Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • next time dont panic and wet yourself and offer payment !! Date of issue – 14 june 2024 date for aos - 2nd july  date to file defence - 16th july      other than the CCA/CRP and if it ever gets that far..a witness statement, you send them NOTHING and dont ever instigate comms with them. esp by email.. i would be sending one final email in reply to theirs above. PLEASE NOTE: email is NOT to be used for any comms with regard to our mutual court claim. else they'll be sending a whole forest of faked agreements/documents to you one minute before a court deadline removing your shace to object/pull them apart as unenforceable etc. dx        
    • Unbelievably I can't find it, I will have a really good look for it when I have a bit more time on my day off this week. AS a side note, I emailed them offering a token payment to settle the account and avoid court action, which unsurprisingly they have declined. However their reply states:  A Claim was accepted on 19 June 2024 which means we cannot set up a payment plan just yet. You should have received a claims pack from the Court. We would ask for this to be completed with your offer of repayment and returned to either ourselves or the Court.  You have 21 days for this to be completed and returned in order to avoid a Judgment by Default. This means we would need to receive this by 10 July 2024. I was under the impression it was 19 days from date on the claim form. which was the 14th, which would be 3rd July. Could I use this against them as it seems like they are giving me false information in the hope of getting a judgement by default?
    • when is your mediation? honestly I don't think that the ups case is much use actually because it concerns third party rights BUT  as we know now the contract for packlink is direct and there are no third parties rights at all so you don't need it, and frankly the really helpful one will be from @occysrazor case but I don't know if they have it. expect evris mediation to be a complete fail yes
    • jk2054: I have ensured there's not reference to the third party rights in the updated letter of claim. BankFodder: thanks for the edits and information. I understand the Consumer Rights Act prohibits EVRi's attempts to avoid liability in their duty and care of accepting to deliver my parcel according to Section 57.  They have accepted to carry my parcel even though I have identified it as a laptop and specified the value so they must take reasonable care to deliver the parcel or face the consequences if it were lost as it seems to be in my case! I hadn't originally referenced Section 72 because of EVRi didn't offer any insurance whether free or for me to purchase. I understand that if I were to have any sort of insurance from EVRi then Section 72 refer to the rules of such secondary contracts. Is this section indicating that the insurance may reduce my rights or remedies to recourse to full compensation if I had been offered and purchased such insurance?  Is it beneficial to include this in the letter of claim (and subsequently reference both Section 57 and 72 in the MCOL?) although it might not be pertinent in my case?  Perhaps this is just to reinforce that in general EVRi and other couriers are taking such liberties with their customers so it is to send a message that they are breaching both sections? I made a few minor edits to the letter of claim but mainly grammatical type stuff and to keep consistent font, black colour, but the edits you provided are included and are extremely helpful and are putting me in a good position to email and post the letter to EVRi this week and get the ball rolling. Thanks. Evri letter of claim.pdf
    • Thank you for getting back to me I will do my best to get hold of the claim form tomorrow  When I spoke to MCOl on friday I asked for the extra 14 days so penty of time Onlymeagain
  • 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

Alliance Parking ANPR PCN (NTK now LOC) - Appeal Refused - 17min Overstay - Harlyn Bay


Recommended Posts

1 Date of the infringement 29th May 2023

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 2nd June 2023

PDF scan done Redacted and Attached

3 Date received 8th June 2023

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] No, not directly but has some wording about transfer to keeper

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes, Entry and Exit times

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] Yes, Panicked thinking JustPark had not updated Alliance with payment details HOWEVER not revealed the driver id
Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up I think so (very brief email, saying appeal failed, due to OVERSTAY of 17min)

7 Who is the parking company? Alliance Parking

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Harlyn Bay, Cornwall

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. IAS

 

This PCN is similar to below

Alliance ANPR PCN - overstay 11mins - appeal refused - Harlyn bay, Padstow Cornwall - Private Land Parking Enforcement - Consumer Action Group

that it was a bank holiday weekend and car park was rammed.

It was a very hot day, and we were first time parkers in this car park (not knowing the Alliance ANPR in play).

We entered the car park looking for our friends who were 2 mins ahead of us.

As the car park was in overspill mode there were 2 other fields open and after doing a circuit gave up looking and after a few more mins trying to find a space parked up on the grass at the top of the field. N.B. There were no signs anywhere near us.

We had to unload the kids, dog and beach bags etc .. and most importantly water the dog as he was so hot.

Then made our way across the fields to the parking machine. As it was so busy there was a big queue, so attempted to book with justpark (which took an age getting a signal). Eventually paying for 4 hours.

Upon leaving we were notified by Justpark that our time was up so proceeded to make our way back to the car, and within 6min had left the car park. So it was 11min to make the booking on JustPark and 6min after our 4hr time was up.

On 5th May 2024 we got a Letter of Claim and decided to post up here ..

As for next steps, we guess from others post on this forum we understand we need to write a "Snotty Letter" with a few key points.

Has anyone got best advice? otherwise we'll cobble something together from others posts.

 

 

Alliance NTK PCN+PAPLOC.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

have you still got your appeal and their reply please?

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

Thank you for posting up the required details and well done for apparently not revealing the identity of the driver. I am assuming you are the keeper?

The depth of ignorance of the parking companies is absolutely amazing. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 is the law relating to private parking and allows those rogues to be able to transfer the charge from the driver [whose name they do not know] to the keeper after 28 days . This is dependent on them complying with the Act. So many of the don't and Alliance is no different.

It would help if we could see what you appeal was and to post the back of the PCN as it is lacking so much of the wording necessary to make it compliant so that in your case only the driver is liable to pay the charge. And of course just entering the ANPR arrival times means that they have failed to specify the parking time which is a requirement.. 

Because the car park was so busy you had to drive around for quite a while before finally finding a place to park which is when the parking period may  actually begin. The poor dears at Alliance have not grasped that particular part of the legislation as yet. To be fair the Act has only been in place for 12 years so one must make allowances for their stupidity . We shouldn't really mock them- but it is fun.

You weren't to know but the chances of winning an appeal against Alliance and the IPC is around 5%-and that is high for them. If they allow you to cancel they lose the chance of making money and they would have had a field day when you were there with so many people being caught overstaying because of the chaos in trying to find a parking space then trying to pay. 

Your snotty letter could go something like this-

Dear Cretins,

Yes I mean you Alliance. After 12 years one would have thought that even you could produce a compliant PCN. Did you really think I would pay you a penny extra considering the time I wasted trying  to pay with  long queues at the parking machine, then trying to get a signal to call Just Park. On top of that you then had the cheek to ask for an additional £70 for what dubious unspecified pleasure? You must have made a killing that day charging all those motorists for overstaying because the queues to pay were do long and even walking to pay from the over flow parking fields takes time. And yes I did take photos of the non existent signs in the fields so please don't give me the usual rubbish about your signs being clearly visible.

Oh yes that £70. Please tell me and the Court whether that charge included VAT and if it did, why am I being charged to pay your vat? I am sure the Judge would look carefully at that as well as the Inland Revenue.

The truth is you had no reasonable cause to ask the DVLA for my data given the chaos at your car park and I believe that you therefore breached my GDPR......................

I expect others will give their views as well.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have 10 cases, including yours, for this company.

There are no guarantees of course, but so far not once have they had the bottle to do court.  They seem to be a small company operating only in Cornwall and out of their depth when it comes to court.

BTW, thanks for filling in the sticky and uploading the PDF so quickly - we wish everyone who comes here would do that!

As dx asked, please post what you wrote in your appeal.

 

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually one thing I forgot to mention was that our friends who got to the car park before us got an NTK too. What I didn't realise was that they paid their £60. Arrgghh!

I think AP made a huge amount of money on that day!!!!!

18 hours ago, lookinforinfo said:

Thank you for posting up the required details and well done for apparently not revealing the identity of the driver. I am assuming you are the keeper?

Can't comment on that. Let's say I'm legal counsel to the keeper!

Unfortunately the appeal was made direct on the alliance-parking.co.uk/appeals page not IAS, we now know that this was only to get driver details and was only after we submitted did we realise that should just ignored it.

As it was a web online form we have a screenshot.

But we stated that we had paid for parking and only really submitted our justpark receipt ref image BUT DID NOT confirm any driver details.

Only thinking they had somehow not got the justpark payment info.

18 hours ago, lookinforinfo said:

It would help if we could see what you appeal was and to post the back of the PCN

The back of the PCN is on page2 of the NTK+LOC. The LOC is page3+4

18 hours ago, lookinforinfo said:

Oh yes that £70. Please tell me and the Court whether that charge included VAT and if it did, why am I being charged to pay your vat?

Just a quick question on this. Where does the £70 come from? In our NTK&LOC it states £170? 

PCN-Appeal-HarlynBay-jun23redact.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Thanks for uploading the appeal.  It was a waste of time but well done in not outing the driver.

Why have your friends paid £60 they don't owe to a cowboy private company that have no means of making them pay as they don't do court?  If they paid by card, as I presume they did, they should get on to their bank and do a chargeback immediately.

