A Disabled Charity And A PPC

taffy056

Well they are all default judgements and not defended IMO, or simply a setup, my question is though, are they allowed to put pdf's of these judgements on their site ? Isn't there some data protection issues with it ?

esmerobbo

One of the defendants has another cases coming up for a disabled bay parking in a hospital! http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=54130 A very unlucky man to have two PPC's take him to court.
His original one! http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=50228&hl= He also has a thread going to revoke a charge order for an official ticket.

The problem in a County Court is the Judge can take a dislike to someone if they believe they are disingenuous. He is not disabled, his defence was he didn't see the sign! I have been to that retail park many times, and one thing you can say is you can see the signs! Whether the signs mean anything or not is a matter for the Judge! I suppose they could be set ups but I think they are more likely to be "well chosen".

What does concern me is the 4 at Liverpool! What is going in here?

As for the DPA on the Judgements I think they are public knowledge aren't they? Its been a few years since I have been to the County Court but I seem to remember them being pinned up on the board in the foyer, from the previous day!

peter_the_piper

The latest I have seen from the wonderful ppc's. not directly related to mobilise though.
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/cardiffonline/cardiff-news/2011/02/19/amputee-motorist-fined-for-parking-in-disabled-space-91466-28196579/

Left a comment, wonder how long it stays up and hope she see's it.

esmerobbo

Its Euro so she can safely ignore that one! Wish the journo would of done a bit of research and advised her not to pay! Calling the issuer a car park "officer" as well!

Its nice to see the appeals process is fairly operated, maybe the lady should of sent her prosthetic leg with the appeal!

peter_the_piper

esmerobbo wrote: »

Its Euro so she can safely ignore that one! Wish the journo would of done a bit of research and advised her not to pay! Calling the issuer a car park "officer" as well!

Its nice to see the appeals process is fairly operated, maybe the lady should of sent her prosthetic leg with the appeal!

Dare I say they would then have had a leg to stand on? Goes and hides in corner.

trisontana

Yet another case of UKCPS hounding a disabled driver (from CAG):-

I am writing here on behalf of my father who has many different health conditions. My farther late last year had a full right knee replacement and uses disabled parking bays because he is still unable to bend his knee fully yet and needs to open the car door fully, this can not be done in a standard car bay at this car park. We did spend 10 - 15 minutes before parking trying to find a parking attendant to explain our point but was unable to locate one. When we arrived back at the car after about 20 / 25 minutes we have been given a ticket for £60, We wrote to this company explaining the issues who have wrote back and told us that we must now pay £100 because 14 days has passed, Can anybody help me with these people ?

What lovely people UKCPS are, and shame yet again on Mobilise.

esmerobbo

It is more then coincidence we are seeing lots of these by UKCPS. Funny how the OP could not find an attendant to ask if he could park in a disabled bay. Yet within 10-15 mins they get a charge notice! Covert action by UKCPS! must make them and Mobilise proud!

taffy056

Yes it's discrimination of the disabled , and fully endorsed by the muppets at mobilise , they get commision out of it by various ppc, honestly they make me sick !

Spartacus_Mills

esmerobbo wrote: »

I see one of the cases was someone suing them, maybe trying to recover a charge. Problem is once paid, you sort of admit being the driver and accepting the contract.

Notice 4 Liverpool ones too! I hope he hasn't got a pet DJ!:p

The Exeter one which was the one too ill to attend £220 was it worth their time and effort! Or was it hand picked to prove a point?:p

The Exeter case was a lady who parked in a disabled spot without a badge and was unable to attend court because her disability had got worse.

The scumbag, sorry we cannot say that on this supine forum, Haswell went all over the net glorifying this as a great triumph. Yeah, UKPC kicked a disabled lady when she was down for parking in a disabled space. Well done UKPC and Mobilise. You are class acts. You do need a blue badge to prove limited mobility.

Coupon-mad

Spartacus_Mills wrote: »

The Exeter case was a lady who parked in a disabled spot without a badge and was unable to attend court because her disability had got worse.

The scumbag, sorry we cannot say that on this supine forum, Haswell went all over the net glorifying this as a great triumph. Yeah, UKCPS kicked a disabled lady when she was down for parking in a disabled space. Well done UKCPS and Mobilise. You are class acts. You do need a blue badge to prove limited mobility.

It's UKCPS who rejoice in having Peter Hasbeen at the helm.

All it will take is for one disabled person to sue the retailer/hospital and UKCPS for failure to provide a 'reasonable adjustment' under the Equality Act for them to park unharassed and without discrimination. That's all it needs, someone to get their deserved compensation and the retailers/hospitals will soon get the message that Haswell's days are numbered and UKCPS is wrong.

As for Mobilise - words just fail me that they support the PPC not the disabled person.

I think outing in the national press is the way forward for exposing Mobilise's conflict of interest, since some of us have already complained to Mobilise and got nowhere.