Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • OK.  So you lent your car to a friend in 2019 and he racked up three parking tickets that he tells you he didn't know anything about(!).  You were the registered keeper (RK) at the time at your family address, but you got chucked out and could not change your RK address with DVLA because you were homeless.  You knew nothing about the parking tickets and enforcement action until you got a bailiffs' letter passed on to you.  You made an Out of Time (OOT) application in respect of one PCN but Birmingham CC objected to it and the traffic court rejected your application.  A solicitor helped you make OOTs in respect of the other two PCNs but you don't yet know the outcome of those two applications.   Is that the situation you are in?   dx100uk thinks you can resubmit the application saying your friend was the driver.  I don't think saying that will help as the driver is irrelevant.  It's the owner who is liable to pay the charge and that is the RK (unless the RK is a car hire firm).  I assume you are not a car hire firm so you are stuck with the liability, not the driver.   Whether you actually can resubmit an OOT once one has been rejected I do not know, but why not try.  What did the solicitor put on the applications they helped you with?  Did you not ask their advice about the rejected application while you were with them?  I think you would have to say something to the effect that you never received any paperwork in relation to the PCNs because you had been chucked out of your home and because you were homeless you did not update your address at DVLA.  That is the truth isn't it?  You don't want to lie on the application.   To me that's a good reason for you not doing anything about the PCNs, but I suspect that Birmingham CC will object again and that the traffic court will reject again.  And, as I said above, I don't even know if you can submit a second OOT application in respect of a PCN if the first has been rejected.   So it looks to me like you might be a bit stuck.   Unless dx100uk, or spaceman61, or another poster with expertise in local authority PCNs comes along I'm not sure what you do.   If you get no more helpful suggestions here you could try on National Consumer Service.  If you do go there, do not register with a hotmail address.  You will also need to provide them with a timeline of everything for all the documents you actually have, and you will need all the facts and dates etc at your fingertips.  And make sure they are accurate.   http://forums.National Consumer Service.com/index.php?showforum=30   And get your friend to contribute to paying off the PCNs.  Do you believe he really knew nothing about them?
    • To enjoy the protection offered by s.75 CCA 1974 for a credit card payment, you must pay over £100 and under £30,000 for the goods or service (even if part payment for a larger total amount).
    • Hi Charlie and welcome to CAG   As an Executor, you have a duty to insure the property and tell the currect insurer of the passing of the deceased.   Most insurers will refuse normal contents cover on a house left unoccupied beyond 60 days. So, unoccupied, the home will not be insured against break-in damage, theft, flood, accidental damage, etc.   You may be able to obtain FLEE insurance covering only Fire, Lightening, Explosion and Earthquake. It may cost more than usual contents cover  because the home is unoccupied, even though the level/amount of cover is less than for an occupied home.   As said here already, an Executor would be wise (or indeed have a duty) to remove valuables from the home if you have somewhere safer to store them pending Probate, distribution, sale, etc.   I hope if you can explain the insurance risks to YB and assure him that you are not taking items just for your own benefit, he may see sense.   Please keep us updated ............
    • yours is not the next move   dx  
  • Our picks

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 873 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

It appears as though the parts of the London hackney carriages Acts were repealed in 1976 and 2004


When people lined the Mall fo the queens golden jubilee they were advised to use the cry "in pain in pain in pain" before urinating in public so I assumed that the met police who gave this guidance on telly at least though that it would still apply.



The Law Commission don't think so. Do you have a link to it?
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well ericsbrother the Law Commission say no such legislation has ever existed. There are loads of on online sites where the claim is made and people have asked for details of the specific legislation but no-one has ever been able to provide it. Can you be more specific?


I can't find the story about what the Met police said at the Queen's jubilee either but even if they did it has nothing to do with legislation for urinating taxi drivers (unless for some reason the Mall crowd was entirely made up of cab drivers?).

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK to add to that there were a number of bylaws for Hackney carriages under the Police Town Causes Act 1847 and earlier legislation that woud have been repealed by legislation between the 1890's and 1970's so more digging required. Now the other side of this coin is that there is no legislation that specifically bans urination in public, just a number of different laws that talk about indecent exposure, behaviour and so forth.



For the sake of the OP's sanity I will reiterate that it is how the act was perceived by the pub landlady that actually counts rather than any custom and even if it were covered by legislation the employer has its reputation to consider and gross misconduct often includes damaging the good name or reputation of the company so grovelling along with the mitigation is order of the day.



now the company can change the job or route of the Op and then tell the landlady that it has all been sorted and cant happen again etc to give her the impression that you have been dismissed without actually saying that. Is there a chance of being given another round? I am aware that you raised the reason at the beginning but you didnt say what else the co had in mnd for you before this incident

Edited by honeybee13
Paras, spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

I deliver in that area twice a week and taking me off that route has already happened but I will be put back on if the contract had gone.

This incident is not something I would normally do but I still feel I had no choice at that moment and found the best place to go,


I also feel I have the support of my manager and any drastic action would be on the orders of the directors. Once again I thank all for your input and apologies to those that I bit at,

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...