Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks for that, Bazza. It sheds some more light on things but I’m still by no means sure of the OP’s father’s likelihood of successfully defending the charge. This in particular from the guidance stands out me: He does not meet all the s88 criteria. S88 is clear and unambiguous: It makes no provision for either the driver or a medical professional to make a judgement on his fitness to drive under s88. S92(4) and the June 2013 guidance you mention defines in what circumstances the SoS must issue a licence. It does no modify s88 in any way. However, delving further I have noticed that the DVLA provides a service where the driver can enter a relevant medical condition to obtain the correct documentation to apply for a licence: https://www.gov.uk/health-conditions-and-driving/find-condition-online I haven’t followed this through because I don’ have the answers that the OP’s father would give to the questions they will ask and in any case it requires the input of personal information and I don’t want to cause complications with my driving licence. It is possible, however, that the end result (apart from providing the necessary forms) is a “Yes/No” answer to whether the driver can continue to drive (courtesy of s88). With that in mind, I should think at  the very least the OP’s father should have completed that process but there is no mention that he has. The Sleep Apnoea Trust gives some useful guidance on driving and SA: https://sleep-apnoea-trust.org/driving-and-sleep-apnoea/detailed-guidance-to-uk-drivers-with-sleep-apnoea/ I know nothing about SA at all and found It interesting to learn that there are various “grades” of the condition. But the significant thing which struck me is that it is only the least trivial version that does not require a driver to report his condition to the DVLA. But more significant than that is that the SA Trust makes no mention of continuing to drive once the condition has been reported. The danger here is that the court will simply deconstruct s88 and reach the same conclusion that I have. I accept, having looked at the DVLA guidance, that there may be (as far as they are concerned) scope for s88 to apply contrary to the conditions stated in the legislation. Firstly, we don’ know whether there is and secondly we don’t know whether the OP’s father would qualify to take advantage of it. Of course he could argue that he need no have reported his condition. The SA trust certainly emphasises that the condition should not be reported until a formal detailed diagnosis is obtained. But the fact is he did report it. As soon as he does that, as far as I can see,  s88 is no longer available to him. Certainly as it stands I maintain my opinion that he was not allowed to continue driving under s88. The only way I would change this is to see the end result of the DVLA exercise I mentioned above. If that said he could continue driving he would have a defence to the charge. Without it I am not confident.  
    • Right, my friend has just called me. He has indeed had to cancel bookings in the past from his end. There is a specific number for Booking.com that he calls.   After that Booking.com jump into action and contact you re refund and/or alternative accommodation. I suppose it's all logical - the party cancelling the booking has to inform Booking.com. So the gite owner needs to contact Booking.com on the cancellation number.
    • they are not FINES. you totally ignore all the silly fake civil restorative letters. they are totally powerless just the same as any DCA on any old debt. might be an idea to go have a chat with your GP in confidence as you recognise whats going on. dx  
    • pinging @Man in the middle looks to me you are on the correct track, you shouldn't need a sols. Programmable Search Engine (google.com) clickme^^ thread title updated dx  
  • 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

NHS Parking ticket


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3944 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 work at a hospital and parked there without buying a ticket as there was no where else. Its an external company called 'Mighty' or something i cant remember. Ive never been worried about parking there as its an external company and ive always been under the impression that unless youve been fined by the police, dvla, council then you can get away with ignoring it. However im surprised to see this ticket has NHS on it.

 

Would you pay it? Can i get away with not paying it? I found it very odd how it doesnt offer anywhere about appealing as they usually do

 

Thanks

 

IMAG1245_zps9f041c3c.jpg

Edited by Bobton
Link to post
Share on other sites

Click the word ignore and read. They cannot 'prosecute' or do anything as they have incurred no losses. It would be different if it was a council maintained car park, but a private company maintains it so they cant do anything.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

It could but they would have trouble justifying it in court. Especially since you are employed there.

 

Go to the hospital and speak to the dept that handles the car park. They have the power to remove it.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

On a separate matter, you might like to ask them whether a 5 year old wrote the notice out that you have attached?

 

'Court proceedings will be issued against you in order to affect recovery'

 

'if judgement is obtained'

 

Get them to write out the words Effect and Judgment 1000 times whilst slapping them about the upper regions with a dictionary!

 

Pedantic rant over, but this shows the extent of the intelligence at play here.

