Would this be permitted in law?

Captain_Leaky

bazster

"we know these processes inside-out, we have no need to pay someone else to win or lose (as the case may be) on our account."

Well, in comparison to you sir, I am onto a complete loser here - thanks for your invaluable assistance.

Look after yourself.

bod1467

You can lead a horse to water, but ....

Captain_Leaky

Sorry! Your irony is lost upon me.

Ryan_Bryan

Your Father/Son scenario is less likely than someone, say a PPC scammer, posting about fictitious ticket in an attempt to muddy the waters. It happens.

Guys_Dad

You are in a better position than if you had tried to tackle this without forum help.

If it was POPLA, then I believe that your £16 would have got you a win. With IAS, then as they seem to be so pro-PPC and act behind closed doors, then the chances of either you or the appeal service is much reduced.

However, you have the company's guarantee should it get to court. Unless your appeal company goes into administration, then that guarantee is like any other "insurance" you buy.

If and when a court letter is sent from Northampton court, you will be informed in more detail how the appeal company intends to process that. You could ask them now what would happen, although you should, perhaps, have found that out up front.

Finally, do have a look at the post counts from some of the previous contributors to your thread and take on board that they have relevant experience and a great record on helping.

BenefitMaster

To be fair, GD, I haven't achieved the magic 500 posts number yet, either here on or PPP, But I do have 866 thanks in 308 posts. Makes me feel warm and cuddly, especially after costing PE over £1000 today when they didn't get a Costs Order against me :-)

Umkomaas

BenefitMaster wrote: »

To be fair, GD, I haven't achieved the magic 500 posts number yet, either here on or PPP, But I do have 866 thanks in 308 posts. Makes me feel warm and cuddly, especially after costing PE over £1000 today when they didn't get a Costs Order against me :-)

Any link BM?

Captain_Leaky

I say, well done that man Benefitsmaster. I also say, thanks you to Guys Dad for his post.

Moving on - Can I ask - is it morally right that we contest every notice issued regardless? If so, on what grounds? Moral? (Legal irregularities are fine) even if the defaulter is in the wrong and is just trying to get off?

On one hand, we have the company - some act to the letter of the law as it stands, and others 'Take a chance', and play fast and loose. Similarly, we have the punters, some of whom have been illegally and morally wronged, whereas others are culpable but do not wish to pay up.

So, do we fight the principle of enforced parking charges on private land universally, and without regard? If so, why? If, for example, the letter of the law was observed to the last i & t, and the penalty was actually a 10th of what they try to charge at present, would that change people's perceptions at all?


Can I also ask - what is the threshold whereby a case is so weakly argued that the PEC (Parking Enforcement Company) wins every time?

That's the trouble with the law in this country - it is adversarial in nature, i.e. those with the deepest pockets always seem to win, simply because they can afford the best legal advice.

Before you all jump on me - just because they are in a position to afford it, doesn't necessarily mean that they buy the correct package, regardless of price.

Sorry for the ramblings, just trying to get a handle on things.

Fight_the_good_fight

From an early stage on reading through this thread I had the feeling there was an hidden agenda from the OP and looking for someone to take the bait and be drawn into an argument for their own motives or to expose/rile more seasoned posters
As it has been already said this is a free forum offering advice for those less initiated in these matters like myself where you read/ take on board the advice and do as you see fit with advice passed.

bod1467

Fight_the_good_fight wrote: »

From an early stage on reading through this thread I had the feeling there was an hidden agenda from the OP

And post #43 would seem to back up that feeling.