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

Cant pay ticket no options


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4588 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

looking for a bit of help if possible

i got 3 tickets for parking outside my house which is residents only now

i admit its my fault but have contacted the people on the t3 forms

to offer payment as cant pay all at once (on disability)

but they say they cant accept any payments only full payment

 

so help what do i do now

Link to post
Share on other sites

are they council or private tickets?

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are convinced that the tickets were correctly issued and do not want to challenge them then I think your only option will be to invite them to take you to court where you will put your case and circumstances to the judge who will no doubt then order that you can pay by installments. Upon hearing that, they may re-consider. As you are disbaled, they should at least give you an opportunity to provide evidence that you cannot pay in one go. Hopefully others may give opinions on this.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are convinced that the tickets were correctly issued and do not want to challenge them then I think your only option will be to invite them to take you to court where you will put your case and circumstances to the judge who will no doubt then order that you can pay by installments. Upon hearing that, they may re-consider. As you are disbaled, they should at least give you an opportunity to provide evidence that you cannot pay in one go. Hopefully others may give opinions on this.

 

Council tickets don't go to court, if they are not paid the council apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre who then authorise them to instruct bailiffs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Council tickets don't go to court, if they are not paid the council apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre who then authorise them to instruct bailiffs.

 

And what happens then if the OP (who is disabled) dosn't have the means to pay? There must be a process available for such situations.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know Ray, but to get to that stage will no doubt incurr the OP with signifitant additional costs. Clearly he/she is accepting the tickets but cannot pay the total cot in one go. Under the circumstances, I would of thought that a judge would need to decide what the OP can or cannot afford to pay. I don't belive that baliffs have (or should have) the right to make those decissions when dealing with vunerable people.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This matter needs to go to the right staff in the parking dept.

 

If you are able to make payment bit by bit, write to the council, briefly outlining your income and expenses. Propose a reasonable payment plan - not a silly one like £1 a fortnight. It should then be looked at properly by someone sensible. (We can hope!!)

 

They would probably not accept a total inability to pay, but should be cooperative if they see the situation is as you say. There's no point in them letting it go to bailiffs if you can't pay anyway, so I expect they will agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trouble is that if the tickets are not paid it goes direct from the council to bailiffs, the matter doesn't go before a judge.

 

Mmm, then there is something wrong with the system. If you didn't pay a FPN, you would have your day in court. The same as if you didn't pay a civil debt then the debtor could take you to County Court. I'm not condoning people who flout the parking regs who are deliberately avoiding paying but in this case (from what we are being told), it appears that the OP is holding his hands up but is in 'vunerable' position as he/she is disabled. Surely in such circumstances, there must be a procededure to follow where by (if necessary) the matter can be decided by an independant adjudicator to assess the 'offender's' financial circumsatnces so an agreement can be reached about paying by installments. I don't see how it can be right that the matter simply gets passed to bailiffs if the OP cannot pay in full. Perhaps the OP should consult CAB about it to see if they can help.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

now even worse news just gotten letter off baliffs and rang them to offer part payment but was told we want

200 now and then installments of 200 there after or they will come get the car instead

can they do that or what the car is on the never never off disability

 

hellllpppppp

Link to post
Share on other sites

no they cant take the car

get the paperwork to hand

 

i would assume that as you are vunerable they must offer 'some' dispensation.

 

me thinks you need to email the council ceo

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you pay council tax? You would have been better using the council tax money to pay the parking fine and then talking to the council to make different arrangements for the tax.

 

They tend to be accommodating over council tax, but there's no leeway with parking fines.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...