Unfair NPS PCN now £100

Ralph-y

blowfelt ......

I am going to politely ask you to stop posting on this thread .....

the OP need real help and you are diverting this ...

good luck and I wish you well

Ralph:cool:

System

pappa_golf wrote: »

Shirley , you must be thinking of Cestui Que Vie Act 1666




often quoted in a county court

Sorry,just a typing error.

So are you aware of this Act?

Quentin

beamerguy wrote: »

m1nt ... the only one to take notice of is coupon-mad

Ignore this OP.


There is only one poster (possibly 2 now we've seen this unnecessary slur) not to bother with in this thread.

dazster

Mockery is the only thing you can do with these FMOTL pillocks. They are impervious to reason (otherwise they wouldn't believe all that tripe in the first place).

Oh, and by the way, who put you in charge of this place?

beamerguy

dazster wrote: »

Mockery is the only thing you can do with these FMOTL pillocks. They are impervious to reason (otherwise they wouldn't believe all that tripe in the first place).

Maybe but doing so, you lay yourself open to admin. There is a report button you can use

Admin is in charge but its up to you now

System

Ralph-y wrote: »

blowfelt ......

I am going to politely ask you to stop posting on this thread .....

the OP need real help and you are diverting this ...

good luck and I wish you well

Ralph:cool:

I am doing nothing wrong and i haven't been abusive to anyone.I have as much right as anyone else on this forum to try and help the OP.

Ever since i mentioned the Qestui Que Vie Act 1666,do you now want to stop me posting on here.You haven't got a good enough reason to stop me posting on here bc i haven't threatend or been abusive to anyone.The real reason is,the Qestui Que Vie Act 1666 which is the Dogs B*****s of what really happens in the courts.

No doubt,my posts about Qestui Que Vie Act 1666, will get deleted.So please educate yourselves on the above Act and pass it on to friends and family before it get deteted.

Fruitcake

m1nt wrote: »

Ok so is this what she has to send?

Dear {name of IPC member, only IPC members for this version!!!}

Re PCN number:

I am not ignoring your charge for a purported parking infraction. As this is purely a charge (not a statutory penalty) issued under a purported contract and the driver has not been identified, I require the following information so that I can make an informed decision:

1. Who is the party that contracted with your company for the provision of their services? I require their contact details.
2. What is the full legal identity of the landowner?
3. As you are not the landowner please provide a contemporaneous and unredacted copy of your contract with the landholder that demonstrate that you have their authority to both issue parking charges and litigate in your own name.
4. Is your charge based on damages for breach of contract? Answer yes or no.
5. If the charge is based on damages for breach of contract please provide your justification of this sum.
6. Is your charge based on a contractually agreed sum for the provision of parking? Answer yes or no.
7. If the charge is based on a contractually agreed sum for the provision of parking please provide a valid VAT invoice for this 'service'.
8. Please provide a copy of the signs that purportedly were on site which you contend formed a contract with the driver on that occasion.

If you believe you have a cause of action, send a Letter before Claim within the next 21 days and I will take advice and will respond.

In my opinion, there is a better alternative than legal proceedings, namely that we utilise the services of a completely independent ADR service suited to parking charges. This does not include the IAS appeal service - which lacks any transparency and possibly any independence from the IPC - unlike the alternative offered by the British Parking Association, POPLA, which is transparent and has been shown to be independent.

Do not send debt collector letters and do not add any costs or surcharges. I will not respond to those, so to involve another firm would be a failure to mitigate your alleged loss. In any case, the addition of any debt collector 'costs' is not my liability because the POFA 2012 can only potentially hold a registered keeper liable if certain provisions have been met and even then, the 'amount of the parking charge' is the only amount pursuable.

Yours faithfully,

In my opinion, yes.


You have the choice whether or not to take the advice of posters who regularly frequent and contribute on this board. A little research will reveal who they are and how successful they have been in helping others.

Coupon-mad

Yes it will do the job, the job simply being to show the keeper is not a victim and is getting assitance on a forum. The rejection letter will still follow, then a load of debt collector letters, there's no way to avoid that unless the landowner will cancel.

So tell her this is merely an 'exercise' to make a point & ask some questions for evidence, then to ignore the rejection letter and any debt collector drivel.

She ignores DRP and Zenith.

YOU ignore blowfelt!

Only take seriously real court papers of course, or a Letter before Claim from a solicitor or from the PPC themselves (NOT a Debt collector threatogram version, wittering on about court and CCJs).

Please ensure the person appealing puts their full name and address on that appela and if ther is an option to submit it by email or online then do that, with a screenshpt being kept. If they have no option but to post a letter, take it to the PO counter and get a free certificate of posting (NOT RECORDED DELIVERY) and keep that as proof.

System

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Yes it will do the job, the job simply being to show the keeper is not a victim and is getting assitance on a forum. The rejection letter will still follow, then a load of debt collector letters, there's no way to avoid that unless the landowner will cancel.

So tell her this is merely an 'exercise' to make a point & ask some questions for evidence, then to ignore the rejection letter and any debt collector drivel.

She ignores DRP and Zenith.

YOU ignore blowfelt!

Only take seriously real court papers of course, or a Letter before Claim from a solicitor or from the PPC themselves (NOT a Debt collector threatogram version, wittering on about court and CCJs).

Please ensure the person appealing puts their full name and address on that appela and if ther is an option to submit it by email or online then do that, with a screenshpt being kept. If they have no option but to post a letter, take it to the PO counter and get a free certificate of posting (NOT RECORDED DELIVERY) and keep that as proof.

You still haven't answered my questions,Do you now the difference in legal and lawful?....if you don't know you've only got to ask.

Fruitcake said,a PCN comes under Distance selling Regs (DSR),this is an Act,an Act is a contract.

Coupon-mad,have you explained to the OP that an Act only as the force of law if consented by the governed (person)...or are you say im wrong.

Fruitcake

catfunt wrote: »

On topic for this thread...
Did you mean frustration of contract? Would make more sense.

Perhaps this discussion of contract law is taking this thread off-piste or derailing it, and needs to be continued elsewhere???

Yes I did. Thanks. I have edited my post accordingly.

blowfelt wrote: »

You still haven't answered my questions,Do you now the difference in legal and lawful?....if you don't know you've only got to ask.

Fruitcake said,a PCN comes under Distance selling Regs (DSR),this is an Act,an Act is a contract.

Coupon-mad,have you explained to the OP that an Act only as the force of law if consented by the governed (person)...or are you say im wrong.

No I didn't. Please refrain from making untrue statements about me.