The Petas appeal service by a PPC

Ivor_Pecheque

In our case, the Judge obviously had a grip on parking and contract law. He seemed to be interested in my opinion on gpeol.

I said that a generous estimate was £16, a conservative estimate was £3.50, a realistic estimate was £9.

LPC lawyer looked a bit blank !

No offence meant Stroma, I won my case on the back of Mr Pranksters advice :-)

Orford

Umkomaas wrote: »

My other concern would be just how up to speed is this outfit with the stuff we deal with daily,

Well allegedly it's been 7 months in the making, beta testing etc, yet the website is very amateurish, with half the pages returning 404 errors

Umkomaas

Orford wrote: »

Well allegedly it's been 7 months in the making, beta testing etc, yet the website is very amateurish, with half the pages returning 404 errors

And I'm looking forward to any hilarious spelling errors, so prevalent on PPC websites.

Would anyone who can spell trust anyone who can't with an appeal on their behalf?

On second thoughts maybe that's a good strategy, because if they don't fully understand the territory, nor can express it adequately, they might be losing more cases than they win. So for every £16 they garner, they might be stumping up £100. Nett result 84 smackers down the pan. Now that's what I call a Genuine Loss (no Pre-Estimate required)

Orford

Umkomaas wrote: »

So for every £16 they garner, they might be stumping up £100.

AIUI KIFL is charging £16, PETAS are only charging £10

Stroma

Ivor_Pecheque wrote: »

No offence meant Stroma, I won my case on the back of Mr Pranksters advice :-)

And how is that relevant here?

Sorry I am not questioning what prankster has done with his ebooks and his site, and in general his advice on the parking industry. But he has put out a pretty bold statement in regards to this.

And I wonder how he can come to the conclusion that multiple appeal processes and services can be a good thing.

spacey2012

My ideals for parking scammers differ slightly.
In my ideal world they all get arrested by the police for the common law offence of misrepresentation of authority and sent to prison.

As this is exactly what they do every day, in fact the offence was almost written around the ppc model.

I feel they only got as far as they have in getting away with it because some government cronies has eyes on a slice of the scam.

Ivor_Pecheque

I'm sure he has an eye on the big picture.

Umkomaas

Orford wrote: »

AIUI KIFL is charging £16, PETAS are only charging £10

OK, let me change that then.

So for every £10 they garner, they might be stumping up £100. Nett result 90 smackers down the pan. Now that's what I call a Genuine Loss (no Pre-Estimate required)

How's that?

Orford

Perfect!!

It does of course rely on a PPC keeping it's promise to cough up if an appeal fails for whatever reason.

Stroma

Ivor_Pecheque wrote: »

I'm sure he has an eye on the big picture.

The bigger picture is these companies are gone in the format they are just now. This picture is stop the DVLA from selling our data to private companies for the profit of these companies, and for them to earn money. They allowed this despicable industry to flourish.