Jump to content


Final Demand or court Action


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5378 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

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Whether the defendant is a real person or not, whether it is a "Perky special" (set up) or not, one thing is clear - the defence posted is hopeless. It does not contain one substantial legal argument. Only an "idiot" in Perky's words could assume such a defence could emanate from legal experts. If this case is a real one then winning it must have been like falling off a log. All it is evidence of is that the only victims cases taken are carefully chosen so that a loss is never likely and that Perky is now so desperate to get some/any publicity that he will claim this as a hard fought win. The cherry picking explains why Perky is always so confident to pre-announce the success before it happens. Perky cannot take on a real opponent, which is why he has never taken the Pepipoo Challenge. And never will.

 

Ermmmm ... The Thomas case. (Dont go on about 'we only helped with the first bit and that resulted in a win' - when we all know the judge just wanted a more indepth POC that was not possible under the moneyclaim, the POC was resubmitted within the 14days set by the court and the claim continued and resulted in a win for the PPC).

 

You all know the defence submitted by the defendant was the same.

 

Thomas covered everything you normally say are unfair, signage, unfair contract terms, penalties etc... The ONLY difference here was him admitting being the driver then disputing it - BUT the legal arguments were the same regardless and the judge, as has been seen in the judgement transcript was the charge was legal, fair and not a penalty and not an unfair contract term.

 

As for the Pepipoo challenge, you need to speak to them as to why they have not contacted us in writing with their proposals .. A letter was sent approx 4weeks ago - So it is the great Pepipoo who is holding it up (I am sure that Mr Steven Smith of Pepitec will be able to comment on that as he has previously responded to solicitors and this is the person we contacted to explain the 'challenge' and what he wanted to achieve)

 

As for pre announcing, we (well the ones that live in the real world) know that nothing is guarenteed in court, it can go either way - A list of cases covering 2 weeks was posted and we are reporting on them as the result comes in - If we lost then we would lose, it we win then we would win - either way they are reported on.

 

I can get hold on the 'killer' defence submitted by the 'eagles / experts' submitted in the Thomas (and purdy) case and upload for all to see, not sure what that would achieve apart from stating yet again that a good PPC case will normally win.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perky, your problem is that you spend so long online trolling, you cannot remember what you have written before. Purdy a great win. Then why did you write this (in one of your scores of other identities):

 

Purdy I agree was unfair as she had the defence but did not know enough in court and made the win easy

 

Perky cant help twisting the truth. He doesn't know what the truth is in any event. Thomas is the same. The word is that there was "eagle" involvement only until the first stage, which Perky lost. He only won the case anyway because Thomas denied being the driver despite having admitted it online. A bizarre and very unlikely to be repeated set of facts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

GCR, get a grip on reality.

If a case is lost it has to goto appeal to a higher court, as we all know the PPC did not lose the case it was merely ordered to re-submit the POC, this was done and the full case was heard in the same court witha judge at the same level thus showing the case was NOT lost, come on even you can understand that GCR.

 

The defence submitted initially and the final defence was in essence the SAME document (a few additions to the second document after the Excel case).

 

I would suggets you read the judgement, the driver issue was 1 of many the judge had to consider and I recall the judge specifically listed 3 or 4 issues he had to consider (driver, signage, penalty and unfair contract terms) and found in favour of the PPC.

 

Those are the facts you seem unable or unwilling to accept and keep trying to spin this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perky, it is you who is spinning but you are not very good at it alas. The forum posting, and subsequent denial in court, was absolutely crucial in Thomas, and coloured the whole attitude of the judge. You know that because you removed all references to this in the judgement transcript before posting it up. What did you have to hide to carry out such an act of editing? And the court did throw out ("struck out") the claim at the first hearing for which eagles assisted. Whether you opted to reissue your claim from scratch was up to you but it was a loss all the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Loo potty thank you for contributing to this forum, it has given us a great insight into the workings of the PPC mind. Perhaps you could help by putting your wins into context by answering the following.

 

a) What percentage of your invoices are never paid.

b) what percentage of the unpaid ones do you take to court

c) What percentage of the court cases do you win.

 

No need to post actual numbers as this may be considered commercially sensitive information - just percentages will do.

 

Your answers will help determine whether the advice of totally ignoring PPC invoices constitutes an acceptable risk to the motorist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Loo potty thank you for contributing to this forum, it has given us a great insight into the workings of the PPC mind. Perhaps you could help by putting your wins into context by answering the following.

 

a) What percentage of your invoices are never paid.

b) what percentage of the unpaid ones do you take to court

c) What percentage of the court cases do you win.

 

No need to post actual numbers as this may be considered commercially sensitive information - just percentages will do.

 

Your answers will help determine whether the advice of totally ignoring PPC invoices constitutes an acceptable risk to the motorist.

 

a) approx 8% (including non UK registered)

b) approx 78%

c) to date 96%

 

All the cases we have had where motorists ignore the PPC have always been criticised by the Judge and resulted in a win for ourselves when the defendant has refused or been 'unable' to confirm who was driving .. Judges state they have 'selective memories' and on balance of probaility go a long way to avoid paying when if it was someone else they would just advise and get on with their life.

