Napier parking shysters ticket after 12 seconds

halibut2209

If you had studied English, then surely you would know the definitions of "fraud" and "theft"

The_Deep

halibut2209 wrote: »

If you had studied English, then surely you would know the definitions of "fraud" and "theft"

Of course. In my student days I also knew rather a lot about fish imagery in Shakespeare's plays, but I am struggling to recall any mention of your goodself.

Stroma

The_Deep wrote: »

I would say that describes Napier and their owner! And if it's libel then he can ask mse to remove it, and try to sue me

I would disagree with you. Having now read the PPP thread I am more inclined to believe Mr Savary's version of the incident.

I'm sorry then you are more gullible than you look then, I for one don't believe a word he says, my opinion is that he is lying through his teeth!

The_Deep

I'm sorry then you are more gullible than you look then, I for one don't believe a word he says, my opinion is that he is lying through his teeth!

Than I look? Have you seen me?

I spent three and a half years as a visa officer in Lagos. I have been lied to by Judges, priests, nuns, bank managers, senior policemen, headmasters, diplomats, et al. I may be lots of things, but gullible I am not.

I would be prepared to accept Mr. de Savary's word over the anonymous peppipoo bilker any day.

halibut2209

The_Deep wrote: »

Of course. In my student days I also knew rather a lot about fish imagery in Shakespeare's plays, but I am struggling to recall any mention of your goodself.

Ahh, instead of refuting the point, attack the person who made it.

Stroma

The_Deep wrote: »

I would be prepared to accept Mr. de Savary's word over the anonymous peppipoo bilker any day.

Well perhaps you should go and work for him, you'll fit in just nicely, just hide in the bushes on the right and pounce after 12 seconds on motorists! And I tend to believe the version by the poster on pepipoo over proven liars with pretty words running a scam!

Coupon-mad

The_Deep wrote: »

I would be prepared to accept Mr. de Savary's word over the anonymous peppipoo bilker any day.

Because he's plausible, can 'talk the talk' was presumably privately educated at Charterhouse or somewhere equally extravagant and decided to reply to the Parking Prankster to put his side of the story? He wins because he paints the picture in a more believable way? Hhhhrrrumphhh!

De Savary had a 'business arrangement' with Capital2Coast clampers, look at HO87's summary here in post #22:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=60758&st=20

...and that poster was sued and lost, for the sake of buying a ticket but stopping to chat to another motorist before putting it on his windscreen.

James de Savary's name comes up in connection with notorious clamping extortion at 'Jengers Mead' in Billingshurst (not a million miles from where I work, in fact). This scam was exposed by an MP in the build-up to the POFA 2012:

http://www.francismaude.com/francis-submission-home-office-consultation-wheel-clamping

So was it fair and justified? Not according to the MP for that constuency ''Billingshurst is a quiet and community-spirited Sussex village and there has not been an issue of people abusing the parking facilities at Jengers Mead in the past. ''

Hmmm so there was NO parking problem before, quelle surprise. It was a business opportunity then, seized just like the cars were seized, to make money. Just like Napier car parks apparently being all warm and friendly and above board, offer a nice enticing 'low' 40p P&D fee to start with, just low enough that people might need to get change...ooops too late, immediate ticket from the cheeky chappie (a good egg, we are told, and maybe he is) employed by Napier.

The Deep, you haven't seen some of the intimidating rubbish some people have received in the past. You haven't been on the receiving end of one of their court claims (where plausibility in front of the Judge and having a good education is likely to be a distinct advantage against Joe Public, the rogue, who committed the heinous crime of taking too long to buy a 40p ticket).

This sort of person below - a typical victim of the clamping regime that existed for 2 or 3 years at Jengers Mead - would have stood no chance against a 'plausible suit' if she had had the nous to attempt to sue them for a refund:

http://www.canyoutrustthem.com/index.php?go=details&id=2734&adv=&company_type=&company_name=

hi i parked my vehicle in jengers mead car park billinghusrt west sussex i got my ticket at around 14.15 i got my 13mth old daughter out of the car by this time i had put the ticket on the dash board has it had no sticky back to stick it to the window i shut the door and didn't notice that the ticket had blew over face down it wasn't until i got back to the car at 14.43 that i had been clamped and then i noticed the ticket had blown over i phoned the company straight away and told them this isn't funny i have a ticket i did'nt realise the ticket was face down he said to me that there was nothing he could do as the ticket was not displayed and that i had to play it there and then. i was crying two old ladys spoke to the blokes in the van on my behalf has i was so distraught and there told the ladys that they would ring the office to c if he could reduce the price but the office man said no i had to pay it now. which i did pay but my complaint is i had a vauled ticket and didn't realise it had blown over please help me i would like my money back...


The person in that example doesn't use good English but I know who I would rather had kept the money in their pocket, given the choice of the motorist or the clampers.

The_Deep

If Mr de Savary upsets you so much you have a simple remedy, avoid contact with his companies.

I am inclined to take many of these sob stories with a pinch of salt, as I have said, I have heard them all before.

Do you have a problem with people who have made the best of the hand with which they were dealt CM? There is nothing extravagant about Charterhouse.

With regard to the two plaintiffs Mr de Savary beat in court, had both bothered to learn the rules of the game, they might have had a better result. You reap what you sow.

Herzlos

The facts still remain; they placed a ticked on someones car after 12 seconds over a 40p parking offence and are seeking significantly more than their costs in damages.

There's also the fact that the 40p likely don't cover the costs of the staff here, so they are likely relying on charging the breachers in order to make their money.

Do you want to refute either of those points? Or are they not written eloquently enough for you?

esmerobbo

Well it seems 12 seconds is not a record try 9!

http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/news/local/car-park-dispute-forces-billingshurst-man-s-ban-1-6140519