Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • OK, all done as requested. Defence left blank for now. Just one small question in relation to the CPR31:14.... Please treat this letter as my request made under CPR 31.14 for the disclosure and the production of a verified and legible copy of [each of the following / the] document(s) mentioned in your Particulars of Claim: and it says * delete if not mentioned in the Particulars of claim. I'm not  sure if I ask for everything or nothing as I can't see any of the list mentioned in the POCs
    • Fund management firm Allan Gray also said giving Nationwide's members a vote on the £2.9 billion buyout would have been 'a much better path'.View the full article
    • A Swiss pressure group says some staff at Shein suppliers are still working excessive overtime.View the full article
    • Let me start by saying I feel tremendous regret, shame and remorse. I have some debt and personal life has fallen apart over the last year which has caused me to be careless. Doesn’t make it okay I know. In a positive way, i will never take anything in life for granted ever again. I want to volunteer and go back to being a good person. I need some advice/reassurance on the below so I can move on better from this experience. A few days ago I was caught at sainsburys, I paid for part of the food (about £5) and didn’t pay for the other (about £8-10) at self checkout. when I got to the exit someone in plain clothes asked to see my receipt and bag and that they worked for mitie. I told him the receipt was in the store bin (true) and he said he followed me round and knows I didn’t pay for all of it. he very sternly but calmly said he just needs my name then I can leave with the shopping. I said i am in a bad day and can’t do this and was on the verge of breaking down. So I handed him the shopping and slowly walked out. No name given (I read elsewhere this is good and makes it unlikely to develop) and I have no way knowing if police contacted. I overthink a lot and I wonder if they can track me via debit card or nectar card on the transaction. I also wonder if they saw me do it last month and have been waiting for me. I know someone who works at their head office and terrified somehow it will get back. I’m also terrified of being recognised in the street.    I don’t know what’s going to happen. I see a lot in the news today about shoplifting 
    • Hi, I’ve just spotted an Arrangement to Pay marker (TransUnion) on my Barclays Mortgage account for 1 month in March 2022. I’ve spoken to Barclays Customer Service and Complaints about this and they’ve given me some background but have closed my complaint: Direct Debit for mortgage bounced in February and I didn’t notice this at the time. Realised there were arrears in March and called customer service straight away. Offered to pay half the arrears on the call with the other half of the arrears the following month. I prob suggested or accepted this as had done that many years previously when I was a poor student with no adverse consequences. Paid in accordance with this. Barclays call notes report they informed me credit reference agencies would be notified and I indicated I understood. However, complaints team couldn’t access the call because it was too old. They advised I could request a transcript through GDPR and complain via ombudsman if still unhappy - I’ll process the GDPR request this week. Whilst it may be factual that I entered into some kind of arrangement regarding the arrears, it wasn’t clear to me that they would be treating it and reporting it as a formal payment plan along with the potential consequences of this. At no point did I agree to or request to “reducing my contractual payments” - I paid my contractual amount for March and April with 50% more on top. I guess it’s likely they did say something vague about credit reference agencies and it’s also possible that I may have agreed without fully understanding it would be different to a late payment marker. I’m not 100% sure of the impact of the AP but I believe it did tighten up balance transfer and new card offers (Lloyds group in particular) even though the rest of my report is spotless and I have many years managing multiple high balance cards. Although it may have been less comfortable, I also believe I had the means to pay the balance in full if I’d realised the impact at the time. Finally, it feels like Ive been penalised for speaking to customer services directly rather than just upping my payments to cover the arrears. Historically, I was under the impression that Barclays mortgages weren’t even reporting arrears of less than 2-3 months as late payments - although this may have changed since the last time I was in arrears. I’ve had a browse through threads about AP markers and it seems like removal is unlikely if it’s deemed factual but it may be worthwhile escalating to FOS or ICO? Will update with transcript details once I’ve raised and received a response to my request. I suppose the upside of this is that I’ll be even more cautious about negative markers in the future. Thanks, J
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Ultimate punishment for refusal to pay parking fine


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5263 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

I think the OP has made it clear why he doesn't have a pass as he does not as a rule use the road. That is why I was saying that this case would be a candidate for the "discresionary" cancellation with a lecture that the council will not repeatedly cancel tickets for the OP and if he intends parking there again he should obtain a pass.

 

You've got it exactly right. I live alone, just me in the house, only one car, usually in my garage or on the drive. If my sons visit from abroad they don't bring cars with them, they use mine. Therefore under normal circumstances I don't need a permit to park in the street. This whole mess was down to a moment's lack of concentration not a deliberate attempt to use something I did not want to pay for. I stated from the start that I made a stupid mistake.

 

£120 or even £60 is, I feel, too much for a (one-time only) small error. What real harm did I do?

 

If my son had not been in the car I would have driven straight into the garage as I usually do. I had to pull up in the road to let him out and.....you know the rest.

 

So I guess it's his fault and he should pay the fine!

