Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So lets look at your one link (I think) apart from some recent news reports from China   My statements are as defined by WHO, the CDC etc etc based on the experiences they had in managing and investigating prior similar outbreaks like MERS and SARS   ... gets my vote     Yours references appear based on a reputable source MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-analysis/news--wuhan-coronavirus/   BUT - what actually is it?   I've scanned through two the two latest reports and it certainlt seems to be a mathematical modelling exercise (standard deviation etc) on the current outbreak based on the limited information currently available.   Absolutely a worthy and essential goal that undoubtedly will add to our knowledge of the progress of these sort of outbreaks It MIGHT even update the processes and procedures already in place some time in the future, or it might simply confirm them.     But is is accurate or anything other at present? From the LATEST updated report 3 - their own words quoted.   "For our baseline estimates, we assume that two key characteristics of 2019-nCoV are similar to those observed for SARS: that there is high  level of variability  in the number of new infections generated by each infectious individual  and that the  generation time (the  average time between generations of infection)  is  the same as was estimated for SARS (mean of  8.4  days  [3])"       "we also generate estimates assuming 1000 or 9700 cases by 18th January, the lower and upper bounds of the uncertainty range around our central estimate of 4000 cases by that date." (a 10 fold spread in the estimates)     How accurate have these guess-timations you quote here proven to be (in their own words)? " The  uncertainty range is 1,000-9,700, reflecting the many continuing unknowns involved in deriving these estimates. Our central estimate of 4,000 is more than double our past estimates, a result of the increase of the number of cases detected outside mainland China "     So yes I do understand them, and will stick with the CDC/WHO figures thank you         oh and of course a Russian spook selling a book - which I admit to NOT having read - I did say not Alex Jones
    • Not really a risk more of an oversight because throughout this claim you have stated you have never held a Cap One Credit Card.....now you find you did...but it helps prove thats theirs cant be valid because you would not have 2 credit agreements with Cap 1 unless one was for a Luma brand.   If your numbers in the screenshot are different to the ones they are quoting in this claim (they have given an account number ?) then yes it would be useful.   This is not about avoiding paying any debt its about proving to the court how DCAs are manufacturing documents to fit their claims.
    • If we can’t agree on the incubation period, what are you thoughts on “Ro” for 2019-CoV (or R0), which I’d prefer to write as R(subscript-0) if I was able....   a) what would you estimate it to be?   I’ve seen estimates of between 1.4-2.5 (the WHO report factoring in 4th generation cases, from Jan 23rd),   1.4-3.8 from other analyses from the same date, although Fisman from Toronto (who did much of the modelling around SARS) cites a paper noting “the volume of observed exported cases in countries outside China suggested a much larger underlying epidemic than had been reported at that time, and this epidemic may have begun a month prior to the recognition of the market-associated outbreak, consistent with the reported timing of viral emergence based on phylogenetic analyses” Fisman believes there is “a SARS-compatible generation time of 6-10 days” (so, again, not 14 days!), stating that he believes the transmission dynamics are similar to SARS :  “ It is the average R0 that determines whether, and how, the disease can be controlled.  By analogy with SARS and MERS, with which nCoV seems to share many characteristics, the spread of this virus should be controllable.”   Do you agree: a) “superspreaders may widen the Ro range seen” (there are suggestion one hospitalised case generated 14 secondary cases), and b) the outbreak can be controlled by measures to bring Ro (targeting both standard spreaders and accepting the challenge of “superspreaders”) down to below 1?   Happy to consider your expert epidemiological opinion based on current knowledge of the statistics currently available (& accepting that the information gets refined over time!)   Ohh, and that still isn’t an incubation period of 14 days, if the generation time is 10 days  (dependant on when / if infectivity occurs prior to symptoms, are you suggesting that that interval is 4+ days??)
    • Thanks Andy, I think it might be a good idea to put your post #94 in the WS2, what could be the possible risks with putting this in, just so that I am prepared for it....    Also I took an image off the internet for a Luma Card which actually shows the first 4 numbers of my Luma card, would this be useful at all?    Thanks, Roland 
    • Ok so the Lloyds account that was on the doccuments is the joint account. I stopped using the joint account when i moved out, I went on to use my Natwest one which I still use to this day. This account was actually closed 07/09/15, the customer services advisor just confirmed on the phone. They do not hold any records for this payment going out. There was various payday loans but not from Payday Express or any of its t/a names. Due to being over 6 years ago they are not obliged to keep all records of closed accounts.   I did not have a computer at this address or a tablet. I don't know how else it could have been set up? Surely if it was from a computer it would have an ip address, or something?            
  • Our picks

actionplan36

Thurrock council PCN for parking with faded/non visible bay lines

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1138 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I have been given a PCN for parking in council run car park, outside of a parking bay.

 

 

I wanted to know if I had a leg to stand on if I wanted to fight my case?

 

 

As you can see in the pictures attached

the bay lines are very faded and in most parts are completely invisible.