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually with NHS hospitals there is a department that deals with this sort of thing. At least there is the 2 near me.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your Hospital Trust will have a parking management team but the majority of appeals fall on deaf ears where revenue is concerned, a

nd I know because I am an employee NHS too and I even know of relatives rushing in to see dying patients getting a charge notice and the appeal not being upheld..

.How bad is that ???

 

Look on your trust's intranet, somewhere there should be a full copy of the parking policy which explains what happens if the ticket is not paid within 28 days

and who brings enforcement and legal proceedings as the Trust are not entitled to your details from the DVLA..

 

..You could also ask for a Freedom of Information Request to see what exactly all the parking revenue was spent on..

 

.I think it is shocking that Hospitals are profiteering from the sick and needy, and those who care for them and visit them.

 

..especially as the NHS is funded by the tax payer already..

 

...I think you will find that these charges are designed to be a deterrant / punative and therefore not recoverable in law.

 

...Youre not doing yourself any favours by advertising the fact you never buy a ticket as these sites are patrolled by PPCs as much as I hate them..

 

.Regards

Edited by Scouse Magic
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

On a separate matter, you might like to ask them whether a 5 year old wrote the notice out that you have attached?

 

'Court proceedings will be issued against you in order to affect recovery'

 

'if judgement is obtained'

 

Get them to write out the words Effect and Judgment 1000 times whilst slapping them about the upper regions with a dictionary!

 

Pedantic rant over, but this shows the extent of the intelligence at play here.

 

They also call it a fine.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

They also call it a fine.....

 

Which in case the original poster doesn't realise it, effectively sinks any case they might have. Not that they do have a case you understand!

 

Basically only local councils and the police are allowed to "fine" people. since their charge is not a pre-estimae of loss, it is a penalty (fine). They can't do that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

legal notice..what law?

 

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

legal notice..what law?

 

dx

I think they are trying to say that it is not an illegal notice.

You will find that the Trust has farmed out all parking activites otherwise they would lose their charitable status and VAT exemptions (medical research) and have to pay corporation tax on the earings. They wont be allowed to spend the money on hospital type things anyway so it is beyond me why they bother to chase the money unless they have shares in the parking co (happens elsewhere).

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they are trying to say that it is not an illegal notice.

You will find that the Trust has farmed out all parking activites otherwise they would lose their charitable status and VAT exemptions (medical research) and have to pay corporation tax on the earings. They wont be allowed to spend the money on hospital type things anyway so it is beyond me why they bother to chase the money unless they have shares in the parking co (happens elsewhere).

 

It would be helpful to see the contract between the trust and the parking company / debt collector....A which magazine report publicised a freedom of information request on a dozen or so hospital trusts and found that each one profited more than a million pounds after all running costs...In my case which was brought by roxburghe hiding under the guise of the hospital, they sent me a cheque not the trust when they lost, but in my wifes case which they also lost, roxburghe refused to pay, so the trust paid themselves which leads me to ask who is responsible for what ?? The reality is, parking is big business and its disgusting that the sick and needy are being profited from.:-(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive just had a bit more time to look at the original charge notice and the penny dropped !!! Ureka...The OP should contact his trust's legal department who deal with negligence etc and will have no knowledge of parking issues and get them to scrub the tickets... As one cag reliable member already points out, the trust do not have the statute authority to use the word "Fine" and they could get themselves in trouble for doing so both with the law and the media.

 

They clearly also cannot state that employees may not discuss the matter.....pmsl feck orf........

 

Further down the notice we see Trethowans Solicitors ha ha ha :lol:

 

You may also wish to present to the trusts legal team this FOI request following a string of lost court cases by Threthowans Solicitors whos client was Aintree Hospitals in Liverpool..

 

From: FOI REQUESTS

Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

 

7 November 2011

 

Dear

 

Freedom of Information Act 2000 – Request for Information Reference: 1128

 

 

 

Thank you for your request for information regarding the amount of money

paid out to pursue unpaid parking charges at Aintree University Hospitals

NHS Foundation Trust.

 

 

 

You asked:

 

 

 

Ã* Amount of money paid by Aintree NHS trust to Trethowans solicitors to

pursue unpaid car parking charges over the last two years!

 

 

 

2010-11- £53,093.65

 

2011-12- £63,479.83 to date

 

 

Now wasting public money like that is worthy of any newspaper headline :lol::lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...