Letter before claim

Kind_Of_Irritated

Redx, I assume nothing. And I have already said I would be including the info on Prankster's site and in the forum by the others you mention. And by Coupon-mad, btw.

Who mentioned flowcharts? I seldom understand them either!

Redx wrote: »

if you go to court , point out what you like , but dont assume a judge will agree with you

frankly , I would say that people like bargepole , prankster and the others who help the british public have probably tried all kinds of arguments and I doubt that someone with your newbie knowledge will come up with an angle nobody has thought of

as for flowcharts , and templates , its been tried numerous times , so again you are not brining up something that has not been tried , but its like trying to make a chart of sandbanks that keep shifting when the tide comes in

the laws are complicated and the cases even more so, there is no easy answer, but if you had read parking pranksters blogs from this year on residential parking you would know this , especially as he tried to clarify it just a few days ago

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/residential-parking.html

I doubt that the charity you linked to is any authority on this either , especially as they are quoting the BPA CoP from 12 months ago and your PPC is an IPC member

MSE tried flowcharts and guides, read them , they are c**p !!

and bargepole told you in post #11 that if you dont like it you could write your own guides

Kind_Of_Irritated

I wasn't arguing, Redx. Just getting frustrated over so much to learn, devour, select and use where applicable. And all to due to these bar steward cowboys! I rate you all highly on here.

Have I been on here for 12 weeks? God, that's where my life's gone. To be blunt it feels more like 12 years some of the time.

Now, how much can we claim in compensation for that time? £95? The Yanks know to do it. :mad:

Redx

and like many you will probably disappear again once this is over , but those who have stuck around for several years or more are the ones advising you and they learn on a daily basis too , hence why templates go "out of date" so quickly

if it was simple there wouldnt be a forum as there would be no need for one

as for charging , you need to read this recent account on the same prankster blogsite (read all of them and you will learn even more like we do)

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/ukpc-hit-for-352-for-discontinuing.html

and read the DAVEY versus UKPC and some of the others like the JOPSON case, which has cost these fools thousands

and ICO breaches where £750 could be claimed due to DPA failures

Kind_Of_Irritated

Once more something is stopping me posting my draft in here. I've tried twice. It's in Notepad at this stage, so I assumed that would be free of intrusive characters. I have posted it at Pepipoo anyway, if anyone cares to have a peep. This is the first of two I've put together. I don't expect the other one will take here on MSE either, but we'll see.

It's here - http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=108631&st=120&gopid=1234621&#entry1234621 - I'm *Fed Up With Scam Artists*.

Kind_Of_Irritated

Yes, thanks beamerguy. It's Link. I'd have thought that should be mentioned in my defence. Doesn't seem to be right that they don't even update their passes to reflect current thinking, even where it isn't yet law.

Another thing, beamerguy... I am referring to the claimant (Link) in the draft I have uploaded to Pepipoo (MSE won't take it atm). Should I mention Gladstones too (by name) since they are the representatives of the other lot of cowboys and they will be the ones facing me in a court situation?

Thanks for your advice on this. I DO appreciate it.

beamerguy wrote: »

Right ... I think you said this was the infamous Link ??

Whilst clamping is an illegal practice, if this still appears on permits, I would suggest that such threats are menacing and against the law.

As Gladstones don't seem to ever check the legalities of their silly claims, it would be prudent to tell Gladstones that this fact will be introduced in any claim. It would be a new wheeze for the judges who must apply the law. That is assuming they actually understand all about POFA 2012 .... MANY JUDGES DON'T

beamerguy

Kind_Of_Irritated wrote: »

I wasn't arguing, Redx. Just getting frustrated over so much to learn, devour, select and use where applicable. And all to due to these bar steward cowboys! I rate you all highly on here.

Have I been on here for 12 weeks? God, that's where my life's gone. To be blunt it feels more like 12 years some of the time.

Now, how much can we claim in compensation for that time? £95? The Yanks know to do it. :mad:

Hey, 12 weeks is nothing, I have been on MSE since 2009 firstly with the scams of the banks. The banks are still at it

Stick with it, attack these scammers and their dirty solicitors to whom the SRA allow.

Whilst this is going on, stay off the booze

beamerguy

Kind_Of_Irritated wrote: »

Yes, thanks beamerguy. It's Link. I'd have thought that should be mentioned in my defence. Doesn't seem to be right that they don't even update their passes to reflect current thinking, even where it isn't yet law.

Another thing, beamerguy... I am referring to the claimant (Link) in the draft I have uploaded to Pepipoo (MSE won't take it atm). Should I mention Gladstones too (by name) since they are the representatives of the other lot of cowboys and they will be the ones facing me in a court situation?

Thanks for your advice on this. I DO appreciate it.

No problem in mentioning Gladstones, everyone on MSE and pepippo knows they are a sham, suspect the courts already know that Gladstones and their stupid IPC/IAS are a sham anyway.

The DCLG are clueless I still wonder what's in it for the infamous Marcus Jones MP ? Who was the complete idiot who gave Gladstones/IPC ATA Status.
The idiot concerned is probably still running around in the House of Commons thinking about the next scam they will allow.

Theresa May needs to weed out these people, she has plenty of time, she has passed brexit on to others

Redx

Kind_Of_Irritated wrote: »

Yes, thanks beamerguy. It's Link. I'd have thought that should be mentioned in my defence. Doesn't seem to be right that they don't even update their passes to reflect current thinking, even where it isn't yet law.

LINK and there fool of a boss come up regularly on here, pepipoo and more importantly on pranksters blogs where they lose in court (gladstoned) regularly

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/link-parking-lose-in-wrexham-flat-owner_2.html

there are others you should read too , especially the tenancy and parking issues

Kind_Of_Irritated

:rotfl:Luckily, beamerguy, I hardly drink.

My defence has to be with the court by 4pm tomorrow, btw. Are you also on Pepipoo? MSE is not taking the pasting in of my draft.

beamerguy

Kind_Of_Irritated wrote: »

:rotfl:Luckily, beamerguy, I hardly drink.

My defence has to be with the court by 4pm tomorrow, btw. Are you also on Pepipoo? MSE is not taking the pasting in of my draft.

No, I am not on pepippo but why not direct MSE users to your pepipoo thread