Premier Parking P&O Hull

salmosalaris

Big Bad Dad
Completely unnecessary and inadvisable to tell porkies .

Big_Bad_Dad

salmosalaris wrote: »

Big Bad Dad
Completely unnecessary and inadvisable to tell porkies .

I wholly agree. Please specify the "porky pie". You're probably reading the wrong thread because I did not make any citations which amounted to facts, I merely asserted my position on the pros and cons of volunteering personal information. I cited the cons, I was unable to establish any pro. Of course if I am giving misguided advice then I reiterate one thing per earlier post, I am all ears.

salmosalaris

To quote
"By that time, the matter at hand will be the alleged breach as recorded on the ticket which you maintain you did not receive."

Fine if you didn't, but earlier you advocating discarding the ticket because nobody would know you'd received it . How can you be sure of that ?

Big_Bad_Dad

Standing alone, the quote is out of context with the wider content. Supposing you overstay by two hours at a car park, and the windscreen ticket is issued 14 minutes after the display ticket expires. On the day of the race, you wouldn't be held for overstaying two hours- but 14 minutes which is all they would have proof of if using the ticket as their evidence. A motorist on the other hand has no obligation to volunteer further information on that subject.

As the Protection of Freedoms Act only kicks in from the time of Notice to Keeper, the who-did-what prior to that doesn't really come to light. A keeper will not be asked why the windscreen ticket was discarded. If he is denying the full charge, then the question on the day will simply be whether the breach caused the damages as related by the Claimant. That was all.

ZiggyStardust1

Big_Bad_Dad wrote: »

Standing alone, the quote is out of context with the wider content. Supposing you overstay by two hours at a car park, and the windscreen ticket is issued 14 minutes after the display ticket expires. On the day of the race, you wouldn't be held for overstaying two hours- but 14 minutes which is all they would have proof of if using the ticket as their evidence. A motorist on the other hand has no obligation to volunteer further information on that subject.

As the Protection of Freedoms Act only kicks in from the time of Notice to Keeper, the who-did-what prior to that doesn't really come to light. A keeper will not be asked why the windscreen ticket was discarded. If he is denying the full charge, then the question on the day will simply be whether the breach caused the damages as related by the Claimant. That was all.

Sorry, but it seems to me that the OP's original plea is being overlooked by a bit of semi-literate & obscurantist jargonspeak & juvenile point-scoring here, by Big Bad Dad, rather than a clear ABC to the OP of what to do. Right Now.

Time is of the essence, it would seem to me.

A bit of precise advice would be advised, IMHO.

Coupon-mad

As the OP has not yet posted again I assume they found all they needed from Redx's advice to copy what other posters did & also to read the NEWBIES sticky advice:

well , to start with , this thread you posted in incorrectly has the best advice about this from 2 of the main people who have had similar experiences

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/....php?t=4854037

therefore I would say do as they do, or did, or will do

so no you should not have posted in it, but its your best source of info, as is the NEWBIES sticky thread near the top of this forum too.

Big_Bad_Dad

ZiggyStardust1 wrote: »

Sorry, but it seems to me that the OP's original plea is being overlooked by a bit of semi-literate & obscurantist jargonspeak & juvenile point-scoring here, by Big Bad Dad, rather than a clear ABC to the OP of what to do. Right Now.

Time is of the essence, it would seem to me.

A bit of precise advice would be advised, IMHO.

The comment to which your above reply alludes was directed at Salmosalaris who accused me of lying and then cited the example. I was merely setting the record straight that I am not fibbing.

Regarding the OP, my original peace of advice stands, and it is advice which is universally approved across the forum by regulars and included in the stickies which is that when a windscreen ticket is issued, it may be ignored. Nobody said ignore the NtK.

Big_Bad_Dad

On top of that I see the term, "semi-literate". Perhaps you can paste my sentence which is the source of this assessment, then correct it for me in standard English.