 

I've explained all this in my grovelling letter to the council. Their answer as reported earlier is 'a contravention has occurred' in other words 'pay up £60 or risk losing the whole £120'.

 

I then see red when they claim on their web-site that they apply 'common sense' to Parking Rules.

 

I guess it comes down to what your definition of 'common sense' is.

Edited by spellboy
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I got this comment from a friend when he heard my story.

 

'You should have stayed indoors when you saw the CEO and waited till she disappeared. Then written to the council and told them that your son was driving and he parked the car. Give them his Spanish address and I bet nothing else would have happened to you or him'

 

Obviously I would never have done that but it makes you think that maybe cheats do prosper.

 

I've already twigged that the meek will not inherit!

Edited by spellboy
Link to post
Share on other sites

I got this comment from a friend when he heard my story.

 

'You should have stayed indoors when you saw the CEO and waited till she disappeared. Then written to the council and tell them that your son was driving and he parked the car. Give them his Spanish address and I bet nothing else would have happened to you or him'

 

Obviously I would never have done that but it makes you think that maybe cheats do prosper.

 

I've already twigged that the meek will not inherit!

 

Neither would it have worked as the owner - not the driver - is ultimately responsible

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither would it have worked as the owner - not the driver - is ultimately responsible

 

If my son gets caught on camera doing 40 in a 30mph area while driving my car in the UK am I the one who gets fined and have 3 points on my licence if he's back in Spain when the summons comes to my address as the registered owner?

Even when I tell them that he was driving not me?

 

Not actually happened....I am just curious to know the answer.

Edited by spellboy
additional question
Link to post
Share on other sites

If my son gets caught on camera doing 40 in a 30mph area while driving my car in the UK am I the one who gets fined and have 3 points on my licence if he's back in Spain when the summons comes to my address as the registered owner?

Even when I tell them that he was driving not me?

 

Not actually happened....I am just curious to know the answer.

 

No, because that is a criminal offence (RTA 1988) and not dealt with by decriminalised parking enforcement (TMA 2004)

 

And there is no such thing as a registered owner. DVLA records the registered keeper and makes it very clear on the V5 that this does not mean owner

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, because that is a criminal offence (RTA 1988) and not dealt with by decriminalised parking enforcement (TMA 2004)

 

Wow....you really know your stuff!

 

It's an interesting thing though to find out that I am responsible for how he parks but not for how fast he drives.......amazing!

 

thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I've just skimmed through this thread and I just want to say I think you're absolutely right spellboy, it's insane that they should try and charge you £60/£120 for a 60 second error. It's as bad as when banks charge you £40 for going 15 pence into an unauthorised overdraft - no less than blatant attempts to rob people of their money. That whole "pay half the fine of you pay now"... it's no different from the concept of "limited time offers!!" in shops that psychologically scare people into buying... and I find it appauling that the government would employ such profit mongering tactics.

 

I really hope you win in this. Let us know how it goes, I'll be crossing my fingers for you (and raising the middle one should I see the one who gave you that fine!).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously I would never have done that but it makes you think that maybe cheats do prosper.

 

Sadly,from what I see, it appears to be nothing but the cheats that prosper in this country!

 

TFT

09/07/09 :)Business Studies BA(Hons) 2:1:)

 

eCar Insurance overpayment - £325

Settled in full - 15/09/08

NatWest Student A/C bank charges - £260

Settled under hardship scheme - 08/06/09

Natwest Business A/C bank charges - £60

Settled in full as GOGW - 20/04/09

Santander Consumer Finance late payment fees - £60

Part settled for £48 - 01/03/08

Peugeot Finance late payment fees - £50

Settled in full before county court hearing - 01/09/09

Peugeot Finance overpayment of £247

Settled in full - 01/12/08

Valley Leisure - complaint about collections agent

£160 part refund of gym membership in compensation - 01/02/09

HFC Bank - complaint about payment deducted from my account on wrong date

GOGW £10 - 01/05/09

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly,from what I see, it appears to be nothing but the cheats that prosper in this country!

 

TFT

 

Well that would be the start of a thread that could run forever. There's so much scope..........especially in this current government.

 

If 'Spitting Image' was still on TV they would have a field day!

Edited by spellboy
grammar
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that would be the start of a thread that could run forever. There's so much scope..........especially in this current government.

 

If 'Spitting Image' was still on TV they would have a field day!

But we've already got our own version of the Muppet Show already so we don't need Spitting Image. :D

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

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

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

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Details for bay markings and dimensions here Diagram (b)

 

Those (1028.4) are the only lines allowed for parking that goes across the verge or footway.

 

It would appear that the lines you have are incorrect, but you will need to take this to a formal challenge to NtO or the adjudicator. You should be aware that at this point, should you lose (you shouldn't), there will no longer be a discount.

