A little confused

Fruitcake

No. The use of the expression "user" of the car implies they were driving.

I think the letter by Edna Basher in post 7 of this thread would be better.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5881338

Obviously change the PPC's name to Not-so-Smart, and the reason the PCN was issued if different to your case in your appeal.

scfcmozzer

Fruitcake wrote: »

No. The use of the expression "user" of the car implies they were driving.

I think the letter by Edna Basher in post 7 of this thread would be better.



Obviously change the PPC's name to Not-so-Smart, and the reason the PCN was issued if different to your case in your appeal.

Thank You,

I will let you know how I get on with this

scfcmozzer

Fruitcake wrote: »

No. The use of the expression "user" of the car implies they were driving.

I think the letter by Edna Basher in post 7 of this thread would be better.



Obviously change the PPC's name to Not-so-Smart, and the reason the PCN was issued if different to your case in your appeal.

Hi Fruicake,


Just want to say a massive thank you for all your help and guidance, it was all a little bit harrowing as I was unsure if I was following your advice correctly, I entered my appeal as you outlined and I recieved this back earlier today which is two weeks after the appeal went in.


Dear victim


Parking Charge Notice Number : onebigscam



Thank you for your recent communication.

I have noted the points you raised and would like to confirm that we are cancelling the Parking Charge Notice.

If I can be of any further assistance please do not hesitate to contact me.


Yours sincerely,

Smart Parking Ltd


Thanks again fruitcake

Redx

well done


its a complicated topic when lease or company or hire vehicles are involved , meaning its more work for the lessee in understanding the issues , which arent always about what the driver did or didnt do