 

Its not for me to give advice if someone should ignore/appeal or otherwise but I can only repeat what is said in courts time after time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perky,

 

I think you may are being "economical with the truth" when you state only 8% of your invoices are never paid, and I think your attempt to appear reasonable is an indication that the message that ignoring PPC invoices is getting through to the public, your takings are falling and panic is setting in.

The PPC business model is based on lies and threats and more and more recipents of your un enforcible invoices are getting wise to the [problem], hopefully before too long we will see PPCs going bust (the sooner the better in my opinion).

PPCs - Don`t pay their begging letters, don`t fall for the $ cam................. IGNORE PPC invoices

 

 

:amen:

Link to post
Share on other sites

its just a pity the PPc's have not seen the new proposed legislation from the MOJ regarding private parking throught out the UK

 

they abused the non legal regulation for far too long

 

the demise of the [problem] draws near after the summer break,

NEVER FORGET

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Help Our Hero's Website

 

http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/

 

HIGHWAY OF HEROES

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/181826-last-tribute-our-lads.html

 

Like Cooking ? check the Halogen Cooker thread

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/218990-cooking-halogen-cookers.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

a) approx 8% (including non UK registered)

b) approx 78%

c) to date 96%

 

All the cases we have had where motorists ignore the PPC have always been criticised by the Judge and resulted in a win for ourselves when the defendant has refused or been 'unable' to confirm who was driving .. Judges state they have 'selective memories' and on balance of probaility go a long way to avoid paying when if it was someone else they would just advise and get on with their life.

 

Its not for me to give advice if someone should ignore/appeal or otherwise but I can only repeat what is said in courts time after time.

 

Useful information. Now defendants can use that to work out your true costs and see how good the 'pre-estimate' really is, something they should do anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

its just a pity the PPc's have not seen the new proposed legislation from the MOJ regarding private parking throught out the UK

 

they abused the non legal regulation for far too long

 

the demise of the [problem] draws near after the summer break,

 

The good thing about the proposed legislation will reduce the overall charges but from reading the document we had approx 4 weeks ago indicated the keeper would be liable for the charge so overall revenue would increase.

 

It is doubtful if the legislation in its proposed format will go through, but we will wait and see.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but from reading the document we had approx 4 weeks ago indicated the keeper would be liable for the charge so overall revenue would increase.

 

 

 

Would this "document" be the PPC wishlist document ??

PPCs - Don`t pay their begging letters, don`t fall for the $ cam................. IGNORE PPC invoices

 

 

:amen:

Link to post
Share on other sites

he's is on cloud 9 ,, the document that is only doing internal rounds @ the moment was only produced monday last week, so he read it 4 weeks ago , must be a time shift on Planet Perky,

 

shows he has never seen it, not that he can anyway

 

PS , there is NOTHING regarding the registered keeper mentioned anywhere in it

NEVER FORGET

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Help Our Hero's Website

 

http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/

 

HIGHWAY OF HEROES

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/181826-last-tribute-our-lads.html

 

Like Cooking ? check the Halogen Cooker thread

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/218990-cooking-halogen-cookers.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

he's is on cloud 9 ,, the document that is only doing internal rounds @ the moment was only produced monday last week, so he read it 4 weeks ago , must be a time shift on Planet Perky,

 

shows he has never seen it, not that he can anyway

 

PS , there is NOTHING regarding the registered keeper mentioned anywhere in it

 

Nothing to do with time or other, the draft document on private parking in relation to parking charges is actually dated 2nd June. (I cant comment on your document, if it exists at all)

 

We will see in the Autum what comes of the proposals, if anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much everything said by him so far has been a tissue of whoppers.

 

There's a definite theme of making a claim, not backing it up, throwing out the occasional insult, and then ignoring the challenge.

 

There's irony for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much everything said by him so far has been a tissue of whoppers.

 

There's a definite theme of making a claim, not backing it up, throwing out the occasional insult, and then ignoring the challenge.

 

There's irony for you.

 

Change the record, if you have nothing constructive to say then its simple - keep quiet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

dear or dear Loopty / perky come back to earth I am talking about the document from the MOJ, not your one from planet perky

NEVER FORGET

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Help Our Hero's Website

 

http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/

 

HIGHWAY OF HEROES

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/181826-last-tribute-our-lads.html

 

Like Cooking ? check the Halogen Cooker thread

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/218990-cooking-halogen-cookers.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Change the record, if you have nothing constructive to say then its simple - keep quiet.
There's no sense in changing a record when the message it plays is an apt and reasonable response to nearly everything you have written.

 

Put up, shut up, or give up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perky likes to give the impression he is at the heart of the action. Instead he is on the outer periphery of the outer periphery of ... The RK will be liable on Planet Perky. Elsewhere on Earth human logic will prevail and the driver will be liable. You would think after 24 months constant trolling Perky would improve a bit. But sadly not. In fact a lot of PPCs are concerned the proposals will lead to tighter regulation and worst of all lower revenue and independent appeals. Especially if Mike "I'm the man, now you shut up" Perky gets anywhere within a 100 miles of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...