Gladstone taking me court

D_P_Dance

But is it unreasonable fort solicitors or anyone signing a legal papers on their behalf not to know the law?  Sureky the same must apply to PPCs?t

Y333moe

On the pack they sent me for land operation it mentions Minchin House. I will show you guy pictures of the new sign they got up there. It is different to the one they originally use. 

beamerguy

henrik777 said:

That's my belief

.beamerguy said:

henrik777 said:

It is.
Bit of a problem getting that passed if some judges still allow it though as they'll just say their belief was reasonable based upon that. Added to the fact contempt proceedings on garbage in a witness statement seem to be rare .....

Anyway, i try to help people win in the battle against their ticket. i'm not a campaigner.

Will judges then ignore the new CPR as of the 6th April 2020

Well, we will have to put that to the test, the time is nigh

Coupon-mad

Y333moe said:

On the pack they sent me for land operation it mentions Minchin House. I will show you guy pictures of the new sign they got up there. It is different to the one they originally use. 

Doesn't matter because the Traffic Order map shows they shouldn't have a sign in that street at all.

Y333moe

The judge ruled against me because he believes that the sign is there and they have an agreement with tower hamlets Council. So I told him about abuse of process and he said thats only for the £60 I also told him the signs are always taken off and different ones are put on. 

Coupon-mad

There can have been no evidence of an agreement to operate on street for the Council.  On what evidence did he base that assumption?

Y333moe

He goes in the pack they sent they have an agreement that they can operate on that street plus the size of the sign being small is not sufficient as it is still readable. 

Coupon-mad

Show us that agreement.

Y333moe

List goes on 

Coupon-mad

But it's not from the Council itself, surely?  From Tower Hamlets HOMES maybe, but not the council.

However, you lost your case so must pay in full.  This happens sometimes when people disappear from the forum and don't get advice on the later stages and prep before the hearing.  Did you put in a witness statement and evidence (I don;t mean your defence)?

You lost but you can still make a difference to stop this happening again:

Please now make a real difference - A TASK FOR SEPTEMBER.

The Government is (this month only) consulting about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework to rein in the rogue parking firms.  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation, and get everyone you know to do the same.

You will need to register to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker, but otherwise it is easy to navigate, and comment upon each section/subsection individually. You can save comments to edit later and or submit comments once you are happy with them.

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

You do not need to register to comment on the enforcement framework which can be found here. It has a link on page 5 to make comments.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913272/Code_Enforcement_Framework_consultation.pdf

At the very least, we say the parking charge level should be £50/£25 or higher level £70/£35, as per Council PCNs in E&W.  

And we say the added fake 'debt recovery' costs are just double counting the cost of letters, and MUST GO because that is unfair and illegal.

Please be heard.  You can bet the hundreds of PPCs will be commenting.

No apologies for repeating this vital 'call for action' to consumers, on every thread this month!