Debt Recovery plus letter - new legis?

societys_child

ballist1x wrote: »

i thought one of the main premise of the defence was that they need to Prove who the driver was,

No, the main premise of defence is that they are a private company and cannot issue a penalty, they can only make a reasonable claim for any loss they have suffered.

Can't see how "not parking wholly within a bay" cost them anything.

Stop taking it so seriously, just ignore them from now on.

ballist1x

ill buy a ticket tonight, if i win then ill pay the debt.

ballist1x

Cheers guys my mates a criminal defence lawyer so ive been talking to him about this situation - but clearly being criminal is a world away from knowing all of the details in a civil case.

As you say societys child, the alleged infraction was 'not wholly parked in a bay' - the car park was NOT full and you dont have to pay to stay there anyway so the net loss to the company would have to be absolutely zero? in this instance?

societys_child

If you win we all want a cut . . .:beer:

societys_child

absolutely zero? Exactly!

taffy056

All the advice in the watchdog videos are still current, there is more than one, there is in fact a further two from last year. And there is a thread with them all in, going to bump that up now for all to see.

And even with new laws coming in , I think this is going to be the biggest red herring for the scammers since the last red herring , yes people may be forced to give drivers details, but still the scammers need to take it to the small claims to get anything

taffy056

All the advice in the watchdog videos are still current, there is more than one, there is in fact a further two from last year. And there is a thread with them all in, going to bump that up now for all to see.

And even with new laws coming in , I think this is going to be the biggest red herring for the scammers since the last red herring , yes people may be forced to give drivers details, but still the scammers need to take it to the small claims to get anything

ballist1x

Well, my 'incred-O-meter' just went off the scale, i got in from work 30 mins ago to find a letter thats been forwarded on by my parents from their address, from NS&I.

'Congratulations, you've won a Premium Bond prize...'

£25!

Ive never won on the premium bonds before and barely knew i jhad any except the £50~ my parents bought for me and my sister, what 15-20 eyars ago.. LOL

So, i take it im going to court

esmerobbo

ballist1x wrote: »

So, i take it im going to court

Better go buy a suit!!;)

Nah spend the £25 on summit nice, and wait for the lottery win, what do they say wins come in 3's?

TrickyWicky

ballist1x wrote: »

Thanks, i heard that there is a much longer time that they can take you to court over this type of ordeal - 7 years off the top of my head. Could they wait for the legislation to come through and then retroactively use this to force me into giving the information over the original dispute?

No. Things that new laws come in to enforce cannot be backdated. The oddity being the road tax bands that Mr Brown introduced in the last government.

Likewise I think the 7 years thing you mention is the statute of limitations which is 6 years (basically thats how long financial records must be kept and thats how long you have to clear up financial dealings).