Jump to content


Civil Enforcement PCN - won POPLA case - they missed out wording in paragrah 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012:


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1088 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

Hacksaw it is always good to learn of the parking crooks get beaten. And we are always looking for extra ways in which we can help our members not having to pay these speculative invoices. However if we do not know what the missing words are it is of little use to us or our members in the same boat as you.

I have read many times that part of the notice you quoted in your first post. The only words missing from another CEL PCN  seem to be  "are met".  Is this your understanding of where CEL went wrong in your case or was it something different and please advise us what thw words were. And whatever the missing words were, was it something you saw yourself in your appeal or did you read it somewhere.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Civil Enforcement PCN - won POPLA case - they missed out wording in paragrah 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012:
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...