28 Days after appeal

paulstevens64

Umkomaas wrote: »

Yep - ReadTheSmallPrint!

:T:T:T:T, :rotfl::rotfl:, :beer::beer:

ReadTheSmallPrint

Thank you, but I tried the above, exactly as described and got the following message "Sorry as a new user you are not allowed to post with links. This is done to stop spammers clogging up the site. Please edit your message below to continue."

MistyZ

ReadTheSmallPrint wrote: »

Thank you, but I tried the above, exactly as described and got the following message "Sorry as a new user you are not allowed to post with links. This is done to stop spammers clogging up the site. Please edit your message below to continue."

Even when you changed the http to hxxp?

Redx

As above

You cannot post a live URL link

But you can post a dead link as described earlier

ReadTheSmallPrint

Yep! But for dropbox it is HTTPS (HXXPS) not HTTP if that makes a difference

Redx

So adapt those 5 letters and alter it until it works, be creative, this is not difficult

Or put hxxxs or abcde and a note to change it to https

waamo

ReadTheSmallPrint wrote: »

Yep! But for dropbox it is HTTPS (HXXPS) not HTTP if that makes a difference

No difference at all. Just change t to x.

ReadTheSmallPrint

Thank you Redx. I hadn't appreciated that this was that type of 'get around 'and that its just to 'fool' the posting process in not identifying it as a url Link. I've tried many combinations none of which get through - the algorithm to identify links must have been updated. In this version I've chopped it in to chucks which just need to be put back together with 'x' amended (it didn't like www either)

hxxps://xxx.dropbox.com
/sj16onbkscu1ch1d/Parking
%20space1.jpg?
dl=0

Ok, in your (or anyone's view) is it worth toughing it out and tell them I'm happy to contest in court? The basis of my challenge is that although the vehicle was outside the marked bay the actual markings are ambiguous as a previous marking cut halfway through the bay and is 'hatched'. Therefore the driver could not comply with the 'rule' as if the vehicle had been fully in the bay it would have been on the hatched area and parking on such is also prohibited.This is also an end bay so the overhang did not infringe on an adjacent bay if that makes any difference - EG It's not reducing the capacity of the car park which is what the marked bays are intended to do in the implied contract. I think.

Le_Kirk

Your link made live but there is something wrong with it. You made it too complicated, post the whole URL from drop box and then JUST change the https:// to hxxps://
https://www.dropbox.com/sj16onbkscu1ch1d/Parking%20space1.jpg?dl=0

Redx

the url link failed for me despite changing xx to tt and xxx to www