 

 

I have also taken a couple of shots of the rest of the car park to show how bad the entire car park is and how bad their bay marking are.

 

 

If anyone could offer any advice I would greatly appreciate it.

 

 

I have written to the council already protesting about the PCN and I am waiting to hear back from them.

Many Thanks

20161119_104331.jpg

20161119_104221.jpg

20161119_104354.jpg

20161119_104452.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

Could you tell us who the PCN is from please?

 

My best, HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

 

I'll move you to the local authority parking forum and leave a link for you to follow. The advisers should be along during the course of the day.

 

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think for the moment that you have done the right thing. Well done on taking the pictures. Many people don't bother but they look very convincing.

 

Come back here when you know the results of your appeal


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, I will let you know as soon as I have heard back from them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

your soft appeal should include the photos and proof that you paid to be there (copy of ticket) If you are forced to take it to a formal appeal you will win as there is plenty of case precedent over markings that are far clearer than this. the council is having a laugh if they think that this will stick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ericsbrother, yes I sent them the photos and also a copy of the proof of payment to be there (the ticket). I will definitely keep this thread updated with what is happening. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What lines are you talking about?

I can't see any line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was the contravention stated on the PCN? And do you have any images/info on the terms and conditions on the car park signs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, it was contravention 86. I do not have images of the carpark signage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, fine - so that would be the correct contravention for not being properly within a marked bay.

 

State of the lines is awful. I think you will win, but please post back if not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everyone, I just thought I would keep you updated with what is happening. So after sending off the email with pictures, I got an automated response stating that they would get back to me within 10 working days. 10 working days has now passed so I called them up saying I have not heard back from them yet. Their response was: Them - A letter was sent to you on at the beginning of the week. Me - I have never received a letter? Them - Oh yes, you are correct, it was never sent as you didn't include your postal address in your email. Firstly, it never stated anywhere that I needed to give them my postal address. Secondly, what would have happened if I never contacted them myself? Would they have let it pass and then charge me.....even though they never sent me a letter out? Anyway, I have sent yet another email and no doubt will have to wait a while longer now to hear what their decision is. Just thought I would keep everyone up to date.

Edited by actionplan36

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Challenging a penalty charge notice

 

If you receive a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) that you feel is unfair, you can challenge it. Your PCN number, vehicle registration number and address must be quoted in all contacts. You can challenge using the online form or write to us:

 

https://www.thurrock.gov.uk/parking-enforcement/challenging-penalty-charge-notice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough, I did not see that part! Thanks for pointing it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I presume you quoted the PCN ref number so they know exactly who you are but are being bloody minded. In their defence though the driver may be appealing and that was not the keeper so confusion can be created.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I presume you quoted the PCN ref number so they know exactly who you are but are being bloody minded.

 

They will have no idea 'who you are'. The PCN ref number will identify the PCN and therefore the contravention and VRM, it doesn't identify a person. Nor does an email address. No council will respond to an informal challenge (either email or postal) without a name and address.

 

It's not until they send the NTO having obtained details from the DVLA, that they will have any idea of the identity of the registered keeper, let alone the driver if t was someone other than the RK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my error, I has assumed that previous correspondence had already covered this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everyone,

 

I wanted to give you an update.

 

I have received a letter telling me that my challenge has been rejected. Most of the text is just a copy and paste job that they send to everyone (I'm guessing). They do have pictures that show my car on a 'T', but when you park....looking out your window.....what do I see both sides....empty space with no other markings? As you could see in my pictures at the start of this thread....most of the lines in the car park have vanished.

 

Do I fight this? 20161206_154317.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have called up the Council's parking department and they have said I should receive another letter soon as I emailed them a question. Every time I ask a question it takes another 10 days to get a response. When I called I was asking to make sure I wouldn't be charged the full amount as the case was ongoing. They reassured me I wouldn't. I said that is good as I am waiting to hear back from my MP who has been notified about the situation. They then said "it has nothing to do with an MP, it's council business". Which I replied "I understand, but the council are not taking responsibility for the state of the carpark and are giving out penalties and to people who cannot see the bay lines. to be continued.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if anyone is following the thread any more, so this will be my last post. I have had another letter stating that basically they will no longer communicate with me and I have to pay. I have decided to pay the £25 so I don't get charged the full amount, but will continue to email them....every single week until they admit they are in the wrong and give me the money back as the whole thing is crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like you've already decided, and paid up.

 

Their images show the lines quite a bit clearer than your images, so there's some doubt over how this might have ended up had you fought on.

 

In any case, really don't keep hammering it out. Now you've paid, just move on. As the council said, this isn't a matter for a member of parliament, and you've closed the case now anyway. It's not worth even more of your time and energy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is worth the time, as the state of their car pack is clearly very bad. Terrible in fact. Anyone could park in the wrong place in there and they will get charged for it. It's not about the money, it's more about the principle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...