Arena Shopping Centre

NewJoiner

I see nothing wrong with them.

I changed it anyway...

NewJoiner

Coupon-mad wrote: »

It quotes para 9 of POFA, 14 days. That's the wrong para, as I said in my first reply.

NewJoiner wrote: »

POFA para 6 refers to both 8 and 9, as the keeper it is 9 unless I got it wrong...

Thoughts anyone??

Coupon-mad

Was there a windscreen PCN first, that's what determines whether it's 8 or 9.

MistyZ

I see it was a windscreen PCN first (looking at opening post). So para 8 then.

NewJoiner

Yes it was a windscreen PCN as mentioned on my first post.

Coupon-mad

So as I told you way back, para 8 applies, not #9.

NewJoiner

OK noted, can you please tell anything about the rest of my response? Provided you are interested in helping me.

Redx

reading through the appeal in post #25, you have stated the claimant is Parkwatch but then concluded that Parking Eye failed pofa, PE rarely issue windscreen tickets so I must conclude its a copy and paste appeal from a Parking Eye thread and no proof reading done

check it for errors and correct them , there is only one claimant who you refer to at the beginning , after that you say "the operator" because everyone knows who they are from the first naming of them at the beginning of the appeal (or the claimant , like in a court defence)

Coupon-mad

NewJoiner wrote: »

OK noted, can you please tell anything about the rest of my response? Provided you are interested in helping me.

Of course, that's why we all come here.



Can you show us draft #2 (with changes made) in a reply now, as we are on page 2 of your thread - as I see the forum pages at least - and it's easier to look at new posts than scroll back to a previous page now.

NewJoiner

Thank you for your comment Redx, I actually posted the full draft with pictures on post #28. I'm now uploading a revised version. I will post it in a new post.