parking charge notice from park watch

soolin

I've moved this to the sub board.

Johno100

Hopefully none of the ignoramuses will follow the thread here.

Fruitcake

Deleted_User wrote: »

Just ignore it and deal with it should they send a CCJ claim pack. Most won't.

No you are right, only about 400 000 per year. Not many at all.

takman

Quentin wrote: »

Ask Lamilad!!

Johno100 wrote: »

There was certainly a case I remember where a parking company raised in courts posts posted on PePiPoo as evidence of an admission as to who the driver was. Unfortunately for the parking company and fortunately for the defendant, reading the whole thread it was clear that this related to a different ticket and not the one subject to the court proceedings.

I'm sure someone else will be able to provide the relevant links if you are really that interested.

Like I said there is no proof of any evidence from a forum being used in court sucesfully. The OP hasn't said they were driving and havnt given any personal details that would satisfy any court of who they are.

The standard reply to anyone who posts a question about a PCN is that they need to edit their post when they havnt even posted any incriminating evidence, this just shows how paranoid people like you and Quentin are.

Just because evidence was submitted ONCE in a forum when someone posted ALOT of details doesn't justify the paranoia shown by some people on here.

Quentin

Deleted_User wrote: »

Just ignore it and deal with it should they send a CCJ claim pack. Most won't.

This is not the advice of this forum!


The Newbies FAQ advises on how to go about this.


The advice there DOES NOT say ignore!!

Quentin

takman wrote: »

The standard reply to anyone who posts a question about a PCN is that they need to edit their post when they havnt even posted any incriminating evidence, this just shows how paranoid people like you and Quentin are.

No.


Why would we waste everyone's time advising to edit posts that are not revealing something to the detriment of the poster??


In this thread there are details to be edited as the OP has been advised

Umkomaas

Like I said there is no proof of any evidence from a forum being used in court sucesfully.

‘Court’ is at the far end of this spectrum. Well before that exists the opportunity to kill this at POPLA. Any hint of the identity of the driver all but removes the protection afforded to the keeper by the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

Particularly of late POPLA has become much more PPC-friendly in their decisions.

i was parked

...... can be enough to lose PoFA protection, should the PPC copy an original post into their evidence pack. While it’s clear that not many do that, we are not in a position to know which one will or might, so there’s a general tendency to advise that any suggestion as to the driver’s identity (however vague) is removed.

Or are you suggesting that the driver’s identity is irrelevant?

takman

Umkomaas wrote: »

‘Court’ is at the far end of this spectrum. Well before that exists the opportunity to kill this at POPLA. Any hint of the identity of the driver all but removes the protection afforded to the keeper by the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

Particularly of late POPLA has become much more PPC-friendly in their decisions.


...... can be enough to lose PoFA protection, should the PPC copy an original post into their evidence pack. While it’s clear that not many do that, we are not in a position to know which one will or might, so there’s a general tendency to advise that any suggestion as to the driver’s identity (however vague) is removed.

Or are you suggesting that the driver’s identity is irrelevant?

I'm happy to be proven wrong so show me the statistics/evidence that the statement in the OP's post of being parked (and not being the driver) has caused someone to loose an appeal at a POPLA appeal. If this happens then it would have definetly been mentioned in a thread somewhere.

If POPLA did decide in the parking companies favour from the statements in the OP and considering there is no way they can be identified from what they have posted then I would say they are very unfairly biased towards the parking companies. If they are that biased then I'm surprised anyone wins their case.

Umkomaas

takman wrote: »

I'm happy to be proven wrong so show me the statistics/evidence that the statement in the OP's post of being parked (and not being the driver) has caused someone to loose an appeal at a POPLA appeal. If this happens then it would have definetly been mentioned in a thread somewhere.

If POPLA did decide in the parking companies favour from the statements in the OP and considering there is no way they can be identified from what they have posted then I would say they are very unfairly biased towards the parking companies. If they are that biased then I'm surprised anyone wins their case.

It’s not about proving anything to you. Our first consideration on this forum is towards the motorist. Anything that potentially exposes him/her to the rapacity of the private parking sector we will point that out to them. But it’s a free country and they don’t have to heed advice.

You seem to have missed the question I asked you earlier.

Or are you suggesting that the driver’s identity is irrelevant?

takman

Umkomaas wrote: »

It’s not about proving anything to you. Our first consideration on this forum is towards the motorist. Anything that potentially exposes him/her to the rapacity of the private parking sector we will point that out to them. But it’s a free country and they don’t have to heed advice.

You seem to have missed the question I asked you earlier.

Or are you suggesting that the driver’s identity is irrelevant?

Nowhere in this thread did I suggest the drivers identify is irrelevant and as I have said many times there is no way anyone can be sure who the OP is. Even if the OP admitted they were driving on here (Which they havn't) then the fact that "kevi26" from the MSE forum isn't going to help any parking company win an appeal.

If you can't show evidence that parking companies can use the OP's post against them then telling them that they will is uncessary scaremongering and paranoia.

If everyone who posts on the parking forum provides advice without any evidence that it will be sucesful or correct then I can't imagine it to be very useful at all.