We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

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).
📨 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!

Thousands could beat parking fines after judge tackles £766k 'Mr Clampit' in landmark

2»

Comments

  • notts_phil
    notts_phil Posts: 1,087 Forumite
    Whilst its good to see excel get used like a punch bag, it isnt a landmark judgement
    Hi, we’ve had to remove your signature. If you’re not sure why please read the forum rules or email the forum team if you’re still unsure - MSE ForumTeam
  • Kite2010
    Kite2010 Posts: 4,308 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Home Insurance Hacker! Car Insurance Carver!
    Excel to be the next company to phoenix?
  • halibut2209
    halibut2209 Posts: 4,250 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    If you're being REALLY pedantic, then the legal term is indeed "penalties" which is exactly why you don't have to pay them ;)
    One important thing to remember is that when you get to the end of this sentence, you'll realise it's just my sig.
  • AlexisV
    AlexisV Posts: 1,890 Forumite
    notts_phil wrote: »
    Whilst its good to see excel get used like a punch bag, it isnt a landmark judgement

    No, but since this appears to follow the HMRC ruling - which is a landmark judgement - it's still noteworthy IMO.
  • HO87
    HO87 Posts: 4,296 Forumite
    AlexisV wrote: »
    No, but since this appears to follow the HMRC ruling - which is a landmark judgement - it's still noteworthy IMO.
    +1

    The apparent lack of any comment (unless I'm missing something), from the BPA in particular, about the VCS situation is equally noteworthy at this stage.

    Rest assured pressure is being applied in the appropriate quarters.
    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.com
  • trisontana
    trisontana Posts: 9,472 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    HO87 wrote: »
    +1

    The apparent lack of any comment (unless I'm missing something), from the BPA in particular, about the VCS situation is equally noteworthy at this stage.

    Rest assured pressure is being applied in the appropriate quarters.

    Last week I emailed the BPA asking for their views on the above case and also the FOI request which showed that only a small number of cases actually go to court, contrary to the propaganda put out by the BPA. Up till now no reply has been received.
    What part of "A whop bop-a-lu a whop bam boo" don't you understand?
  • HO87
    HO87 Posts: 4,296 Forumite
    trisontana wrote: »
    Last week I emailed the BPA asking for their views on the above case and also the FOI request which showed that only a small number of cases actually go to court, contrary to the propaganda put out by the BPA. Up till now no reply has been received.
    Exactly.

    The VCS judgment (that is the upper tax tribunal case) is awkward at best for the BPA. However, having also been discovered to have claimed in the evidence provided to the DVLA (as part of their legislative impact assessment) that between 36,000 and 90,000 cases are pursued through the civil courts - when the reality is that the figure is closer to just 800, I believe that the BPA have been found seriously wanting.

    Patrick Troy has stated on the record that he has full control of the BPA membership. I think not. In addition one must say that he, as THE representative of the BPA, would appear to have little control of facts either.

    Please remember that the BPA have placed themselves as the gatekeeper of access to DVLA held RK data. They owe the public a duty and at the moment their silence could be interpreted as speaking volumes about the concern they have for that duty.

    This is not the time to be gandering or slapping ourselves to heavily on the backs but we should now be pressing home complaints about PPC's, the DVLA provision of RK details and the BPA's seeming indifference to the actions of its members.

    Let's get writing people.
    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.com
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.5K Life & Family
  • 258.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.