RAF lad gets Fine from Service Station

Welsh_Exile

PaintingsHero wrote: »

Thanks i will pass on your post to him as he was going to ignore it... but will pass it on now cheers for all you're help, although we are very confused with all the replies.

There will be some confusion until the new law beds down - unfortunately there is a lot of misleading reporting on this. My post above represents, I believe, the view shared by most of us on here who have actually read the new act.
In your brother's case there is an additional issue that's just occurred to me - will he be abroad at all in the next few months and, if so, will someone be dealing any possible post he gets as a result of the ticket?

taffy056

spike7451 wrote: »

Sorry but in this case you're wrong.

What will happen is the PPC will find out that he is a serviceman via his address if he uses a base address.
(married personnel in AMQ's may have the address as "Cpl Bod,31 Station Road,RAF Conningsby" for example & single servicemen will have their mail delivered to their squadron as they live in barracks)
The PPC will write to the Discipline Section via the Station Commander (all correspondence is addressed to him/her as courtesy)
Airman will then be summoned to the Discipline Section & ordered to pay the fine or dispute it,failure to do so may involve harsher action,such as a charge or notation on your service record.
The reason I know that is because the is what HAPPENED TO ME when a garage I sold my old car to used the car on a lunch run or something & got it ticketed for parking in a car park before they sold the car on.
I ended up getting my Squadron Leader to dispute it as I had proof to show that I was back in RAF Germany at the time the ticket was issued in Peterbourough.
Best thing the OP's brother can do is go & have a word with his Warrant Officer.He could also ask over on the RAF forum E-Goat as the would be people there who would be better advised on how he can deal with this 'in house' rather than advice on a civilian forum that mainly answers questions from civvies as by simply ignoring it could damage his career.

http://www.e-goat.co.uk/forums/forum.php

HTH.
Spike (ex RAF)

Which now would not be legal, the ppc must write to the driver himself, once that has been established its nothing to do with the armed services.

PaintingsHero

I have saved all links and your replies and emailed them over to him, he is working tonight so he can read them when he gets a chance.

He is the RK but his letters go to Mums not to the Barracks.

I will discuss this in depth tomorrow with him, thank you all again for you're replies.

How you all know this much info i never know i have saved the Glove Box Parking Guide... shall print this and give it him next time he is home.

xx

taffy056

trisontana wrote: »

But it's not a fine, it's a ppc invoice that can be ignored. He hasn't broken any law, So why should he be disciplined?

I'm sorry but it can't be ignored, stop giving incorrect advice on this as you are confusing people on here, if you don't know anything about the new rules that are in force now I would suggest you read up on it

PaintingsHero

Welsh_Exile wrote: »

There will be some confusion until the new law beds down - unfortunately there is a lot of misleading reporting on this. My post above represents, I believe, the view shared by most of us on here who have actually read the new act.
In your brother's case there is an additional issue that's just occurred to me - will he be abroad at all in the next few months and, if so, will someone be dealing any possible post he gets as a result of the ticket?

He isn't going abroad until next year... a tour we are not looking forward to being his family! hes heading to Wales this weekend with work etc... But his letters go to Mums house.

spike7451

trisontana wrote: »

But it's not a fine, it's a ppc invoice that can be ignored. He hasn't broken any law, So why should he be disciplined?

He may not have broken any civilian law but he may have broken a military law.The used to be a charge of "Bringing the service into disrepute" on the books that had a wide catch net that encompassed many transgressions.
For example,my German bank stopped sending money to my English Halifax BS account when I was in the Falklands so I ended up a hundred quid or so in arrears on my car loan,now this was before online banking,so the Halifax wrote to the station like in my other post,and I was threatened that if I didn't put in a repayment arrangement to pay off the arrears,I'd be charged with the above,even tho this was a civilian matter.The same as the OP's brother's issue is a civilian matter.Even if he didn't get charged,it could end up on his service record & would affect his future prospects in the RAF.I know bloke who have been done for drink driving off duty who have not been promoted because this is on their records.

trisontana

taffy056 wrote: »

I'm sorry but it can't be ignored, stop giving incorrect advice on this as you are confusing people on here, if you don't know anything about the new rules that are in force now I would suggest you read up on it

Why can't it be ignored? I have read the rules, all it says is that the RK can be "pursued" to name the driver. So what? He is the RK, the letters will go to him and the RAF has nothing to to with it.

Half_way

Being drunk and disorderly, or drink driving are real "crimes" with real repercusions, receiving an un enforcable speculative invoice from a parking company is something completely diferent.

If the parking charge can have an effect on his carrer, then any body with a grudge could potentialy issue a bill/charge/ or any other speculative invoice against a memeber of the armed services ( or anyone else for that matter ) in order to cause damage.

if you think about it (although ths may seem a little bit trumped up) the actions of the ppc in pursuing this matter could have security implications.

If this is a concern then another option instead of ignore would be to be pro-active in stopping the PPC from pursuing the matter.
do not at any stage state why, or state the persons carrer.
a simple complaint to the service station manager, possibly in person may set things right, if it doesnt remind the service station manager that its his/her service area they are responsable for the actions of their agents and these threats constitute harrasment.

taffy056

trisontana wrote: »

Why can't it be ignored? I have read the rules, all it says is that the RK can be "pursued" to name the driver. So what? He is the RK, the letters will go to him and the RAF has nothing to to with it.

You are missing the point here, if he ignores it all there is no chance that we can use this to get what the process is, also ignoring means not costing the ppc £32 as you can only get the code for that once you exhaust the appeal with the ppc

Quentin

trisontana wrote: »

Why can't it be ignored? I have read the rules, all it says is that the RK can be "pursued" to name the driver. So what? He is the RK, the letters will go to him and the RAF has nothing to to with it.

Saying you have now "read the rules" doesn't make you an authority, so why are you continuing to post in such an authoritative matter on this issue?

The OP (and others reading this thread for info) should ignore your "ignore, ignore and please read the other threads here" bad advice.