Jump to content


Norwich Traffic Control/BW windscreen PCN Claimform - 1 minute stay - Connaught Hall Attleborough dr surgery


F1MOS
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 810 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

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

have they paid?

ring and ask

 

court date?

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

I have called and got no answer but I will keep trying.

Court date is 1st July.

 

 

 

For the letter i sent under CPR 31:14 where the solicitors haven't replied, are they legally required to reply to this?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok good.

as for the CPR.....so you've not been reading up here then in 5mts?

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

Yes I have read quiet a bit but its hard to follow when trying to determine if these are compulsory when it comes to information and disclosure of documentation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no requests under cpr are compulsory

but that's immaterial to your case

you only stayed 1 min.

 

 

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

Thank you.

I have the codes of practice and all of that with regards to grace periods. My back up however is that NTC may not actually be allowed to issue tickets. There are doubts with regards to whether there was a contract in place, if there was who was that with coupled with the fact that they have installed the signs and machines with no planning permission.

However i am still trying to find out what legislation covers the planning permission requirement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They dont have planning permission for anything and nor do the hall have permission for a car park.

The person who signed the contract with NTC doesnt have the authority to make such contracts so one of your arguments later will be "performance of contract"

PP for equipment is covered by several laws, signage is the 2007 Town and Country Planning  Act

Link to post
Share on other sites

ericsbrother, that is unbelievable. How on earth does something like this happen!?

 

Anyway, I will use the signage planning permission issue. I haven't found out if they have paid the court fee yet so this still may not happen.

 

Thanks again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ring 'em in the morning even better😂

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

the cameras also need planning permission as they are not fixed to a  bulding and used for security purposes.

Again you will have to look up the relevant planning legislation as it isnt the same as the Town and Country Planning Act 2007 that covers the signs.

however, without the PP the kit and signs are there illegally and you cannot enter into a cotravt where criminality is needed to form ti.

Bit like I cant sue you for not murdering my MiL as agreed to, it is called a criminal compact so automatically unenforceable. However, you will have to do the running as they will say they ahve deemed consent and judges tend to take people at their word or 50% of people involved in civil litigation would be gaoled for perjury.

there is a paper that is readable via the parking prankstrs blogspot of Dec 2017 called the great private parking planning permission [problem]. At the bottom of that article there is a hyperlink to the research. Read and print it out and use it as part of your evidence.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

the cameras also need planning permission as they are not fixed to a  bulding and used for security purposes.

Again you will have to look up the relevant planning legislation as it isnt the same as the Town and Country Planning Act 2007 that covers the signs.

however, without the PP the kit and signs are there illegally and you cannot enter into a cotravt where criminality is needed to form ti.

Bit like I cant sue you for not murdering my MiL as agreed to, it is called a criminal compact so automatically unenforceable. However, you will have to do the running as they will say they ahve deemed consent and judges tend to take people at their word or 50% of people involved in civil litigation would be gaoled for perjury.

there is a paper that is readable via the parking prankstrs blogspot of Dec 2017 called the great private parking planning permission [problem]. At the bottom of that article there is a hyperlink to the research. Read and print it out and use it as part of your evidence.

you also need to get somehting down about the 10 minute grace period and thw BPA CoP regarding this. Now as it was discussed as part fo the BEAVIS decision there is a precednt so although it isnt in the POFA is has become compulsory. again you will need to quote cases hwere this has coem up and find the passges in the BEAVIS decision at the supreme court so you can show that as evidence as well.

Basically you include anything you can find as a comparator so you have "persuasive" case law on your side. they wont be able to come up with much that says  "we dont have to follow the law"

 

The owner of NPS lives just down the road and has had other parking co's that have gone bust so it is a gamble for him whetehr to pitch up and lose, which WILL( your job) get into the local papers saying that he cant legally demand a thing and nor can the managemnt of the hall or he can just drop the claim and hope that the lack of publicity will allow him to carry on his illegal activities

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Guys,
I have my court case tomorrow (1st July) and I have gone through the bundle supplied by the Claimant (NTC).
 

They provided a limited version of the supposed contract with the Hall but the Company who holds that contract has a different registered address that the one that issues tickets. This company was disolved in 2013 so no longer exists and therefore their contract which is supposedly dated for 03/01/2017 is not valid.

 

The company that issues tickets is not a registered company on Companies House.

 

The County Court Claim form also detailed a different address and is therefore a different entity that the NTC that issued the PCN.

 

There is also no evidence of planning permission for the signs etc.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont forget  min 10 mins stay no max too

 

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

They are not the same so the company that is suing you has no LOCUS STANDI

No planning permission and they are breaking the terms of their membership to their ATA and that menas they have obtained your keeper details by lying to the DVLA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys,

The Judge today ruled in favour of the Claimant (NTC) however a max of the PCN and court fee (£25).

However, during the hearing he agreed that the Grace Period should be 10 minutes but disputed the fact that I had returned to the car within 10 minutes. He said because I hadn't brought evidence from the Dr Surgery that I was collecting a prescription, the PCN was still valid.

 

He deemed that there was adequate signage despite the fact the signs do not mention the Dr Surgery as he knew the car park very well.

 

He deemed that the 3 different companies named on the PCN, the Court Claim form and the contract with Connaught Hall were the same company despite one company being dissolved in 2013 and therefore to legally enter into a contract with Connaught Hall in 2017.

