|
Post by tazi on Dec 23, 2014 17:54:24 GMT
So it's ok to park all over the grass verges?. Yes it fucking well is! It's a grass verge not an entrance to a hospital or school. When this wankstain of a council start to maintain the grass verges then might people start to think twice about parking on them and causing any sort of damage. If they're not the property of the council then the owners of the verges need to maintain them also and maybe even police them if they don't want anyone to park on them, As for the fucking parking police saying that they are causing "obstruction" by parking there then please explain what this "obstruction" is. Gouranga. Crush the fcukers there and then.
|
|
|
Post by jarvinski on Dec 23, 2014 18:21:43 GMT
Don't even get in touch with them, they cannot take any money off you, it's the same at the hospital, they will soon get fed up of writing to you
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Dec 23, 2014 18:27:04 GMT
Don't even get in touch with them, Incorrect advice - plenty of good advice on the MSE forums and/or from a couple of knowledgeable folks on here
|
|
|
Post by no1972 on Dec 23, 2014 19:03:06 GMT
Anyone else received demand for £100 parking charge notice? Where were you parked,there was a announcement during the game about cars parking illegally and if they were not moved they would be towed away,found out after they were blocking a private entrance.
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Dec 23, 2014 21:00:16 GMT
Anyone else received demand for £100 parking charge notice? Where were you parked,there was a announcement during the game about cars parking illegally and if they were not moved they would be towed away,found out after they were blocking a private entrance. This thread relates to the parking tickets issued after the Southampton cup game, not last night.
|
|
|
Post by alsagerstokie on Dec 23, 2014 22:31:19 GMT
Can i ask. When you walk over the fly over from the mitch and you walk down to that round about. goin towards the canal. Load of cars now piling on the grass verges thier. I once considerd it a couple of season ago but got told by a copper dont bother you will get towed. I pay that guy on the mitch 4 this season 5 quid every home game. Seems those people on the verges dont need bother.
|
|
|
Post by Countydog on Dec 24, 2014 4:44:23 GMT
I did not pay my fine. I rang them and told them not to bother me again.
Ever.
I have heard nothing since..............
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2014 4:54:24 GMT
A few years ago I had a similar "Fine" for parking outside Subway in Stone. This was a private firm that employ bully boys, they sit and wait for you to leave yr car and pounce immediately. They apparently have full access to your home address, or the cars keepers registered address, from the DVLA. What I did was to write to them saying basically to get stuffed, but I did not write to their office, I got the address of the M.D. from companies house, and wrote to him at home, he went freeking ballistic, threatened me with the " we know where you live" bullshit, to which I replied..." Yeah, I know where you live also"...Never heard from him again...
|
|
|
Post by trigger on Dec 24, 2014 5:15:48 GMT
A friend at work got a ticket and was told not to pay it by a number of people, sure it came back to bite her in the arse as it mounted up to several hundred pounds and affected her credit rating as they chased it all the way.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2014 7:48:44 GMT
A friend at work got a ticket and was told not to pay it by a number of people, sure it came back to bite her in the arse as it mounted up to several hundred pounds and affected her credit rating as they chased it all the way. Trigger, there's a difference between simply not paying and actually challenging it with full reference to the legal frameworks under which private property owners (or the shitbag parking management companies who look after the car parks on their behalf) seek to punish a breach of contract. I can understand, as with these circumstances, not responding to the PCN's which get issued on the day as they are for the drivers and present no evidence of who it is for - these alone simply cannot be enforced. However, under the Protections of Freedoms Act (2012), they now have the legal framework to pursue the keeper of the vehicle if that PCN does not get paid. At this stage, the charge can be no more than the original. However, they have a set of strict requirements of issuing this notice - of which there are often major flaws. In this case, they have appointed a 3rd party without notification (which they are required to do so) and have simply sent a letter saying "Pay us £100. We're not going to tell you against what provision (even though we are required to do so), exactly how that charge is incurred (even though we are required to do so) and the supporting information behind it (even through we are required to do so). The £100 is the maximum we can charge without justifying it to the British Parking Association". The charge can only be a genuine pre-estimate of loss for the breach of contract/trespass. If, as it is claimed, each time any parked on that bit of land it genuinely caused a loss of £100; then the purchase of a temporary, removable bollard which can be supplied and installed for about £300 would solve the trick entirely. But, we all know that there is no chance it causes that kind of loss. At most, even if they were operating a car park, the maximum any parking charge could lose to the owner is the revenue of a ticket for that period...a few pound. But, that doesn't make for an attractive business plan; so instead these arsewipes simply whack a £100 charge on and hope people pay. By sending a fully detailed letter at this stage, which accepts nothing that is not proven (and remember the burden of proof is on them to justify the loss) and counters through identifying each and every breach of the Protection of Freedoms Act and the British Parking Association Code of Practice - whilst also requesting every piece of information that should be provided in order to prove that any monies are due AND threatening to make a formal complaint to the BPA... it puts the keeper in the strongest position as everything is thrown back at them. I imagine that the person who you wrote about just ignored it and ignored it; which does then incur extra costs which are acknowledged in the PoFA (2012) and then you do get in a spot of trouble. It is an absolutely disgusting industry which has been set up to unlawfully increase revenue for private firms - who tend not to follow the legal framework and Code of Practice which they should adhere to. People who either: pay straight up; simply ignore them or even respond brashly all help them. The best way to fight back is with clear, calm, detailed, structured communications which genuinely challenge them against those frameworks.
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Dec 24, 2014 8:06:22 GMT
However, under the Protections of Freedoms Act (2012), they now have the legal framework to pursue the keeper of the vehicle That's the crucial bit - it used to be ok to just ignore these scumbags, but sadly no more. Many thanks BG for your help so far - we have 28 days (I think) to reply to these folks, so, just enjoy Christmas then in a quiet moment around New Year, just copy and paste BG's letter, adding your own details of course and send it back to them. You don't need 'recorded delivery' but 'proof of posting from the post office should be free. Merry Christmas one and all
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Jan 28, 2015 16:21:36 GMT
Just to say thanks again to Jamie AKA #Bojanground He wrote a nine page letter for me to send to these parasites and lo and behold ... result .... Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by mrcholmondleywarner on Jan 28, 2015 21:41:21 GMT
Just to say thanks again to Jamie AKA #Bojanground He wrote a nine page letter for me to send to these parasites and lo and behold ... result .... Excellent Result. Can you post your letter of appeal (obviously redact the personal info)?
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Jan 28, 2015 22:31:23 GMT
Excellent Result. Can you post your letter of appeal (obviously redact the personal info)? Well, it was bojanground 's letter template - it was nine pages! - and then I just added my 'personal details' Do you want to PM me and I can e mail it to you?
|
|
|
Post by paulinespens on Jan 28, 2015 22:44:45 GMT
NINE FUCKING PAGES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thats a frigin book in me eye.
A few sentences should be enough,always ending in shove your cunting fine up ya wrong un.
Yours sincerely
Mr Go Fuck Thee Sen.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2015 22:55:57 GMT
Justice.
|
|
|
Post by RF10 on Jan 28, 2015 23:42:49 GMT
Waiting on the result of my appeal, although the same letter was used so fingers crossed.
Jamie's effort are very much appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by craig67 on Jan 28, 2015 23:48:32 GMT
The wife was chased by those who run the parking at Stone Morrisons-simply ignored it and never had anymore contact after the first couple of letters.
|
|
|
Post by prudhoe on Jan 29, 2015 21:50:49 GMT
I have a better solution. Park somewhere sensible, safe, and in accordance with parking regulations and you get no hassle at all!
