Ukcps court claim

bazster

The_Deep wrote: »

Is it too much for you to take it Mr B? Would you prefer it if I dumbed down my posts?

Could they get any dumber?

bod1467

Hot_Bring

The_Deep wrote: »

No advice has been tendered.

Yes there was :

"I will maintain until I am blue in the face. No PPC in their right mind would ever take a person to court if that person had leasehold rights to park IN THEIR OWN SPACE, and their paper can therefore be ignore with impunity."

The_Deep

No, Baster it is not. It is part of that which I will maintain until I am blue in the face.

I know that some of you disagree with my stance of facing down PPCs who ticket people in their own spaces, but I will continue to do so. I think that encouraging landlords/tenants to do Popla is wrong, they should be going after their landlord and managing agents, not engaging with scammers.

Also, they are in a totally different category from people who dodge P&D machines, or those who abuse parking for the disabled, and, to a lesser extent, those who overstay.

Redx

The_Deep wrote: »

No, Baster it is not. It is part of that which I will maintain until I am blue in the face.

I know that some of you disagree with my stance of facing down PPCs who ticket people in their own spaces, but I will continue to do so. I think that encouraging landlords/tenants to do Popla is wrong, they should be going after their landlord and managing agents, not engaging with scammers.

Also, they are in a totally different category from people who dodge P&D machines, or those who abuse parking for the disabled, and, to a lesser extent, those who overstay.

the problem here is that you are expecting each and every one of these members to do it themselves, even with no training, its also not your choice , its theirs

now if you setup a help site (like I have mentioned in the past and you complained about me for doing so) - something like parkingticketappeals site , and take on the job for these people , including court where necessary, and anywhere in england or wales (not limited to your own area and not limited to when you arent in spain) - then fine , not a problem !!!

anyone can be a back seat driver , but as you are so passionate about this and getting blue in the face, set up a proper system that these people can all use and fight it on their behalf !!

dont be the gooseberry at the party sniping from the sidelines but never "flying the plane" , do something positive about these issues and actually put yourself out for these tenants etc

personally , I dont have a problem with you getting blue in the face over landlord and tenants rights, but to keep sniping from the sidelines but never actually helping them to deal with the issue smacks of mr know it all like Harry Enfield once portrayed on tv "MR. you dont want to do it like that, do it like this" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkZdTHmX0TQ and his other character Stan Herbert http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8Kum8OUTuk

also, stop asking questions in other peoples threads, start your own if you wish to ask questions , which is forum netiquette

so stop being a retired un-civil servant and either do something or dumb down the posts

Hot_Bring

The_Deep wrote: »

No, Baster it is not. It is part of that which I will maintain until I am blue in the face.

I know that some of you disagree with my stance of facing down PPCs who ticket people in their own spaces, but I will continue to do so. I think that encouraging landlords/tenants to do Popla is wrong, they should be going after their landlord and managing agents, not engaging with scammers.

Also, they are in a totally different category from people who dodge P&D machines, or those who abuse parking for the disabled, and, to a lesser extent, those who overstay.

But it isn't YOU facing down PPCs - you are encouraging other people to take the risks on your behalf. You imply that the court procedure is easy and flippantly suggest no PPC would ever go to court on the back of a residents permit issue - utterly wrong.

I've asked before but yet again - please highlight the risks of your advice if you must post it rather than allowing other people take the risks without realising they exist.

bargepole

The_Deep wrote: »

No advice has been tendered. I am aware that there is a fee, I am also aware that I would need to prove my losses, and you have not answered my question. ..

To answer your original question, if you make a counterclaim, that is normally heard at the same hearing as the original claim.


If the claimant decides to drop the original claim, the counterclaim will still be heard as long as the defendant pays the hearing fee. The claimant then has the choice of going to court to defend the counterclaim, or getting a default judgment against them if they don't turn up.


I still wouldn't advise this for most parking tickets though, it will be very difficult to evidence any loss if they drop the claim.

The_Deep

the problem here is that you are expecting each and every one of these members to do it themselves, even with no training, its also not your choice , its theirs

Tenants and landlords have rights and obligations which P&D bilkers and blue badge abusers does not have. Landlords can be sued by their tenants if they fail to accord their tenants "quiet enjoyment". Is encouraging a tenant to appeal to a ppc, then submit a document the length of a speech by Fidel Casro quiet enjoyment? I think not.

This cancer of predatory PPCs should be excised, a Popla win is merely a sticking plaster. Poorly educated tenants should be encouraged to complain their landlords, not write appeals based on laws which many of them do not understand. Landlords, who are expected to know the law, should be encouraged to use it, not faff around with Popla.

Some of you suggest I involve myself more. I am at present trying to have a Charitable Housing Association dismiss UKPC. So far no joy and I am about to involve the Ombudsman and charity commissions. I think that that is sufficient for a seventy-four year old in poor health, don't you?

Redx

The_Deep wrote: »

the problem here is that you are expecting each and every one of these members to do it themselves, even with no training, its also not your choice , its theirs

Tenants and landlords have rights and obligations which a P&D bilker does not have. Landlords can be sued by their tenants if they fail to accord their tenants "quiet enjoyment". Is encouraging a tenant to appeal to a ppc, then submit a document the length of a speech by Fidel Casro quiet enjoyment? I think not.

The cancer of predatory PPCs should be excised, a Popla win is merely a sticking plaster.

Some of you suggest I involve myself more. I am at present trying to have a Charitable Housing Association dismiss UKPC. So far no joy and I am about to involve the Ombudsman and charity commissions. I think that that is sufficient for a seventy-four year old in poor heakth, don't you?

not when you are bringing it to this table - no

as jesus once pointed out correctly , remove the plank from your own eye before dealing with the splinter in somebody else`s" (or words to that effect)

http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-7-5/

The_Deep

as jesus once pointed out correctly , remove the plank from your own eye before dealing with the splinter in somebody else`s" t effect)

It was Matthew, (as clearly stated in your quote). But never mind, as long as you help the overstayers. the blue badge bludgers, and the P&D dodgers to get off scot free when they abuse the property rights of others, accuracy is of little importance.

Just carry on slagging off a landlord trying to educate other landlords and their tenants in their statutory rights. To hell with the principle, lets go for another win at POPLA.