I have received a fine from UKPC

Trebor16

Wig wrote: »

Because your statement was in agreement with what I have been saying on this thread. If that was your position then you do, like it or not, agree with me.

What you said in post 44:-

"It was not disingenuos as within the same post I made it clear that it was not a complete agreement because I highlighted where we might differ"

Could you please make up your mind one way or the other.

Wig

cajef wrote: »

At first you state that there a plenty of court cases now it is there could be a court case, hardly credible advice without examples of where people have followed the ignore advice and lost court cases.

You are not making any sense. The person "could be taken to court" i.e. there "could be a court case" No-one knows if there will be a court case or not, that's why I used the word "could" :wall:

Are you drunk?

Wig

Trebor16 wrote: »

What you said in post 44:-

"It was not disingenuos as within the same post I made it clear that it was not a complete agreement because I highlighted where we might differ"

Could you please make up your mind one way or the other.

Ok, here it is in black & white for you (ok pedants, there is some red & some blue), and I will not quote exactly because I don't want to waste any more time on you.

I said, If there was a displayed tariff after a 2 hour free period then they could demand that tariff be paid
You said, If there was a displayed tariff after a 2 hour free period then they could demand that tariff be paid

You said, Any additional amounts would be doomed to fail.
I said the additional amounts would be questionable, but could be justified with the right wording.

When you said as much in a post, I followed that post to say I was glad that you agreed with me, because your position was largely in agreement with me. and I re-iterated that I held out there was some scope for additional amounts with the right wording just to acknowledge that we don't appear to be eye to eye on that point.

I do not accept that this was in any way disingenuous.

Happy now?

Trebor16

I wonder what version you will be using later on this evening or tomorrow?:D

cajef

Wig wrote: »

You are not making any sense.
Are you drunk?

You really need to read what you are posting, early on in this thread you stated that there have been cases where people have lost in court, when asked to produce evidence you change it to 'could be taken to court', make your mind up, I could win the lottery tonight but there is a big difference between that and actually winning it, the chance is about the same as being taken to court and them winning.

As others are trying to tell you if you are going to post advice make sure it is correct rather than causing confusion in threads with opinions which are to say the least misleading and contradict posters in this forum that have far more experience of dealing with these topics.

If 'are you drunk' is the only comment you can make it says a lot about you.

Coupon-mad

Wig wrote: »

Happy now?

Well I am, because you obviously had no comeback to those successful cases I posted, which prove your posts were wrong earlier.

Wig

I haven't bothered reading them yet, will do in the future, but your own post proves my point that people do lose. You're not saying that people -except that one singular case you highlighted- don't lose are you?

I'm not making any point here except that people do lose in court, how many of them will go on to appeal? How many OP's do you think will appeal a lost case?

Wig

cajef wrote: »

You really need to read what you are posting, early on in this thread you stated that there have been cases where people have lost in court, when asked to produce evidence you change it to 'could be taken to court', make your mind up, I could win the lottery tonight but there is a big difference between that and actually winning it, the chance is about the same as being taken to court and them winning.

As others are trying to tell you if you are going to post advice make sure it is correct rather than causing confusion in threads with opinions which are to say the least misleading and contradict posters in this forum that have far more experience of dealing with these topics.

If 'are you drunk' is the only comment you can make it says a lot about you.

You are again -despite me making my use of the word could perfectly clear- making no sense what so ever. You must be drunk... Goodbye, I can't waste anymore time with you.

trisontana

The sad truth about the whole PPC "business model" is that two thirds of people who receive these fake tickets pay up without question. So PPCs don't have to go to court to make money.

Wig

And I will leave it here, as there is nothing further to argue or gain from this.