For the attention of Crabman

LincolnshireYokel

Crabman wrote: »

There are over 4,000 open threads on this sub-board at the moment. The rest have been closed automatically by forum software (applies to threads that have been inactive for two years).

I wonder if they can tweak it so it shuts them after 2 months instead, for a short period.

taffy056

The protection of freedom act 2012 will I believe be for England and Wales and will be implemented on October 1st, but according to the bpa it does not apply in Scotland and Northern Ireland

As for closing threads, it's possible with the software to do this with what they have added to the forum already, or maybe a better alternative would be for a couple of the trusted regulars the ability to close threads for a couple of weeks just on this sub forum maybe ??

Crabman

taffy056 wrote: »

As for closing threads, it's possible with the software to do this with what they have added to the forum already, or maybe a better alternative would be for a couple of the trusted regulars the ability to close threads for a couple of weeks just on this sub forum maybe ??

Closing a large number of threads is of course possible (only MSE could do so with their admin tools) but I'm not sure about the feasibility of posting a message on each of them as that would bump each thread to the top of the sub-board and bury the threads that are currently active.

On the Matched Betting board, a generic message appears at the top of each thread (click on any thread on this board if you're not sure what I mean). That may be an option...

LincolnshireYokel wrote: »

I wonder if they can tweak it so it shuts them after 2 months instead, for a short period.

Good suggestion. Keep any further ideas coming as MSE will no doubt look at this thread.

taffy056

Crabman wrote: »

Closing a large number of threads is of course possible (only MSE could do so with their admin tools) but I'm not sure about the feasibility of posting a message on each of them as that would bump each thread to the top of the sub-board and bury the threads that are currently active.

On the Matched Betting board, a generic message appears at the top of each thread (click on any thread on this board if you're not sure what I mean). That may be an option...



Good suggestion. Keep any further ideas coming as MSE will no doubt look at this thread.

But we would only do that to the threads bumped already, so it would be there in any case, what the message would do is inform people that things have changed, and to post a new thread. A generic message like you suggest would be a good idea as well. Though getting MSE to send the new info in one of their emails would also help greatly.

Crabman

taffy056 wrote: »

But we would only do that to the threads bumped already, so it would be there in any case, what the message would do is inform people that things have changed, and to post a new thread. A generic message like you suggest would be a good idea as well. Though getting MSE to send the new info in one of their emails would also help greatly.

If you're referring to members who may post their case on the end of an existing thread, the way we currently deal with that is to split their post into a new thread together with any replies. That would continue to happen.

As for posting a message, there's no reason we can't come up with a concise and informative message that one of the regulars can easily paste into any such thread that is bumped.

taffy056

It would be good to also close the thread if possible as well. The problem is that google throws up results and people don't really read the thread at all and just post, if there is no ability to post on it but a message on the last post to say come to the sub forum instead.

Do you think that mse will allow maybe a trusted regular or two to close threads just on this sub forum? That way a message can be posted and the thread closed. That will save complications due to some threads needing to be open for example existing problems.

RENEGADE_2

HO87 and Bazster, I thank you both for enlightening me on POPLA and the upcoming changes. I had taken my finger off the pulse for some months.

I see now why at the top of this thread there is an action plan, "appeal No.1, appeal No.2, stage 3: ignore". It all fits now. Now just out of curiousity, how is it beneficial for the victimised keeper to enter into communication with those bodies? I appreciate that early days may see landowners attempting court in light of their target not replying to them but since we have established that this remains within Contract Law, surely the rest of the show will be what we have seen time and time again - the judge striking the case out because he immediately identifies the fixed sum demanded by the claimant as a de facto penalty and not a calculation of losses. Is this not so?

Also - if your reply/ies to the above still favour entering into communication with POPLA and the filth (PPC), then again I say can we not merely write to deny the legality of the claim outright? A double "appeal" will doubtlessly accede to the authority of the PPC. Also, an appeal by its nature implies that the author is supplicating: pleading that the charge be overturned and even then merely on that one occasion. Hardly suitable behaviour when informing a cowboy that you know his demand is unlawful - why if it is wrongful on XYZ grounds this time then it is wrongful on XYZ grounds every time. Is it simply not better to write a civilised letter to POPLA following the routine rejection by the PPC stating these grounds which are familiar to you?

taffy056

Popla will cost the ppcs £32 for each appeal, it's binding on them but not the motorists, they cannot add appeal costs to their claim, so expect the price to go up up somewhat for infringements of their pathetic rules. Can't see ones much below a £100 in the new scheme of things, which will lead to even more people not paying and seeking advice.

The reason to contact the ppc is that you must exhaust their appeals before going to popla, basically there is fundamental change of how things will proceed. Oh unless you get a ticket in Scotland and NI which remains the same as now.

RENEGADE_2

taffy056 wrote: »

The reason to contact the ppc is that you must exhaust their appeals before going to popla, basically there is fundamental change of how things will proceed.

But why "must" people - who know better - exhaust the appeals when we know the nexus will fall flat on its back in the end.

Also - does it have to be an "appeal"? A process by which the target pleads in earnest for the action against him to be cancelled?

taffy056

RENEGADE wrote: »

But why "must" people - who know better - exhaust the appeals when we know the nexus will fall flat on its back in the end.

Also - does it have to be an "appeal"? A process by which the target pleads in earnest for the action against him to be cancelled?

It's the same when you appeal to the council, how often is an informal one allowed ? This is about costing ppcs money, they will either have to allow appeals so it drops permanently, or if as we will be advising to take it to popla where it costs them £32 and binding on them but not you. How many do you think they will take there ? This will break the backs of many scammers