We call the £70 the Unicorn Food Tax.  The law specifically states they are only allowed to charge the original £100 but the PPCs and their bezzies in their trade associations allow this made-up extra £70 so £100 becomes £170.  Unfortunately for them the law doesn't.

Anyway, snotty letter time.

There is an example in post 32 here you can tweak as it's the same company but a different car park   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/463964-alliance-anpr-pcn-lease-car-appeals-refused-daymer-bay-cornwall/page/2/#comments

 

Edited by FTMDave
Typo

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did ask them why, but seems they have more spare cash than we do .. ;-( .. I doubt their bank would even support a chargeback after a year has passed.

I've constructed my first DRAFT Snotty Letter .. so here goes ..

 

RE: PCN 4xxxxx

Dear ALLIANCE PARKING Litigation Dept,

Thank you for your dubious Letter Of Claim (dated 29th April 2024) of £100 for just 2 minutes of overstay. The family rolled around on the floor in amazement of the idea you actually think they’d accept this nonsense, let alone being confused over the extra unlawful £70 you had added. Shall we raise that related VAT issue with HMRC, or perhaps the custodians of the unicorn grain silos?

Apart from the serious GDPR breach you’ve made with the DVLA and your complete failure in identifying the driver, we’re dumbfounded that the PCN is still not compliant with the PoFA (2012 Schedule 4 Under Section 9.2.f) even after 12 years of pathetic trial and error.

We also doubt a judge would be very impressed at your bone idleness and lack of due diligence regarding the ANPR entry / exit periods compared with actual valid parking periods. Especially with no consideration of the legally allowed grace periods and the topological nature of the Cornish landscape versus a traditional multi-storey.

And don’t even get us started on the invisible signage during the ultra busy bank holiday carnage, that is otherwise known as the random parking chaos in the several unmarked over-spill fields, or indeed the tedious “frustration of contract” attempting to get a data connection to Justpark. 

We suggest your clients drop this extreme foolishness or get an absolute hammering in court. We are more than ready to raise the issues with a fair minded judge, who will most likely laugh your clients out in less time than it takes to capture more useless ANPR photos. We will of course be requesting “an unreasonable costs order” under CPR 27.14.2.g and put it toward future taxis to Harlyn Bay instead. 

We all look forward to your clients' deafening silence.

Legal Counsel on behalf of the Vehicle Keeper.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done on the epic level of snottiness!

It'd probably be best to not play so many of your cards so early, in case Alliance do decide to do court - even though they have never had the bottle to do so so far.

I'm knackered now but all the regulars will suggest tweaks over the next couple of days.

BTW, Alliance Parking don't have a Litigation Department.  It's just Kev  https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09766749/officers  who obviously is too thick to get a proper job so he puts his signs up where no-one will ever see them and tries to threaten motorists into paying him money that they don't owe.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a suggested modified version for consideration by the team.

(Not sure whether it still gives too much away?)

 

RE: PCN 4xxxxx

Dear ALLIANCE PARKING Litigation Dept,

Thank you for your dubious Letter Of Claim (dated 29th April 2024) of £100 for just 2 minutes of overstay. The family rolled around on the floor in amazement of the idea you actually think they’d accept this nonsense, let alone being confused over the extra unlawful £70 you added. Shall we raise the related VAT issue with HMRC, or perhaps the custodians of the unicorn grain silos?

Apart from the serious GDPR breach you’ve made with the DVLA and your complete failure in identifying the driver, we’re dumbfounded that the PCN is still not compliant with the PoFA (2012 Schedule 4 Under Section 9.2.f) even after 12 years of pathetic trial and error.

We also doubt a judge would be very impressed at your bone idleness and lack of due diligence regarding parking periods. Especially with no consideration of section 13 in your own trade association's code of practice and the topological nature of the Cornish landscape versus a traditional multi-storey.

And don’t even get us started on the invisible signage during the ultra busy bank holiday carnage, that is otherwise known as the random parking chaos in the several unmarked, unmanaged over-spill fields, or indeed the tedious “frustration of contract” attempting to get a data connection to Justpark

We suggest your clients drop this extreme foolishness or get an absolute hammering in court. We are more than ready to raise the above issues and more, with a fair minded judge, who will most likely laugh your clients out in less time than it takes to capture a couple of useless ANPR photos.

If you insist on continuing this stupid, money grabbing quest, after having all of the above pointed out, we will of course show this letter to the Judge and request “an unreasonable costs order” under CPR 27.14.2.g and put it toward future taxis to Harlyn Bay instead. 

