Town and City Parking yet again...

halibut2209

Probably not, but I think there's a difference between youngsters calling their peers names, and a blatent disrespect for the police. Bring back the days when the police could give rude youngsters a clout round the ear.

And with their disrespect, they already demonstrated they were "alienated from the police". This is about showing them that disrespect to authority is not without consequence. A valuable lesson.

And please don't enter a strawman argument. I did not say it was a crime.

Sirdan

halibut2209 wrote: »

Probably not, but I think there's a difference between youngsters calling their peers names, and a blatent disrespect for the police. Bring back the days when the police could give rude youngsters a clout round the ear.

And with their disrespect, they already demonstrated they were "alienated from the police". This is about showing them that disrespect to authority is not without consequence. A valuable lesson.

And please don't enter a strawman argument. I did not say it was a crime.

So you believe that Police Officers should be entrusted with the power to decide what is or is not acceptable behaviour which falls short of criminality and then they should be allowed to dispense summary justice by assaulting the individual concerned about the head !

I believe Police Officers should deal with crimes as determined by the rules which exist for a very good reason these being in most cases the Police and Criminal Evidence Act and the accompanying Codes of Practice.

if as you state what these youngsters have done is not a crime then it has nothing at all to do with the Police in an official capacity. That said I would expect the headmaster and / or parents to make those concerned give an apology to the PC and to punish them accordingly.

What this case clearly did not need was FOUR police Officers wasting their time on it.

halibut2209

Sirdan wrote: »

I believe Police Officers should deal with crimes as determined by the rules which exist for a very good reason these being in most cases the Police and Criminal Evidence Act and the accompanying Codes of Practice.

And I believe there should also be an element of preventative measures, and the education of the young, which this falls under.

We're not going to agree, and I like and respect you and your posts here, so I'm not going to continue to argue as I believe it's healthy that different people have different opinions on policies. It's what makes life interesting.

Sirdan

halibut2209 wrote: »

And I believe there should also be an element of preventative measures, and the education of the young, which this falls under.

We're not going to agree, and I like and respect you and your posts here, so I'm not going to continue to argue as I believe it's healthy that different people have different opinions on policies. It's what makes life interesting.

We agree to disagree

Now back to the business in hand ..what the hell do Parking Eye think they are up to ??

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=60343

halibut2209

Yeah, still calling big troll on that one. Will be happy to be proved wrong, but nothing is adding up. And that's a very neat "stamp" on that form

Oopsadaisy

Yeah it's probs a fake.

thetriggerhappypwner

If in this thread that I started, that what is being said that any PPC will do anything to get their hands on peoples hard earned money, it would be reasonable to assume that they will go to absolutely any lengths got get at it, including faking a County Court Claim to intimidate the "victim" in to paying for a faked "fine" from an illegitimate claim.

Personally, I would tell them to shove it!!

Sirdan

thetriggerhappypwner wrote: »

If in this thread that I started, that what is being said that any PPC will do anything to get their hands on peoples hard earned money, it would be reasonable to assume that they will go to absolutely any lengths got get at it, including faking a County Court Claim to intimidate the "victim" in to paying for a faked "fine" from an illegitimate claim.

Personally, I would tell them to shove it!!

You can only tell them to shove it if you are absolutely 100% certain it is not a real claim.

If it is real and you do nothing to defend it then the claimant (PPC) will win by default i.e. that is automatically.
They don't have to turn up,present evidence or anything simply filing the claim would be enough.

Oopsadaisy

Sirdan wrote: »

You can only tell them to shove it if you are absolutely 100% certain it is not a real claim.

Yes, so poster needs to find out if it's real.[Don't think this can be done online, so may need to contact court.]

They could also get a good idea from the envelope...was it sent from the court postcode [Northhampton iirc for moneyclaimonline], and again iirc it's a fairly std brown envelope, etc. If it came from the PPC as part of some other stuff I'd say it's more likely a scare tactic [which may get them in trouble].

I personally sent a 'completed but not yet filed' N1 to someone; however I did make it clear in my letter that it was filled in but not yet filed with the court but would be in 5 days time [it was to show them I was serious]...result, they paid up.

thetriggerhappypwner

Very interesting...