A PPC specific thread and invite them to make their case?

bargepole

They covered this on the JV show about 3 or 4 years ago, on one of Martin's Friday phone-ins. The overwhelming advice and response from listeners was to ignore the tickets, although Perky managed to get on and spout his usual bow locks.

nickcc

Believe that Martins on TV tonight talking about PPC's.

edward123

BASFORDLAD wrote: »

Hardly

You spot the trottered one miles off

bargepole wrote: »

They covered this on the JV show about 3 or 4 years ago, on one of Martin's Friday phone-ins. The overwhelming advice and response from listeners was to ignore the tickets, although Perky managed to get on and spout his usual bow locks.

This Perky get about a bit! But did Martin Lewis do a good job?

edward123

TrickyWicky wrote: »

edward you're still missing the point and I'm getting fed up of you not listening.

Perhaps its you who hears but do not listen?

Clamping wasn't a huge revenue earner for the government. They didn't get 2 per car for a DVLA address lookup as the customer always had a huge sign put on the car saying "Do not move this vehicle it has been clamped - call this number" etc.

But it was for the PPC clampers. But not any more.

Secondly people hated clampers and their extortionate fees.

And what if "people" hated the fake PCN's of the PPC scammers?

It was seen as a grubby industry.

So make the PPC look grubby then?

If you sued a clamper and won the case they would never pay you back your money and the bailiffs would rarely have any luck as the clampers only have the tools of their trade and nothing else. That is what is meant by assets. They have no assets that can be seized as bailiffs can not take the tools of your trade. If they only have a truck and a collection of wheel clamps the bailiffs won't be getting anything.

This does nothing whatsoever to refute my suggestion as it has nothing to do with my suggestion! So why include it? To cloud things?

Turning to PPC PCNs puts a different spin on things. Not only does it make the industry look relatively 'genuine' (like hell it is) it also earns the government £2 everytime an ex clamper does a DVLA lookup. Then there is the fact that they'll have to have an office to work from.. meaning they'll be careful about court cases in case the bailiff takes the coffee machine..

Once again as this has nothing whatsoever to do with my suggestion it refutes nothing about my suggestion!

PCNs are going to become legitimate. I said this when the clamping ban was first announced two years ago. Everyone jumped up and down celebrating and I was telling people it would mean everything goes down the PCN / paperwork route instead (though not on this forum - I wasn't here then). No-one believed me then and look what happened on the 1st of October - the government tried to give the PPCs RK responsibility.

This does not mean that the PCN by the PPCs are legit or will become legit nor does what has happened means they cant be seen for what they are and a demise of sorts can happen. Have faith my son. Faith moves mountians

You still seem to think you have some sort of master plan that is smarter than the industry.

Nothing I have suggested remotely resembles what you describe it as so I wonder if you are the one not really listening. Your sarcastic remark above seems to show you aren't!

I've made my points to you yesterday and you thanked me for it (yeah I noticed that pretty quickly).

Listen....thanking someone for replying does not necessarily equate to agreeing with that reply. Get it?

It's taken you over 12 hours to come back and try to argue it out again

I have a life. Do you?

.... yet I can respond to you the moment I read your points.

Wow...are we all meant to be impressed? Perhaps its the case you spend too much time on here? However, speed does not equate to quality does it? What point then do you make?

If I can do that how do you think the parking industry operates?

Terribly when compared to other industries.

I stand by my original statement, clamping was outlawed in favour of PPCs and their PCNs. It doesn't matter how much you think about it and try to argue it to justify it to yourself, the industry operates the way it does and you can't change that.

I have not said I could. I have said it could. See the difference? You will if you listen more and have less speed.

TrickyWicky

edward

Thanks for your latest assertions. The reason I mentioned about clampers, bailiffs etc was because I am trying to show you why the government decided to get shot of them and why they are now supporting the use of PPCs.

You seem to think that by pointing out that PPCs are grubby it will change something. Do you not realise that MPs know about this already? They don't care. They're too busy looking after themselves / their seats and the government income to worry about the little people and the scams the PPCs are running.

