We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
BPA on Wikipedia
Options
Comments
-
This means, that provided the site moves towards a neutral viewpoint that it stays. :cool:My very sincere apologies for those hoping to request off-board assistance but I am now so inundated with requests that in order to do justice to those "already in the system" I am no longer accepting PM's and am unlikely to do so for the foreseeable future (August 2016).
For those seeking more detailed advice and guidance regarding small claims cases arising from private parking issues I recommend that you visit the Private Parking forum on PePiPoo.com0 -
trisontana wrote: »The BPA seem to think they own that page and won't tolerate any dissenting views. Completely wrong of course. As somebody wrote on the "talk" page :-
It is a page about you, not your page. It is vandlism to remove any edits that move the content towards a neutral point of view
One of my pithier paragraphs.0 -
The article has evolved quite nicely IMO
0 -
The PPC one is deletedOne important thing to remember is that when you get to the end of this sentence, you'll realise it's just my sig.0
-
Yes it has, but a new one can be placed up as long as its factual and a neutral standpoint , something that we can come up with , Wikipedia is a good resource to have and it's free, obviously it's open to the otherside as well, but if their comments are at all biased they can be removed without reprisal.Excel Parking, MET Parking, Combined Parking Solutions, VP Parking Solutions, ANPR PC Ltd, & Roxburghe Debt Collectors. What do they all have in common?
They are all or have been suspended from accessing the DVLA database for gross misconduct!
Do you really need to ask what kind of people run parking companies?0 -
One of my pithier paragraphs.
On a similar note;
Took me a few reads to notice that!! (red emphasis; mine)We are the British Parking Association and have produced content for this page. We are aware that other edits are made so we check this page regularly in an effort to ensure it is up-to-date with misleading spin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Britishparking (talk • contribs) 11:27, 24 January 2012 (UTC)"Part P" is not, and has never been, an accredited electrical qualification. It is a Building Regulation. No one can be "Part P qualified."
Forum posts are not legal advice; are for educational and discussion purposes only, and are not a substitute for proper consultation with a competent, qualified advisor.0 -
pmsl you just couldn't make it upExcel Parking, MET Parking, Combined Parking Solutions, VP Parking Solutions, ANPR PC Ltd, & Roxburghe Debt Collectors. What do they all have in common?
They are all or have been suspended from accessing the DVLA database for gross misconduct!
Do you really need to ask what kind of people run parking companies?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 350.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 253K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.5K Spending & Discounts
- 243.8K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.8K Life & Family
- 257.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards