Lost case against PCM

beamerguy

HMMM so I guess Sherlock Holmes is now off the case

norm2008

And the insults/ mindboggling detective work continue.



Assumptions- I never make them myself, but clearly the advice being handed out by experienced contributors seems to be based on them, and you must know that they are the mother of all sorts of wicked things.





Is it not possible, even just a teeny weeny bit possible, that the 2 parking fines are completely and utterly unconnected?

ECP- Peel Centre , correct, guilty as charged.

PCM- Peel Centre- nah, not me, maybe someone else posted that once, but that wouldnt make sense as they dont operate there.



But dont let some facts stand in the way of a nice helping of smug, you crack on and belittle me, its fun.

System

@Norm2008 You still don't get it.

Had letter before court around 5 weeks ago, and just had court judgement for claimant through this week , total fine now 273.98, payable to Gladstones solicitors.

The LBCC reached you. A claim will have reached you. If you defended you would have had your day in court. The timings suggest you did not defend, hence the default CCJ.

No-one's problem but your own.

waamo

Given you said it's your first time posting when in fact it wasn't I wouldn't be inclined to trust your memory of events whatsoever.

norm2008

@waamo, apology accepted, just try not to jump to conclusions on this board please, especially when you appear to be one of the more senior contributors on here.



@IamEnare- as constructive as it was insightful, thanks for sharing that pearl of wisdom.



I'm off to find a silly place to park now, I'll be sure to let you guys know how it goes.

beamerguy

I assume this thread is now dead

No point in prolonging the pain

DEAD THREAD

nosferatu1001

Obvious troll is obvious

Troll - you has your own first hijack post quoted at you, and you deny it was you
You had your own post quoted where you didn't enter a defence, so the magical "winning formula" isn't really that tricky to understand - anyone who fails to enter a defence will, of course, get a default judgement. This isn't magical, this is bloody obvious.

waamo

I'm amused at me being called a "senior contributor". I'm closer to being a senior citizen than senior contributor.

For the record I consider myself as no such thing at all.

Coupon-mad

None of us ever encourage finding 'silly places to park' and we criticise anyone who (very rarely) rocks up saying they dumped their car all day in a retail park, or stopped in a disabled bay with no excuse.

The point being, the idea that the BPA have been putting about for years, that this country is heaving with 'rogue parkers' is utter codswallop. Part and parcel of the misinformation that the Government swallowed for too long, that has allowed a scam industry to thrive that should have been heavily curtailed, or ended, years ago.

e.g. when Local Authorities were banned from using ANPR in 2014 and the BPA bleated about it like cry-babies, private firms should ALSO have been banned from using ANPR to fabricate 'parking contraventions', too.

A trick was missed then. One day that will be put right.

We help people who park normally but are caught out by scammers.