Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Don't give them your e-mail address, don't give them your telephone number and don't fill in their forms. They send these things to pretend they are some sort of statutory authority. In reality they are a disgusting cowboy company who use sixth-rate solicitors who can't get any other work so are reduced to doing everything on the cheap with no due diligence for private parking companies. Your letter is meant to totally ignore their procedures and show you've sussed them for who they are.  From their point of view it would be better to drop you like a hot potato and instead concentrate on going after people daft enough to give in. That's why I went on & on about their previous court humiliations, to show them that if they continue with you they'll just end up with another thrashing.
    • Hello and thank you for that It says as follows 1 - Driving without due care and attention - sec 3 Road Traffic Act 1988 2. - Failing to stop at a road traffic accident - sec 170 (4) Road Traffic Act 1988 3.   Failing to report road traffic accident - sec 170 (4) Road Traffic Act 1988 To be honest, none of the above occurred. Yes, they say I have to tell them who the driver was, but as I am the only one using my car it would be me anyway. Due to the location of the alleged offences I am pretty sure it is to do with this lorry driver.  I am happy to say it was me driving, but should I also give a written account of my side of events , as they have kindly provided a blank piece of paper for me. But not sure as these are criminal charges, whether I should put anything in writing at this stage I don't really know what it's about and don't know on what evidence these allegations are based on, given the fact none of the above actually occured.
    • This sounds like someone has alleged that you wee involved in an accident which caused damage or injury to a third party or their property. If the request is issued under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act (and it should mention that) you are obliged to respond by providing the driver's details. But that is all you are obliged to do at this stage. As far as the failing to stop/report charges are concerned, you could inform the police that you did neither because, as far as you are aware, no accident requiring you to stop occurred.    
  • 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

Parking Ticket advice needed


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5422 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

Hello all

 

I am new to these forums and would appreciate some advice re a parking ticket I received.

 

I received a PCN for dispalying a ticket not valid for the car park, as it was only valid for street parking. I bought the ticket in good faith in the firm belief that the machine was for use on the car park and I have attached a photo which shows my vehicle in relation to the machine where I purcheased the ticket.

 

The irony is - I actually paid more for my ticket than had I bought the correct one!!

 

It wasn't until I looked at the machine that I noiced a sign above saying that it was only valid for street parking.

 

A number of questions:

 

1. Is it worth appealing on the grounds of an innocent mistake?

2 Is the ticket legal- - the ticket states that I was' Parked in a car park without clearly diplaying a valid ticket', yet the warden had hand written on the PCN bag ' Ticket not valid for car park, only street parking'

 

3. Whether the sign stating 'street parking only' is lawful- i.e. it was not a eye level and in white- should it have been yellow?

 

Any help would be appreciated

 

Thanks

car1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we see the front of the on street machine?

 

Any signage in the car park directing you to the right machine? Where is the right machine located?

 

CEO's notes on the bag are probably just to make the reason clear to you. It's the contravention on the PCN that counts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I will have to take a photo of the front of the machine and post later.

The other machines are dotted around the car park but there are no directions on the street machine and the sign which states that it is only intended for use on the street is above the machine and a simple white sign- surely this should be in yellow or something and be more visible?

 

I wouldn't mind, but it is not as if I was evading the cost or attemting to deceive anyone.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...