Waitrose, BW Legal, Britannia Parking, John Lewis Legal team

twhitehousescat

I seen to recall saying upload an IMAGE not point imgbb to a whole album

twhitehousescat

it seems that you have been registered with mse long enough now

so do again and save as bbs code full linked and then copy full output to your post





last yrs advent calender

KeithP

Hahaha.

You have faffed around, made so many useless posts, you can now post live links.

Well done. :rotfl:

BS_Newbie

Redx wrote: »

I agree with you that if a customer wishes to spend longer than 90 minutes inside a store (plus car park) they should be allowed to do so and some mechanism like registering the vehicle instore (like in pubs) should allow it. in any case , my local asda has no time limit for customers using PE and my local morrissons has 3 hours with ECP

thse companies have brought these measures in to stop people parking up all day whilst going to work etc

so forget about that and concentrate on what matters

there is no advantage to the driver by the keeper naming the driver , the only advantage is to the keeper , because under POFA naming the driver allows the keeper to exit out of the picture

naming the driver means that the PPC can issue court proceedings against the driver without the encumbrance of POFA, these companies have always had the right to chase the driver, its knowing who was actually driving that is the hard part for them

the infamous case in Scotland was taken out against a known and persistent driver and she lost and the PPC was awarded thousands of pounds, so known drivers get taken to court a lot and they can easily lose

also , this argument about signs above, is fine for one contravention , but familiarity breeds contempt and so a judge would say that if this is a regular parking occurrence then the driver should be familiar with the signs due to parking there a lot, ignorance is not bliss when this parking charge issue happens a lot

ie:- a driver cannot keep saying they are unfamiliar with the rules if they park there regularly , especially not after getting say 5 tickets

ignorance is only bliss for one or possibly two parking events , after that the driver is bilking and so cannot expect the same safeguards that somebody with one contravention may rely on


so the first time it happened and a complaint was made to the store manager , followed by a complaint to JL, means only that particular event counts as the IGNORANCE stage, any further contraventions cannot possibly be upheld as IGNORANCE


lastly , posting dead links to picture sites is ALWAYS POSSIBLE, but embedding them into your posts may not be , hewever , that last link failed and didnt lead to any pictures

all pictures must be uploaded to a hosting site, no good leaving them on your pc

Cheers Redx -
It seems I am now allowed to post the url as I have been upgraded from a newbie for making a few posts !! I have uploaded the images to imbgg.com and thats worked a treat and in my last post I attached the link to one pic which was one page of a letter as a test. - the link now works but what I dont seem to be able to ascertain is does MSE not give the actual image in the thread >> - it seems only to give a link to the image which is disappointing particularly if there are a few images to look at .

point taken about the amount of times the driver has received PCN's . What would you suggest as the best approach at this point because the RK really does not want to name the driver and they are really worried about having to go to court??

Umkomaas

BS_Newbie wrote: »

Ah OK - I have tried this several times now so that must have been s slip up ,I will do it again for one picutre - this one
https://ibb.co/m8M25zL

So does this forum not post the actual picture - just the link to the picture . i dont know what it should be doing

Instead of the clever questions in that letter, why not just write to either W’s or JL’s CEOs a simple letter of complaint and ask they intervene and get the tickets cancelled for regular and genuine customer(s). Send copies of receipts/bank/cc statements to prove patronage. If there is a loyalty card in play, quote its reference number.

What were you going to do with the answers to those questions, had they all been returned? I’m not surprised they’ve ignored your letter, especially as there is no requirement on them to respond. The detached legal department will have no interest in your parking charges, too far away from them to care I would say.

Redx

I dont give legal advice , just common sense advice based on years of coming here and reading posts and helping people, this isnt a legal aid forum (as my signature tells you, try legal beagles for that) - this is a consumer rights forum about parking , not court cases , there are probably less than 5 people on here qualified to give legal advice, plus you are not entitled to free legal advice and so should seek a lawyer, which is what Martin Lewis would tell you to do if you asked him

I would say that the RK cannot have their cake and eat it

its either risk it by going to court , turning up and trying to win using POFA to hide behind

OR name the driver and throw them to the wolves , where its easier pickings because the driver has no POFA protection and is a serail abuser of the parking and cannot hide behind signage etc due to the complaints that were made about the first contravention. from that point on they were fully aware of the signs and a judge may take a dim view of continually parking there regardless, as happened in the scotland case


your live link in post #24 now works ok

BS_Newbie

OK so here is the letter that went to Brittania with a small change to ask if they were acting as agent and also to John Lewis solicitor



And this is the reply they sent back

BS_Newbie

And these were the signs in 2016

Very clear to see that signs had been doctored and were not compliant with the BPA code of compliance as it was at that time .

Britannia never replied to the letters asking about these signs which is not surprising

twhitehousescat

if that sign was on display it did not meet BPA COP ,

according to the terms you owe 5 x £25 , no mention of when and to whom , no mention of escalating costs

perhaps you should ask the bpa if they are happy with that sign

Redx

it also mentions the word PENALTY, which these are not because they are PARKING charge notices on private land , not PENALTY notices