Honest John - Telegraph paper

ripped_off_driver

murdomaguire wrote: »

Whether or not some idiot parking company person posted on another forum as Stephen Thomas I know not - but I do know I am not "Perky" who ever he may be and I am certainly not some parking company foil or troll.

"some idiot parking company person posted on another forum as Stephen Thomas". No. The claimant in the case, Perky, posted as the defendant "Stephen Thomas" (on this forum by the way). The case turned on a forum posting by "Stephen Thomas" which sunk his case.

Surely a veteran lawyer like you can see a slight issue here? Stephen Thomas may exist but what does that prove an nobody knows who he is? Setting up a case like this would be like falling off a log.

Regards you posting information about the case on the internet, why was the transcript doctored to remove all references to the online forum postings? If you are so in the know you will be able to say why that little piece of doctoring happened and what it was intended to hide.

murdomaguire

Please tell us more about cases, who was the worst PPC to write to? Did you EVER see any evidence of any PPC allowing or even considering any 'appeal'?

One of the northern companies near Blackpool once allowed an appeal. I though the old chap who wrote the refusal letters must have had a particularly good egg for his breakfast.

Worst without doubt was Excel. Simon Renshaw-Smith their managing director used to ring and abuse us most Friday afternoons.

I also once got a photograph of Gary Wayne - who operates Civil Enforcement Limited. He is obsessive about his privacy and he and the company hide their identity behind numerous nominee directors and their address through behind nominee addresses. I think his home address and his photograph somehow found their way into the hands of the Daily Mail.

The comment about them being letter writing factories is probably about right. The way we had it set up was their machines would write an automatic letter to us (who were defending the cases) and then our machines would write an automatic letter back to them. I don't think anyone read anything much.

And so on and so forth. The postman ended up with so much mail it was delivered in sacks.

The real trick is to dump everything but not the court letter. If you miss that they can get judgment by default.

Coupon-mad

murdomaguire wrote: »

One of the northern companies near Blackpool once allowed an appeal. I though the old chap who wrote the refusal letters must have had a particularly good egg for his breakfast.

Love it...just one old guy allowing one appeal because he was having a good day! :T

I like the info you've got, do you post on pepipoo as well? Once you can overcome any troll suggestions I think they'd be interested to hear your experiences.

I am, thanks for posting.

Still wondering, was the £12.50 the sum total per case awarded in those Court cases, or was it £12.50 plus the stupid 'parking charge' amount?

Oh, and posting or pm-ing me any up to date PPC addresses for my 'send Christmas cards to a PPC' thread would be very useful, please, if you know how to get them. We only have PO boxes for some and wouldn't want them missing out on our seasonal greetings this year!

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2111771

Coupon-mad

murdomaguire

Regards you posting information about the case on the internet, why was the transcript doctored to remove all references to the online forum postings? If you are so in the know you will be able to say why that little piece of doctoring happened and what it was intended to hide.

My colleague corrected the local newspapers in respect of the alleged precedent - and other factors.

Regarding the document as far as I remember the issue the judge took exception to was not the transcript but claims that there were insurance documents which purported to show that other drivers were permitted to use the car.

I think the internet advice received by Mr Thomas was the "spin" the parking company put on the case.

HO87

murdo

Constructive criticism - Could you indicate a little more obviously where comment ends and quotations begin (citing the sources as well?)? It is a little difficult to follow your arguments.

murdomaguire

Still wondering, was the £12.50 the sum total per case awarded in those Court cases, or was it £12.50 plus the stupid 'parking charge' amount?

The judge awarded £12.50 per case to the parking company. I think there was a small award for mileage and parking for the parking company legal officer (in house, not a lawyer) but all the cases were held on the same day so this was divided between them.

That said I think had the residents brought the cases individually and to their own benefit I think the awards would have been considerably larger - inconvenience, cost of parking elsewhere, deprivation of peaceful enjoyment etc.

In this case they may well have done better bringing their case under trespass than under contract.

murdomaguire

Could you indicate a little more obviously where comment ends and quotations begin (citing the sources as well?)? It is a little difficult to follow your arguments.

Yes happy to.

ripped_off_driver

murdomaguire wrote: »

My colleague corrected the local newspapers in respect of the alleged precedent - and other factors.

Regarding the document as far as I remember the issue the judge took exception to was not the transcript but claims that there were insurance documents which purported to show that other drivers were permitted to use the car.

I think the internet advice received by Mr Thomas was the "spin" the parking company put on the case.

You seem very confused. The transcript I am referring is the doctored document placed on the internet by Perky, the boss of Combined Parking Solutions, the claimant in the case. This has clearly been doctored to remove all references to the forum postings admitting toi being the driver which were the key aspect of the case being decided in favour of Combined Parking Solutions.

If the only research you have done on the case is to read a bunch of newspaper reports then am not surprised that you think the case is genuine.

ripped_off_driver

murdomaguire wrote: »

In this case they may well have done better bringing their case under trespass than under contract.

Total nonsense. It would be much more difficult to prove a loss under the law of trespass.

dacouch

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Love it...just one old guy allowing one appeal because he was having a good day! :T

I like the info you've got, do you post on pepipoo as well? Once you can overcome any troll suggestions I think they'd be interested to hear your experiences.

I am, thanks for posting.

Still wondering, was the £12.50 the sum total per case awarded in those Court cases, or was it £12.50 plus the stupid 'parking charge' amount?

Oh, and posting or pm-ing me any up to date PPC addresses for my 'send Christmas cards to a PPC' thread would be very useful, please, if you know how to get them. We only have PO boxes for some and wouldn't want them missing out on our seasonal greetings this year!

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2111771

Coupon-mad

I agree Murdo could be a valued member of MSE and with his knowledge could help members and also the posters who contribute to the parking forum with his knowledge and access to case histories.

He has certainly thought his case in this thread and this is the type of thing I would want in my brief.

Perhaps everyone could cut Murdo some slack and rather than being confrontational which would put most people off from posting. Maybe we could ask his "Professional Opinion" on the issues we have with parking tickets.

If he did manage to censor Excel then he could be just the person we are all looking for to find ways of bringing the parking business to heel.

I'm not having a go at any of the other contributers on this thread as we are all members and everyone's opinion is equally valuable. I'm just saying we potentially have a great ally in Murdo so don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

P.S Welcome murdo