Excel / myparkingcharge Final Demand

Le_Kirk

Point 2, I would change to "alleged contravention." If the added part by 1505grandad is true, i.e. they changed condition without informing drivers, then yes, add it in.

myparkingchargevictim

Hi all,
I think the above defense is as accurate as I can be.
I've not been as on-the-ball with this as I would have hoped due to some other circumstances.

I will add the phrase "alleged" in the final sentence of point 2.

Will this defense be sufficient? My main ground of argument here is the confusing nature of there being an unmanned pay window.

I looked at the pictures within the PCN and most of them shows pictures of my car. One of them *attempts* to take a picture of some signage however the picture is blurry so you cannot read the text & the signage is quite small (ie. the actual contract to be read is too small - so I'm thinking to argue on the grounds that the text was small so I could not have engaged in a contract) - covered in point 6.

If I've got the go-ahead from you guys, I will get this printed and signed and follow KeithP's steps in post #17

Redx

glad to see that the actual DEFENCE (no S) has the correct spelling, because you swing from one to the other too often

cant see the CRA 2015 mentioned in there , as regards the contract issues and the added charges either, see the CEC16 thread

plus read the defence coupon mad wrote for another student called basher52 , compare yours to that one , see what she added about abuse of process, POFA and the relevant parts of the CRA

she won in court recently based on the CRA amongst other things, so not to mention it is a sin , proving you havent kept up with recent events

read the Abuse Of Process thread again by beamerguy too, its all here if you look

myparkingchargevictim

Whoops, I was certain it was defence, had grammarly kept correcting it to "defense" - think it has the US Dictionary enabled or something.

I will check out those points you raised, thank you!

Redx

so set it to UK english, so no more mistakes creep in , like aluminum (sic) , sidewalk , hood , trunk , etc , lol

myparkingchargevictim

see the CEC16 thread

I've just done an Advanced Search for CEC16 and can only find threads referring to look at the CEC16 thread
Could you link it please?

beamerguy

myparkingchargevictim wrote: »

I've just done an Advanced Search for CEC16 and can only find threads referring to look at the CEC16 thread
Could you link it please?

Everything you need to know including CEC16 here
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/75929156#Comment_75929156

KeithP

Use the Advanced Search.

Put nothing in the search box but put CEC16 in the username box.

With the Show threads button ticked, hit search.

Only one thread will be returned, and as it is (still) the season of goodwill, here it is...

forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=6006850

myparkingchargevictim

So if the judge agrees with me that Excel have abused the process by charging that extra £60, the entire case gets thrown out? Or Just the £60 off the total?

KeithP

myparkingchargevictim wrote: »

So if the judge agrees with me that Excel have abused the process by charging that extra £60, the entire case gets thrown out? Or Just the £60 off the total?

Could be either. Depends on the judge.

Or the Judge could disagree with you and not even knock the £60 off.