say that "we have considered your explanation and regret the penalty is upheld"

By chance, I have not told them who was driving, But I feel it was genuinely bad signage that caused "the driver" not to pay. Should I continue with the signage route or reply stating that they should contact the driver if they feel that the signs were correct?

Please help .. my wife is putting more pressure on me to pay than they are.:rolleyes: It's the thought that we may have to pay more if we contest the ticket.

 

Many Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

By chance, I have not told them who was driving, But I feel it was genuinely bad signage that caused "the driver" not to pay. Should I continue with the signage route or reply stating that they should contact the driver if they feel that the signs were correct?

Please help .. my wife is putting more pressure on me to pay than they are.:rolleyes: It's the thought that we may have to pay more if we contest the ticket.

 

Many Thanks

 

If Apcoa are acting as a private parking co. on behalf of the private car park landlord, and not as an agent of the council (to enforce public road parking) then you should do nothing until you receive a letter from them addressed to the "Registered Keeper" (the details of whom they will have to have paid DVLA to obtain). Then you can reply with one of the letters from the stickiess area of the forum stating, "yes I'm the keeper, please write to the driver".

 

If you read through these many forums, you will see consistantly the advise is that you should never instigate the dialog with these companies, but only reply to a contact from them. (and then only once is advised with any other letters being ignored)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you,

Apcoa are working for First Great Western. I have read through a number of the forums but can't find anything that outlines any rules that have to be adheared to with regard to signage ie distance from parking space. The message from signs at this parking area are not clear enough as I managed to misinterpret them. I'm sure other drivers will face the same problem. Who can I go to, to get help in forcing Apcoa to rectify the problem. If it was a council owned carpark, I could go to a third party ombudsman but there does not seem to be any body to turn to?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh thanks. How will this help my appeal and put pressure on the LA?

 

Back to my original subject....

 

Could somebody kindly let me know what benefit asking for the CEO to attend gives me?

 

Regards.. Karl

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to my original subject....

 

Could somebody kindly let me know what benefit asking for the CEO to attend gives me?

 

Regards.. Karl

You can raise questions. it is not unknown for CEOs to have dodgy notebook entries.... I was reading today of one CEO who was dishing out tickets because they thought the tickets had expired when they hadn't. they were adding hours and minutes on a calculator - in decimal !! they couldn't actually tell the time and yet had become employed as a CEO - so who knows what you would find.

And it keeps the CEO off the street for the day !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for the input.

Out of interest, is there a min or max length of time before you can get clamped/towed after receiving a pcn on a yellow line?

 

I only ask because in the pictures that they submitted you can see the tow truck in the background. Usually it's the CEO that takes the photos after he's issued the pcn so I am assuming the tow truck was there at the same time that i received the pcn.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for the input.

Out of interest, is there a min or max length of time before you can get clamped/towed after receiving a pcn on a yellow line?

 

I only ask because in the pictures that they submitted you can see the tow truck in the background. Usually it's the CEO that takes the photos after he's issued the pcn so I am assuming the tow truck was there at the same time that i received the pcn.

 

No, the CEO would probably be with the tow truck, after any applicable observation period he/she would issue the PCN then its immediately lifted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Check out the contents of

 

DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ACT 2004

THE SECRETARY OF STATE’S STATUTORY GUIDANCE TO LOCAL

AUTHORITIES ON THE CIVIL ENFORCEMENT OF PARKING

CONTRAVENTIONS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Check out the contents of

 

DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ACT 2004

THE SECRETARY OF STATE’S STATUTORY GUIDANCE TO LOCAL

AUTHORITIES ON THE CIVIL ENFORCEMENT OF PARKING

CONTRAVENTIONS

 

the relevant bit states...

 

Where a vehicle is causing a hazard or obstruction the enforcement authority should remove rather than immobilise. If the vehicle is parked where parking is prohibited (such as on double yellow lines), then the vehicle can be removed as soon as a PCN has been served.

Link to post
Share on other sites

on your decision or definition of relevant maybe.

there is PLENTY more on removal that that little snippet as well you know G&M. you are in No position to decide what is relevant only the OP is. you don't know all the facts but he does. I find your post at the very least misleading. Are you trying to help people or just get them to pay regardless ?

 

more of the guidance to follow. anyone with an interest is better off getting the original document and reading it.

get it here

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tpm/tmaportal/tmafeatures/tmapart6/betterprkstatutoryguid.pdf

 

further selections (inter alia)

54. When a vehicle is parked where parking is permitted, authorities must not33

immobilise or remove in the first 30 minutes following the issuing of the PCN,

with the exception of ‘persistent evader’ vehicles (see paragraphs 65-66)

where the time limit is 15 minutes. When a vehicle has been immobilised, a

CEO must34 affix a notice to it. The regulations set out what that notice

must35 say. The immobilisation device may only be removed by or under the

direction of a person authorised to do so by the enforcement authority,

following payment of the release fee and the penalty charge.

55. Where a vehicle is causing a hazard or obstruction the enforcement authority

should remove rather than immobilise. If the vehicle is parked where parking

is prohibited (such as on double yellow lines), then the vehicle can be

removed as soon as a PCN has been served36.

56. If a driver returns to the vehicle whilst immobilisation or removal is taking

place, then unless they are a persistent evader, it is recommended that the

operation is halted, unless the clamp is secured or the vehicle has all its

wheels aboard the tow truck. If immobilisation or removal is halted the PCN

should still be enforced.

57. When a vehicle is immobilised and subsequently removed to the pound, the

driver does not have to pay the clamp release fee37.

Edited by lamma
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...