 

I mentioned the non compliance with the IPC Code of Conduct and the BPA Code of Conduct, especially around signage and planning permission. The judge said that there was no evidence to suggest that the Claimant hadn't applied for planning permission and therefore disregarded these items.

 

I requested an appeal on all of the above which he refused.

 

Is it me or is this slightly strange that a judge can disregard all of the above?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

urm..smells like a case of judge lottery to me....

or else he's granted so many claims in favour of the claimant before that he cant now say yes you are right , they dont have xyz..as it will open the flood gates for his poor judgements before whereby no one questioned the points you've raised and he'll loose face?

 

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

"there isnt any evidence to suggest they hadnt applied for planning permission"

They didnt have it.

i cant drive a car without a driving licence or insurance and not providing proof that i hadnt applied for the same wouldnt persuade a court that the police were wrong to prosecute.

 

the onus is on the claimant in these cases to show they HAVE all of the relevant permissions.

 

the judge has misdirected himself.

I agree with DX's comments, he has probably rushed all of the previous claims through without anyone questioning their right to enter into contracts so didnt want to contradict himself for all the cases that would now be shown to be wrong.

 

there is a precedent for parking on yellow lines when loading and that involved the appellant providing a receipt for a sofa they were collecting. Now all cases that involve loading the parking tribunals ask for a copy of the sales receipt for the item being collected regardless of the circumstance so people like DHL delivery drivers get asked to prove they have just bought something!!

 

same goes with grace period, they should have to show that you were there more than 10 minutes and they didnt do that.

again the judge has got this **** about face.

 

The NTK wasnt POFA complaint so there was no liability created and that means you cant in law owe them and the judge has completely missed that rather inconvenient truth because of their ignorance even after multiple cases from the same crooks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to agree with your comments as he said he was very familiar with NTC as soon as the Claimant's advocate started talking.

 

I quoted the requirements of the BPA code of conduct that stipulate that detail the signage and the requirements of this...I quoted both BPA and IPC CoP fro Grace Periods.

 

The 3 differing entities made him think for a minute especially as the entity that has the contract with the Hall was disolved in 2013 and therefore unable to enter into a contract...all were disregarded.

 

He was happy with the signage as "I know the car park very well". I explained that the signage must be clear for people who not know the car park and in any event must comply with the the CoP's and legislative requirements.

 

"I am happy with the signage is sufficient"! and so it went on.

 

Can his ruling be appealed even though he refused the right to appeal?

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, you have to fill out the correct form and tell the appeal court why you think that the decision was wrong.

In your case it is both the misapplication of law ( for example you cant have a contract with a co that doesnt exist) and also for matters of fact. the Circuit judge who sits at that county court will then decide whether you can go forward with your appeal and you will have to fill out soem more forms and submit all of your evidence of why the decision was wrong ( and not just that you didnt like it) and ask permission to add new evidence ( this will be proof of a lack of palanning and proof fro the surgery that you were only there to pick up a prescription and the CoP regardinmg the 10 minute MINIMUM grace period) and as said the judge getting the requiremtn of evidence the wrong way round as it is for NTC to prove that you overstayed if this was the key point in the judges mind.

 

now you need to go to the councila dn get them to enforce the planning rules and copy you in on this compalint about their lack of PP and as importantly  get them interested in the Committee of Attleborough Hall also breraching the planning regs by having barriers  etc there without permission and probably breaching the covenatnt on the hall dating abck to when the Yanks gave it to the town at the end of WW2

you need to create a long paper trail for everything and be able to proc duce all fo the stuuf they cnat so copies of recotds from caompanies house, etcd.

get anyone else who has fallen foul of this judge lottery to hand overn their paperwork, the local news may be able to gather soemething for you.

Get on to the MoJ to get anything you are allowed about prevous NTC cases in court and see what they say in the defence and also what the judge said. getting transcripts of all of these will cost you thousands but you might be able to get a copy of the official tapes in a suitable format, again others who have suffered might be willing to help you as they wont have to bear any of the cvosts of a fight but stand to gain if you are successful

Link to post
Share on other sites

you have 21 days to submit your application.

It will be initially "on the papers" at the same court with a higher ranked judge looking at it. if you have failed to fill out the forms exactly as required and leave out stuff you want to add later you have to start all over again and that may well annoy the judge so get it right first time.

 

careful  not to say things about the comperternce or demeanour of the judge, it is a misapplication of law and matters of fract that were discounted when they were most relevant that are the thing here.

 

there is a post in the parking pranksters blog where the person suffered a similar fate to you inasmuch as the judge had already made 4 decisions in the parking co's favour that morning before hitting the buffers with the well presented case adn then having to admit that the defence WAS correct after all.

 

find that and copy it for your own purpose if nothing else. it is relevant as it shows that judges can make decisions based on limited fcats that are then proved to be wrong by a more diligent person presenting their evidence. In yur case suggesting that the judge had basicaly travelled down a cul-de-sac with his previous determinations allow the thought process to be challenged without suggesting they are incompetent or whatever

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gents,

A question, the contract that NTC supposedly has with Connaught Hall (attached) details that they will comply with the BPA Code of Practice.

However, NTC notified me that this is not the case.

 

Can this be followed up with the BPA at all?

 

I mentioned this in the country court also but this was ignored too.

NTC Con Hall Contract.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...