The fact that the government have attempted to give PPCs registered keeper liability should say it all.

You can argue it out as much as you like but my initial points remain:
1) It won't change for a long time
2) The government favours the use of PPCs
3) You won't get a PPC to come on here (unless its Perky thinking he can wind everyone up)

Sorry if you don't like those points but they are at least realistic. Arguing with me won't change any of it I'm afraid. If you want to continue pointing out your theories and how it will change the parking industry then please do and I will wish you all the luck in the world on your crusade but again, you're facing an impossible challenge.

esmerobbo

TrickyWicky wrote: »

edward

You can argue it out as much as you like but my initial points remain:
1) It won't change for a long time It already is before the last couple of months how many PPC's did you see being banned?
2) The government favours the use of PPCs Why? I dont think they favour them I just beleive they dont understand them.
3) You won't get a PPC to come on here (unless its Perky thinking he can wind everyone up) What about PPC Guy?

Sorry if you don't like those points but they are at least realistic. Arguing with me won't change any of it I'm afraid. If you want to continue pointing out your theories and how it will change the parking industry then please do and I will wish you all the luck in the world on your crusade but again, you're facing an impossible challenge.

PPC's will eventually have too be regulated, and since the banning of clamping it wont be long before the clamper's move in to ticketing and ripping people off.
The BPA suckered the government by stating they needed a way of enforcing legitimate parking charges. The problem was this remedy was always there.
They think the POFA will give them more leverage. However those that know will know nothing has changed. Lets see even after a POPLA appeal how many will fancy court.

edward123

TrickyWicky wrote: »

edward

Thanks for your latest assertions.

And thank you for your assertion about the future of the PPCs. However I made no assertions but gave possible outcomes. So please re-read me.

The reason I mentioned about clampers, bailiffs etc was because I am trying to show you why the government decided to get shot of them and why they are now supporting the use of PPCs.

And yet other reasons and 'forces' can come into being or greater which could mean the demise of the PPC. You though seem to rule it out on one sole basis which does not predict what will happen in the future but only states whats happened in the past!

You seem to think that by pointing out that PPCs are grubby it will change something.

No I didnt. I used your own argument against you though. I used it to show that it might help make something happen. The demise of the PPC or their present scam tactics.

Do you not realise that MPs know about this already? They don't care. They're too busy looking after themselves / their seats and the government income to worry about the little people and the scams the PPCs are running.

They might or even will care about it we care enough to make them too. Power to the People as Lennon once sang.

The fact that the government have attempted to give PPCs registered keeper liability should say it all.

Ever heard of a new government? Or a new cabinet minister? Or a growing number of MP's who start to care. To care 'enough'?

You can argue it out as much as you like but my initial points remain:
1) It won't change for a long time
2) The government favours the use of PPCs
3) You won't get a PPC to come on here (unless its Perky thinking he can wind everyone up)

You might be right. Then again your prophecy might be a false one. Most prophetic utterances are. It might be that:
1) It might change in a few years time
2) The Government might turn on the PPCs
3) A PPC might be persauded to come onto here.

If three fails to then re-read what I stated about that and what can be 'done' with this. It all helps. The PPC is on a lose lose situation whether they come onto here or not.

Sorry if you don't like those points but they are at least realistic.

Its not a question about liking or not liking. And you can label them "realistic" till you are blue in the face. But what is real is what will happen and neither you or I knows that. But this is why you should not nor can not rule out the demise of the PPC industry.

Arguing with me won't change any of it I'm afraid.

Who said arguing would?

If you want to continue pointing out your theories and how it will change the parking industry then please do

Thank you.

and I will wish you all the luck in the world on your crusade but again, you're facing an impossible challenge.

Most things are possible. Like the demise of the PPC world. But it won't have any thing to do with luck. More like regulation.
I agree with the following thread, post No.3 and the implications of it>
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4260497