Good News for all

Coupon-mad

To Peter Haswell of UKCPS - do you really believe that Troy can convince anyone that the BPA are up for the job of handling an 'independent appeals procedure'? :rotfl:

mcjordi

taffy056 wrote: »

Care to comment perky?

http://i52.tinypic.com/25z40si.jpg

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

peter_the_piper

trisontana wrote: »

He also fails to mention that the PPC will only be able claim if the parking ticket is affixed to the car before it moves off site. So no more just using CCTV or ANPR evidence on it's own if no ticket was left on the car.

So will we have lots of empty envelopes photographed on random cars with a made up invoice sent later when the victim phones up to query the empty envelope, saves on DVLA charges?

Coblcris

Schedule4Rules wrote: »

An appeal will only be upheld if the ticket was found to be incorrectly issued.
Use the example, a "free" council car park has a clear sign on the entrance stating 30minutes ONLY and a vehicle is observed as being there for 45minutes a ticket is issued.
There are no grounds to appeal it, so a private car park the same rules should and will apply.

More details on the appeals process will be known around August.

The emboldened text is, frankly, wrong. Utterly wrong. Even a cursory examination of the regulations reveals this.

One wonders if this second attempt at an 'appeals procedure' will fare better than the first.

Once the Bill gets assent we can have a sensible discussion. I believe that several of the points already made will become salient.

Until then why waste energy dealing with speculation and, frankly, drivel.

taffy056

Schedule4Rules wrote: »

An appeal will only be upheld if the ticket was found to be incorrectly issued.
Use the example, a "free" council car park has a clear sign on the entrance stating 30minutes ONLY and a vehicle is observed as being there for 45minutes a ticket is issued.
There are no grounds to appeal it, so a private car park the same rules should and will apply.

So if someone has a heart attack and dies , there is no grounds of appeal? guess the charge would then go to the next of kin to pay, thanks for clearing up a frankly absurd comment!

mikey72

taffy056 wrote: »

So if someone has a heart attack and dies , there is no grounds of appeal? guess the charge would then go to the next of kin to pay, thanks for clearing up a frankly absurd comment!

We had a classic one over the weekend.
Fire outside the carpark, and the emergency services wouldn't let anyone out for about 45 minutes.
Tickets all round then.

taffy056

mikey72 wrote: »

We had a classic one over the weekend.
Fire outside the carpark, and the emergency services wouldn't let anyone out for about 45 minutes.
Tickets all round then.

Wonder how many will appeal, then have it turned down by the scammers ?

Oopsadaisy

Here's what will happen under S4.....

RK names driver

Named driver denies it and names RK

RK denies it and we're back to square 1.

mcjordi

Oopsadaisy wrote: »

Here's what will happen under S4.....

RK names driver

Named driver denies it and names RK

RK denies it and we're back to square 1.

thats what I intend to do

Freddie_Snowbits

taffy056 wrote: »

You again trolling on here, you are as bad as the perky/hasbeen troll above.

And to the OP all it means is that the RK gives the driver details, and you must still take it to the small claims to try and get something, best of luck with that

Glad you acknowledge my prescence with your usual retort. Do you wish I would pm you before posting so you do not have to wait for me to post.

Fortunately oithers have given a little clarity on what this is, I assume it is about an independent appeal process? Still, you would not support this though.