|
|
|
Post by longtimestokie on Jan 29, 2015 22:43:54 GMT
I have a better solution. Park somewhere sensible, safe, and in accordance with parking regulations and you get no hassle at all! I would gladly park on the south car if you could get off easily,, last time i went on there we got off 6.10 ,,,when if we park down by sainsbuy`s or the mich we are north wales side of chester by 6o,clock ,,,,,no contest
|
|
|
Post by davethebass on Feb 4, 2015 20:44:42 GMT
Sorry to bump this thread but I'm sure some may find this video helpful and informative
|
|
|
Post by jarvinski on Feb 5, 2015 16:20:15 GMT
A firm called parking eye are another bunch of twats, you DO NOT have to pay it, its the same at the hospital
|
|
|
Post by jarvinski on Feb 5, 2015 16:23:22 GMT
Brilliant onlooker
|
|
|
Post by Robo10 on Feb 5, 2015 17:04:18 GMT
You have all seemed to miss the most important part of this thread Who is this girl? I was quite interested in the posts but the more I read, and the more time she appeared against Marwoods name, I just got attracted to her tits and lost interest! Well done to the appeallers and Mr Bojans letter though - keep that one safe for future use!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2015 17:38:25 GMT
You have all seemed to miss the most important part of this thread Who is this girl? I was quite interested in the posts but the more I read, and the more time she appeared against Marwoods name, I just got attracted to her tits and lost interest! Well done to the appeallers and Mr Bojans letter though - keep that one safe for future use! I think its Bojan Mackey post op in a final bid to win Bojan around without resorting to anything sinister!
|
|
|
Post by adiebunn on Feb 5, 2015 23:17:14 GMT
Showing my age now, could well be Valerie Leon, star of the Hai Karate aftershave TV adverts and many 'sexy' films in the 70's. Put her name in Youtube for some blatant non PC works of art :-)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2015 22:46:34 GMT
Tell them that you are an asylum seeker and that you have lost your right of appeal to stay.
They wont bother you again .
|
|
|
Post by jmst4 on Feb 17, 2015 23:49:02 GMT
Councils and police......pay the fine. Every fucker else hasn't got a prayer. Ignore Not in Brighton mate. The deluded Green council here is so draconian on parking, but so characteristically bad at following up the fines. You just write to them and they will usually void it. It is the done thing here, apparently.
|
|
|
Post by PerCyfilth ....Captains Log on Feb 20, 2015 8:06:17 GMT
from todays News
Drivers may have been illegally charged many millions of pounds for overstays while parking on private land, according to the RAC Foundation. Some drivers have been threatened with, and have paid, £100 for exceeding time limits, but the courts could see such payments as penalties and thus unenforceable, the foundation said. RAC Foundation director Professor Stephen Glaister said: "Millions of drivers could be in line for a refund. We estimate that in 2013 alone drivers might have been overcharged by some £100 million." In one case highlighted by the foundation, a mother from High Wycombe in Buckinghamshire was forced to pay £100 even though the reason she ran over time was that she was attending to her upset three-year-old son. In another incident, a woman from Stokenchurch in Buckinghamshire forked out £100 after a demand was left on her windscreen when she parked outside her partner's home where she had parked without a problem every weekend for two years. The foundation said that although the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 banned clamping on private land, drivers who stay longer than the time they have paid for were still likely to receive tickets that demand payments of up to £100, and in some cases significantly more. However in a paper for the foundation, barrister John de Waal QC argued that this is likely to be several times more than compensation for a genuine loss. So it would not be enforceable by the courts. Mr de Waal said: "Payments at the level that operators presently demand as sanctions are unlikely to count as genuine pre-estimate of loss; they should be seen by the courts as penalties, which means they are unenforceable." Mr de Waal also said that European consumer legislation which requires contracts to be fair means so-called "early payment discounts", which are often used to put pressure on the public to pay up quickly or face a higher charge, are in fact unlawful because they constitute a "price escalation clause". He also said that when signs are not clear or prominently displayed, the charge can also be challenged on the grounds of unfairness. Prof Glaister said: "We would like to see this legal argument tested in a higher court so that a binding precedent is set. "At the same time we would like the Government to do what it should have done at the outset and set out what are reasonable charges." He went on: "Ministers thought that the ban on clamping would end parking problems on private land. As we warned at the time, they were wrong. "They allowed a system of ticketing to emerge which is barely regulated. In effect drivers have been short-changed."
|
|
|
Post by enuntio on Feb 20, 2015 11:16:32 GMT
|
|