Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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

Stopped by un-marked Police '2005' Corsa for speeding*


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3905 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

Me thinks TC must go back to the Peelers, Specials have ALL the authority of a Constable ON or OFF Duty.!!!

 

Also as of 2007 their authority extends to ALL areas of England and Wales.

Edited by BRIGADIER2JCS

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Me thinks TC must go back to the Peelers, Specials have ALL the authority of a Constable ON or OFF Duty.!!!

 

Also as of 2007 their authority extends to ALL areas of England and Wales.

 

My apologies, you are correct. I had very little to do with Specials during my service being on a specialist department and was therefore not aware the regs had changed.

 

So again, apologies and thank you for the correction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I mentioned nothing about lane separation, I simply mentioned that to be a dual carriageway there is no requirement for there to be a central barrier, but reading it again, then maybe I did select the wrong choice of words to describe a DC.

 

A dual carriageway is a road which has a central reservation to separate the carriageways. This can be a barrier, a central concrete island or even a grass strip, so long as there is clear separation. 99% (not all) of dual carriageways comply with this requirement, if it is a multi lane carriageway without the central division, then of course the national speed limit of 60 applies unless posted otherwise.

 

I agree :)

 

I did try to make that point clear in post #10 that the "seperation" can be by many different means, but there has to be something visible. Many drivers still mis-understand the national speed limit rule and apply it to the number of lanes, not carriageways.

 

I have even known my ADI colleagues misinterpret it sometimes which is a bit worrying. :-( For example there is a dual carriageway near me that has 2 lanes each way (so they agree 70mph limit), but it then gets a bit narrower reducing each side to 1 lane, but still maintains a clear "proper" crash barrier down the middle. They insist that this also, therefore, reduces the limit to 60mph because there isn't 2 lanes anymore. I disagree of course. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The officers that stopped me did not have a common uniform, there were no Police logo's on their clothing. The only thing they all had the same were walkie talkie's. A warrant card & blue lights were the only identifiable means produced.

With regards to them claiming to be County Police. The PC issued me with a TOR Report which has the 3 separate Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire & Buckinghamshire logo's. So. it would seem that County Police for these area's do exist.

It was without doubt a 2005 Corsa. I am guessing mainly used for drug offences and the like.

I will be seeking help from a solicitor soon.

Just one question. I am not familiar with appearing at court etc. Can I recoup any fee's and expenses if it doesnt go to court after sending this 'Postal Requisition' ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

s54(1) RTOA 1988 states that an officer must be 'in uniform' to issue an FPN to someone who he believes committed the offence. However, the speed you were "alleged" to have been travelling would not attract a FPN anyway. He has simply reported you for travelling at xxx mph in a 70 mph zone and his report will be corroborated by his two colleagues who will be his witnesses. The Corsa speedo will most likely have been checked against a calibrated Radar speed gun within a few days of the report being made and corrections made to your alleged speed based upon the inaccuracies observed on this speedo check.

 

In my opinion, the stop was legitimate, the 3 policemen identified themselves correctly by showing you their warrant cards, a report was made and you have been summoned to appear in court. A specialist (read: expensive) solicitor might be able to challenge the charges against you but don't hold your breath.

Link to post
Share on other sites

NB; Only one of the officers showed me his warrant card.. The other two policemen just walked around by their vehicle and didn't seem interested in the stop whatsoever.I still can't see how they can prove what speed I was doing without a speed gun or not following me at any length of the road to judge my speed at any accuracy. They actually stopped me in the 30mph limit at the end of the dual carriageway where I was driving within the limit !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, your info and knowledge has been very helpful and enlightening. Thank you. Can you recommend a traffic offence solicitor? I live in Bedfordshire so, the closer to me the better. Regards.

Shaun

Link to post
Share on other sites

CAG cannot recommend solicitors or other professional, check your local firms.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shaun, you could check the Law Society website. The have a find a solicitor option that lets you type in the speciality you want and where you are. Then it shows you the firms you can approach.

 

I would call several and see which one you think you could work with, also check what they think the cost might be.

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

May also be an idea to ask for a copy of the calibration of the speedo of the Corsa for that day.And hope they didnt have it checked

 

 

As I have mentioned already, details of the speedo calibration have to be included as part of the prosecution evidence and whether it was checked against a certified stop watch over the measured mile or against another calibrated speedo.

 

The speed o is checked at 30 and 60 MPH, and should take 2 minutes at 30 and 1 minute at 60 and this has to be included and recorded in the vehicles log book.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have seen a specialist traffic offence solicitor today. In addition to this possibly being an illegal prosecution due to the fact he wasn't in uniform it appears that the Traffic Offence Report was not signed by me and was left blank in the space for 'subjects signature'.

So, it looks that this may be another technicality of this offence being thrown out of court or not even reaching court at all !!!

Will update once my solicitor has sent and got a reply from the courts.....:|

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...