Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

I got PCN in Leisure centre car park. No Penalty notice signs


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5396 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

Hi I just drafted my appeal letter, could you have a quick look to say if this is suitable. i just kept it short and for the initial appeal

its going special delivery tonight.

and advice on any ammendments would be greatly apreciated

thanks

Jon

 

do i enclose the copy of PCN with it or keep photocopy for myself and send them the original back to council. or will that only wind them up ?

appealPCN.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi group. thanks for your advice in writing a letter about the PCN i received. Its been a week or so since my letter I sent the council.

 

This morning I had their formal reply in letter. I am just scanning it and will up load it shortly.

 

BRB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi , Just finished putting together the PDF of the replyies from torbay council. and the evidence i have etc in one document here.

have a look.

 

Torbay council say they have investigated and that clear sign exists stating that a valid permit must be displayed. Yet, there is none on site in that car park.

 

they also did not reply with a copy of the Off street parking places order.

 

have a look

thanks

Jon

TorbayCouncil_PCN_contest_Reply_fullstory.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just posted this to my old thread. but incase that thread is old & missed ... heres my scans in one PDF concerning the contravention.

 

TB council are claiming that signs do exist in the car park. but I think they just have not investigated.

 

also they ignored my request for a copy of the Off street parking places order.

 

ive blotted out all my personal details in the scan as you can see , also added comments in colour.

 

have a look if you like. hope you could advise the next course of action.

thanks

TorbayCouncil_PCN_contest_Reply_fullstory.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

They can ignore it, but they'll have to produce it to the Adjudicator if it gets that far. If they don't have one, they'll back down and cancel the PCN.

 

They could well still be looking for it and send it to you in a few weeks though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi, Just this morning i received the Notice to Owner NTO . I'll Scan it later and attach the pdf. im not sure what I need to do next

 

still not off road parking order received from the council either.

 

thanks

Jon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any advice on how to correctly write my representation to the NtO. can i just state that the sign in the members car park does not state that a valid permit must be displayed. also enclose a print out of the picture of the sinage in the car park. Would something like that suffice?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, missed your post from Friday.

 

NtO looks ok to me unfortunately. Tick 'The contravention did not occur' and submit your appeal again. Include photos etc. again.

 

I assume they still haven't sent you the Off Street Parking Places Order? If not, just mention 'a request was made on xx date for the council to send the Off Street Parking Places Order, but to date nothing has been received.'

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I wrote up my Representation document as clear as I could, see in the PDF attached.

 

also pointed out that the Council also wrote to me advicing me that they were satisfied that the sinage in the car park was sufficient.

 

since its stating in a printed letter to me that "... signs ... are CLEAR TO ADVISE drivers that a permit must be displayed." So here they are stating there are signs to advise permits must be displayed! They say they are satisfied that sufficient sinage is in place. Dispite all my photos showing the signs CLEARLY DO NOT state that its permit holders only, or permits must be displayed.

 

I just dont understand why its been rejected. since my representation makes it as clear as i could that the signs dont say that a permit must be displayed. .. and then I have that letter from the council in black and white stating the signs are clear to advise permits must be displayed. (previously uploaded pdf)!!! I even put that extract in my representation. and they still thew it out.

i have 28days from 08/07/2009 to make appeal. but i just dont know what i should do now.

 

Here is the full Representation doc and their Rejection doc uploaded.

 

can you have a look and whats ur thoughts.

thanks

Jon

Representation-document-rejection.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish i just paid the reduced fee of £25 now. its just been a stress since i got the ticket i can do without this making my depression worse since i got the ticket.. for the sake of a stupid ticket. its just another pressure i cant cope with right now. I wish i could!! I know i parked in the wrong car park, but the signs dont say there is a penalty fine of £70, or that you must display a permit. If they had a sign there saying that, id never of parked there. I was just late at the time for karate club, and seeing that there were no signs for penalties or permits etc so i parked there. Didnt look like that was part of the car park that was patrolled by CCP as there were not permit signs etc. Surly the council must put up a sign stating the penalty charge for off road parking offences.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Calm down and don't worry :-)

 

You certainly went to town on your Representations - good job!

 

The council has rejected your letter because they are hoping you will pay up and go away. Some councils are genuine and others are revolting organisations that are only interested in cashing in.

 

Next stage is adjudication at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal: http://www.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/site/index.php

 

You can appeal in person or by post. You should have received a form with your rejection.

 

It's simply a matter of submitting your Representations as they are to the TPT.

 

If you have a hearing, it's an informal affair - just you and a guy sat opposite a table. The council may send someone or they may not.

 

Alternatively just do it by post.

 

Bear in mind statistically you have a higher chance of success doing it in person, probably because you can put you points across and talk to the adjudicator.

 

Think it over! You have nothing to lose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the reasons councils refuse when its obvious that they are in wrong is to get exactly your reaction. they want to wear people down to get them to pay. Good appeal. TSRGD does not apply but signage must be clear. In this case it it isn't. Go to adjudications and expect the council to drop out at the last minute. You should win easily if they don't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...