 

It will be worth checking the line dimensions (in mm) as well as just relying on the misplaced 'L'

 

The council emailed me this link when I asked them to show me any authorisation from the DoT to vary/change markings/signage.

 

http://www.havering.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=13251

 

Its a lot to wade through but I could not see anything to allow them to change from the approved drawing.

 

I would value your opinion. I have one day left to pay up within 14 days.

 

Council have taken time and been evasive about providing this information

Edited by spellboy
wrong link
Link to post
Share on other sites

they are playing brinkmanship to get you to fold.

I refer you to pat's post.

 

Ask the DfT for a copy of any authorisations. My bet is that there are none and the council knows it.

 

My inclination is to fight because hardly any of the bays in my area have the correct markings as shown on pat's post. With regard to the bay I parked in; almost all the white lines and spaces beteen were not in accordance with approved drawings.

 

The evasive reaction from the council and reluctance to produce confirmation makes me inclined to your opinion too

Edited by spellboy
grammar
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just had a phone call from the woman who finally gave me the council link.

 

She said 'I've had a word with Parking about the lines and things being wrong. They agree not everything is exactly right but it's not enough to convince an adjudicator to overturn the PCN'

 

I may not have it word for word but that's the gist of her statement.

 

I am even more inclined to believe they are bluffing now.

 

Any opinions?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Its your decision whether to fight on or pay up not ours......

 

I am aware, however it's good to have some feedback.

 

If I hadn't found this forum I wouldn't have known that I had even the slightest chance of fighting these PCN's.

 

All the info ref. signs, markings etc is completely foreign to me.

 

It seems that some councils are relying on the average person's lack of knowledge in orderto get money out of them. This is disgraceful and should be exposed nationwide.

 

Maybe it has been....it's just that one doesn't know about such behaviour until one becomes a victim.

Edited by spellboy
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just had a phone call from the woman who finally gave me the council link.

 

She said 'I've had a word with Parking about the lines and things being wrong. They agree not everything is exactly right but it's not enough to convince an adjudicator to overturn the PCN'

 

I may not have it word for word but that's the gist of her statement.

 

I am even more inclined to believe they are bluffing now.

 

Any opinions?

 

She's bluffing.

 

The lines significantly do not conform to the required (and lawful) dimensions.

 

The may try to argue de minimis (de minimis non curat lex - the law does not concern itself with trifles) but the doctrine of de minimis rightly applies to not prosecuting for 'trifles', rather than a prosecuting authority being able to ignore such errors in their case.

 

The adjudicator may also try to argue that the lines convey the necessary restrictions to a reasonable man. Case law removes any test of reasonableness for road signage (which includes lines). The case is Davies v Heatley; if the signs are not as prescribed then they cease to have effect.

 

Some adjudicators will claim that Davies v Heatley is criminal law and therefore does not apply to decriminalised parking. However, so is de minimis - they can't have it both ways. Either prior case law applies or it doesn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just had a phone call from the woman who finally gave me the council link.

 

She said 'I've had a word with Parking about the lines and things being wrong. They agree not everything is exactly right but it's not enough to convince an adjudicator to overturn the PCN'

 

I may not have it word for word but that's the gist of her statement.

 

I am even more inclined to believe they are bluffing now.

 

Any opinions?

 

Write the conversation down as a true memory of the call. Whilst not as good as a recording I think if you refer to it in an ajudication it will carry more weight than if you are just trying to recall a conversation from many months ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hello everyone...I've just joined this forum. :)

 

Now,I would say,having looked at those bay markings,that the ticket you got is un-enforceable,becuse the bay markings do not conform. And if they do not conform,they might as well not exist at all ! Plus ,I do not think that you can have a parking bay which is half on the pavement. There is a specific reference to to exactly this on Pepipoo. They have access to the TSRGD which includes all the prescribed forms of bay markings. I have a copy myself around here somewhere. I'll have to dig it out. There may also be failings on the actual ticket.....I have only skimmed through the thread. Some good advice given on here already (pat davies),but I would be tempted to go over to Pepipoo. They are rather hot on this sort of subject....I've seen them in action !! lol . If this was my ticket,I'd be taking it all the way.

 

Generally tho',this looks like a very useful forum. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus ,I do not think that you can have a parking bay which is half on the pavement.

 

Yes you can - as long as the TRO supports it

 

There is a specific reference to to exactly this on Pepipoo. They have access to the TSRGD which includes all the prescribed forms of bay markings. I have a copy myself around here somewhere.

 

TSRGD is available to anybody here

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Another question I'd like some help on is whether bay markings should continue over dropped kerbs.

I would have thought that the bays should be stopped where a dropped kerb occurs and then continued after them.

Most people know not to park in front of a dropped kerb.

However is it a requirement that the bays should be marked out to show where you can actually park?

Is it possible that the bays are illegal as a result of this?

Here are some examples from the bays outside my house.

 

baymarkings062.jpg

 

baymarkings066.jpg

Edited by spellboy
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...