Honest John - Telegraph paper

Jeff_Bridges_hair

So i wrote back to him



>
> Well john im sorry to hear that. this may have worked on numerous
> occasions as they have at least got some money rather then nothing as they
> know that it wouldnt stand up in a court of law.
> Please look on those 2 websites i have passed on to you - they have saved
> thousands of people money from the advice i have given and as of yet not
> one person has been taken to court to pay any of these fines unless they
> have been issued by the council or by the police. They are unenforceable
> parking tickets and an unfair penalty on the car user.


To his reply

You still don't understand the point of law or what has really happened in
these other cases so there is no point in continuing to argue with you.

HJ

dacouch

I read HJ's column and he the advice he gives about insurance is frequently wrong. I can predict his (Often) wrong answer just by reading the question if it involves insurance.

He seems to take advice from Lucy Bonham Carter who is a lawyer who runs a website giving advice on motoring matters, I'm guessing he gets his advice on parking tickets and some of the insurance issues from her which may explain his stance.

taffy056

More that HJ doesn't know the point of law in regards to this, otherwise he wouldn't be contradicting a legal expert in the field, also unless its passed you by the same legal expert on the watchdog programme , was the one who advised on the guardian link above.

Really you cannot take the advice by HJ in this regard seriously as obviously he is no expert in this area, and is offering his opinion as a layman, a legal expert in the area is infinitly more knowledgeable, unfortunately this person has a wider audience, shame his advice is shambolic.

Sir_Roger_deLodger

Jeff_Bridges_hair wrote: »

Well i got this in reply where he seems to contradict himself a little

You obviously have his email address. If you don't want to publish it on here then PM me with it and I'll do it for you.

I do find it very strange that a journalist on a national newspaper keeps his email address secret.

Jeff_Bridges_hair

Sir_Roger_deLodger wrote: »

You obviously have his email address. If you don't want to publish it on here then PM me with it and I'll do it for you.

I do find it very strange that a journalist on a national newspaper keeps his email address secret.

Its not a secret - It quite clearly states it on his letters page..

Letters at hoenestjohn.co.uk

Sir_Roger_deLodger

Thank you. I don't have the paper, I was looking on the Telegraph website.
Email sent.

Jeff_Bridges_hair

ah ok.. its on his own honest john website too.

Though now a few people have emailed him maybe he will start to come round.. though looking at his picture he looks about as honest as these car parking companies.

rev_henry

Hadeon wrote: »

How utterly naive is that? Does HJ, & you rev-henry, seriously believe that £10 would 'buy-off' a PPC? I don't think so.
HJ's advice would more than likely cause his readers immense additional stress if followed.

As already touched-on by C-M in post #2, the PPC would then have evidence of the admission of liability thereby stengthening the possibility of a court case, but my guess is that the PPC would exploit this weakness & at the very least vigorously & mercilessly pursue & harass the victim for the remaining amount if not more. Exactly the opposite to the intended consequence eh?.

Have you not read about cases where victims have even paid up in full & still been pursued for alleged non-payment?

Yes I suppose HJ's answer works in theory but in reality the PPC would just take it as more evidence of guilt and would not just accept the £10 lying down.

Hadeon

rev_henry wrote: »

Yes I suppose HJ's answer works in theory but in reality the PPC would just take it as more evidence of guilt and would not just accept the £10 lying down.

Yes quite; it's astounding that HJ does not appreciate the implications and potential adverse consequences of offering this ridiculous advice & that of his readers acting on it.

AlexisV

Honest John has vaguely got the gist, but if he'd known anything about Parking Eye he'd know they have never done court, never will do and the the only time they've been near a court was when it was THEM being sued. They lost.

£10 as an estimate of actual loss suffered is too high.