Should you appeal alone? (prev. Parking Cowboys are cowboys too it turns out...)

Quentin

enfield_freddy wrote: »

so a link to an alternate site for help was given , just like pepipoo and cag , if the site had an advert for gold at 6 shillings a ton , and it was a con , could MSE be held responsible?

The OP misunderstood, the relationship between Cowboys website and the appeals service.


Easy mistake to make as Cowboys hosts the appeals service's online contact forms!


As has been pointed out, the Cowboys website is the one that is recommended in the newbies thread!

4consumerrights

Whilst posters are keen to sling accusations regarding any liability left, right and centre: I would appreciate the OP emailing directly the information into the company as per the request....

although I believe I may have traced him already via information in the private message and done a search of our systems, it would appear that the POPLA code had already expired before he applied and paid for the service and an email to him bounced back for some reason

CENSTE

At no point have I ever looked to hold any MSE forum to account. My issue which I thought was clear was".. I paid for a service to support me which I found through clicking links via this forum.."

As Quentin has eloquently pointed out there is no single link but a sequence which started on here, took me through Parking Cowboys and ended up at PPE. My perception was that the latter two were connected when in retrospect I can see that they were not but that was my perception at the time which I cannot now change.

I did openly acknowledge my misnomer on my response earlier today and if I can, I will happily amend the original post to reflect this but given what I believe is a genuine case of mistaken connection, for which I am sure I am not nor will be the first, my preference would be a clear caveat stating my mistake.

What is interesting is how individuals seem very emotionally attached to a forum and are quick to both defend an issue which did not exist or members which openly use, admittedly weak, passive-aggressive insults rather than offer support

• “Just woke up, their everywhere! oh sorry just been watching the walking dead to much!”
• “You cannot have read the forum very well as every post tells you that you do not need to pay these parking scammers.”
• “You just cannot help some people”
• “You could have got free advice from this forum had you bothered to read it (you obviously haven't as you paid a scummy debt collector), and to use your first post to berate this website is frankly laughable!
• “He/she probably buys stuff from Brighthouse”

4consumerrights - I will pick up your PM shortly and thanks for bearing with me

Guys_Dad

CENSTE wrote: »

• “Just woke up, their everywhere! oh sorry just been watching the walking dead to much!”
• “You cannot have read the forum very well as every post tells you that you do not need to pay these parking scammers.”
• “You just cannot help some people”
• “You could have got free advice from this forum had you bothered to read it (you obviously haven't as you paid a scummy debt collector), and to use your first post to berate this website is frankly laughable!
• “He/she probably buys stuff from Brighthouse”

4consumerrights - I will pick up your PM shortly and thanks for bearing with me

These quotes are certainly OTT. However, your initial post flamed 2 organisations - MSE and Parking Cowboys - that were not responsible for the appeal. It is your own misreading of the web sites and failure to realise just who you were actually paying the £18 to, I suggest.

The fact that one site recommends another (Cowboys and the appeal service)and you take up the offer with the latter means that your contract is with the 2nd site and there is no good then progressing matters with the first and then slating the first.

And when it says "Private Parking Ticket Appeals
This is a sponsored page for Private Parking Appeals Ltd. This service is not run by ParkingCowboys.co.uk." then you should have read that more closely.

CENSTE

4consumerrights I have PM you as requested and emailed you directly with all paperwork but I get the below updated when I PM you


"4consumerrights has exceeded their stored private messages quota and cannot accept further messages until they clear some space"


I am confused on the below comment which would be great to clear up, as reading through this forum I have seen posts which state that the POPLA code expiry is not a reason to no longer appeal???


"...although I believe I may have traced him already via information in the private message and done a search of our systems, it would appear that the POPLA code had already expired before he applied and paid for the service and an email to him bounced back for some reason..."


My expectation as a consumer would be that had I missed a 'deadline' which prevented me in getting the service I paid for then I would have expected that the payment for this non-service be returned. I don't see this as an unreasonable stand point which I hope you agree?

CENSTE

Guys Dad - It was never my intention to 'flame' anyone and have openly apologised on my previous posts for any misrepresentation and clearly said I will amend my original post to reflect my mistake.


It is again interesting how the focus still seems to be on highlighting, in very big bold text, my mistake, which I have apologised for, yet the sequence of derogatory comments is very quickly glossed over. It would be great to use some of the passion back at the more 'experienced' commentators


I am now dealing directly with 4consumerrights, who I am assuming is directly connected with PPA however given your passion here I would welcome your advice and will repoint you to one of my previous posts the following question


" I have one final question and please only respond if you have anything of value to offer and I mean this with most respect but is it now possible for me to pursue this PCN now I have paid it or have I closed that door now?"

Guys_Dad

As you are now corresponding directly with 4CR - and I do agree that if you were the person with an expired POPLA code you should have been refunded, but wait to see why the emails to you bounced - and you have admitted that your initial post was incorrect, smeared two different innocent organisations, I suggest the proper thing to do is to delete the thread in order that MSE and Parking Cowboys are no longer maligned by anyone skimming the posts .

I consider that this recommendation comes under the definition of being of value to offer.

CENSTE

Guys Dad - I have amended my original post to clearly call out that it was not Parking Cowboys but Private Parking Appeals who I had my issue with however this thread has highlighted some value points which merit the thread remaining such as but not limited to:

1. It is important that first posters use this thread as an example of the pitfalls which I have come across
2. Remain as an example how first posters will come under rapid, sustained and personal attack if 'experienced' posters believe that the post is deemed "unacceptable"
3. I am still awaiting a response from the forums experienced posters about whether once a fine has been paid can it still be pursued. To delete this thread will deny future skimmers of a valuable response

Finally I do not believe I have "smeared" MSE but please point out where I have and will amend if I feel appropriate.


I would like to reach out to any official moderators to help me understand if I have done anything incorrect or if my actions, comments or responses are against forum rules?

Guys_Dad

The OP is now much fairer, thank you.

Just 2 points.

1. The Thread heading is still misleading and maligning.

2. "But disappointed most of all in myself for falling for what seems to be a scam on of all places a Martin Lewis trusted website. " Again, where on the MSE site is this alleged scam? And I would await the result of your email discussions with 4CR before claiming a scam.

I hope that the eventual accurate story will emerge after these private discussions.

CENSTE

Guys Dad : I have amended this posting to avoid perceived misappropriation and hopefully add clarity of fact

On this i would like to make clear that the process as i have stated in my original post is factual which i am sure 4CR will agree, given the private correspondence between us, therefore there is no ambiguity around "...eventual accurate story" as far as i am concerned and the implications it openly makes.

I will keep repeating the same question however in that can / should i pursue the appeal and subsequent reembursment from DPR or am will I simply go down the rabbit hole?