We all look forward to your clients' deafening silence.

Signed, "Spot". (Vehicle Keeper's pet Dalmation).

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

In both versions the three references to "your clients" near the end need to be changed to "you" or "your" as Alliance are not using solicitors, they have sent the LoC themselves.

Personally I'd change "Dear ALLIANCE PARKING Litigation Dept" to "Dear Kev".  It would show you'd done your homework, looked up the company, and seen it's a pathetic one-man band rather than having any departments.  The PPCs love to pretend they have some official power and so you should be scared of them - showing you've sussed their sordid games and you're confident about fighting them undermines all this.  In fact that's the whole point of a snotty letter - to show you'd be big trouble for them if they did do court so better to drop you like a hot potato and go and pursue mugs who just give in instead.

In the very, very, very, very unlikely case of Kev doing court, it'd be better that he didn't know in advance all the legal arguments you'd be using, so I'd heavily reduce the number of cards being played.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Notice how Kev goes about his scam.  In Kahunaburger's case they left the car park well before the time shown on the ticket they had purchased.  But because Kev added on the time taken to look for a parking spot and queue to pay/try to get an internet signal he still sent them an invoice.

So If you had left before the Justpark message, say at 3:55, Kev would still have managed to turn that into a stay of 4:06 and thus an overstay and an invoice.

Unfortunately for Kev, judges have ruled against his reasoning.  Have a read of this famous case  http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2014/03/waiting-for-space-is-not-parking.html

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK,

In post 10, I've highlighted 3 sections in red as suggestions for removal.

Do we reckon this is enough to give them a clue, without giving them the whole gameplay?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose it doesn't make a massive amount of difference as Kev has never had the guts to do court - well at least not yet - but to me the number of cards played still needs to be reduced. 

Given the OP has already referred to the "very busy and overflowing car park" in the appeal I'd refer to that and tell Kev to go and look up case no.3JD08399.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all, especially the information about Kev! Yes, I'll make the mods you all suggest, especially the client bits (didn't realise it was a one man band).

The only thing I'm not sure of, is the best way to "sign off", especially as the Keeper is not so keen to sign. So I'd much rather send it from our pet dog.

BTW does anyone know about the landowners at Harlyn Bay? I did try to find out last year but couldn't find anything useful, and whether it is worth raising this massive cash generator scam with them. I'm guessing the landowners get a small percentage, so happy to go along with it?

Just made a small donation. Maybe a little help to continue the good work you guys are doing. I'll post up my tweaks before sticking in the post (with confirmation of posting).

BTW anyone not signed the parking petition please do so now! Only 339 as of now .. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

:yo:

not sure on the silly petition, they'll never get it through whilst the same rules dont apply to councils first.

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

Revised with all comments from the experienced members:-

RE: PCN 4xxxxx

Dear Kev,

Thank you for your dubious Letter Of Claim (dated 29th April 2024) of £100 for just 2 minutes of overstay. The family rolled around on the floor in amazement of the idea you actually think they’d accept this nonsense, let alone being confused over the extra unlawful £70 you added. Shall we raise that related VAT issue with HMRC, or perhaps the custodians of the unicorn grain silos?

Apart from the serious GDPR breach you’ve made with the DVLA and your complete failure in identifying the driver, we’re dumbfounded that the PCN is still not compliant with the PoFA (2012 Schedule 4 Under Section 9.2.f) even after 12 years of pathetic trial and error.

We also doubt a judge would be very impressed at your bone idleness and lack of due diligence regarding Section 13 in your own trade association's code of practice, including the lack of differentiation between the topological nature of the Cornish landscape versus a traditional multi-storey.

And don’t even get us started on the ultra busy bank holiday carnage , i.e. the "very busy and overflowing car park" that degraded into random parking chaos in the several unmarked over-spill fields. Perhaps you need a refresher and go and look up the ParkingEye case 3JD08399.

We suggest you drop this extreme foolishness or get an absolute hammering in court. We are more than ready to raise the issues with a fair minded Judge, who will most likely laugh you out of court in less time than it takes you to capture more useless ANPR photos.

If you insist on continuing this stupid, money grabbing quest, after having all of the above pointed out, we will of course show this letter to the Judge and request “an unreasonable costs order” under CPR 27.14.2.g and put it toward future taxis to Harlyn Bay instead. 

We look forward to your deafening silence.

The Vehicle Keeper’s Dog, 

Vince
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fine.  The important thing is to show Kev you're trouble and so best to drop you like a hot potato.

Invest in a 2nd class stamp tomorrow - all Kev is worth - and get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...