Got a ticket on windscreen

andygo

The flow chart link suggested in post #2 doesn't work. I guess I just need to send a letter to Nappies. Is it better to do it within 14 days or wait for a few more days?

By the way, do they have to display the full T&C's or can they get away with abridged ones, which clearly don't tell the full story to the prospective parker.

spacey2012

The crap about "authorised person, it is an offence to remove" All LIES.
Just a lie to make people confuse the fake parking ticket with a council one.

Works as well 60% fall straight for it and more than once.

bod1467

This is the walkthrough as linked from the NEWBIES thread.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=63678135&postcount=3

andygo

Just re read the notice, got up to 56 days to write to Nappies, so no mad rush just at the mo. Back to doing the VAT return for month end.

Now they DO get tempremental if I forget to send them money!

ColliesCarer

Hi Andy,

Here's the link to the flow chart again which hopefully works this time

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4922055

As they assert the alleged contract is formed with the driver at the time of parking I would imagine they must display full T&C's

Stroma

andygo wrote: »

Just re read the notice, got up to 56 days to write to Nappies, so no mad rush just at the mo. Back to doing the VAT return for month end.

Now they DO get tempremental if I forget to send them money!

No you haven't, they must get registered keeper details between days 29-56 after ticketing as this is a windscreen ticket, then you have 28 days to appeal after you get the notice to keeper. However be warned that this company uses underhanded methods (don't you Napier?) in doing this.

They go straight to debt collector letters and bypass sending NtKs out to people, when people complain they say it's been sent, and not to late to appeal, so you are then left fighting to get a popla code. Plus Napier are one of the few that do issue claims.

The reason I'm telling you is that so you are under no illusions about this company, and you are in possession of all of the facts.

Stroma

Actually I'm thinking of a different company , Devere ! Sorry just getting my scammers mixed up, so you can see what I'm talking about though, here is a foi request to the ministry of justice last year

Direct link
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/179544/response/444525/attach/3/A%20FINAL%20REPLY%20TO%20LEWIS%2085865.doc

andygo

They had the same T&C's at the initial point of entry as the spot where the vehicle was parked. The War and Peace version was nowhere to be seen.

That being the case, surely they have not complied...

ColliesCarer

I'm not familiar with the nappy guys or that location, however, I think it would probably fall under an appeal point connected with - "unclear non-compliant signage consequently no contract with driver was formed"

If so it will be the failed to establish a contract aspect that is more important than any non-compliance with BPA CoP

But would wait for input from those more familiar with the vagaries of this ppc,