BW Legal Letter of Claim (Newcastle Airport) 2020 (5yr After Alleged Contravention)

Umkomaas

I'm confused now!

Posting on two forums doesn't give you twice the advice, just double the confusion!

Someone told me on either MSE or Pepi forums yesterday that the customer on the rental agreement WAS the registered keeper. 

It must have been on one of your threads, so if you can find the quote for us (if it was just yesterday it shouldn't take long), we can help you straighten that out.

Castle

Umkomaas said:

I'm confused now!

Posting on two forums doesn't give you twice the advice, just double the confusion!

Someone told me on either MSE or Pepi forums yesterday that the customer on the rental agreement WAS the registered keeper. 

It must have been on one of your threads, so if you can find the quote for us (if it was just yesterday it shouldn't take long), we can help you straighten that out.

This is probably the thread and since it runs to 13 pages i wasn't going to go looking for the particular statement referred to above
.http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=102097&st=240&start=240

Umkomaas

Castle said:

Umkomaas said:

I'm confused now!

Posting on two forums doesn't give you twice the advice, just double the confusion!

Someone told me on either MSE or Pepi forums yesterday that the customer on the rental agreement WAS the registered keeper. 

It must have been on one of your threads, so if you can find the quote for us (if it was just yesterday it shouldn't take long), we can help you straighten that out.

This is probably the thread and since it runs to 13 pages i wasn't going to go looking for the particular statement referred to above
.http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=102097&st=240&start=240

I've already added one or two comments there. It would be best if the OP can stick to one or the other. The information given will be substantially the same, but trying to question bits of advice given by one against the other will lead to confusion. 

nosferatu1001

I dobt anynoe said they were the registered keeper; the person on a hire agreement is the hirer, and may be the keeper, but obviously is not the RK.

Redx

As above , your name is not on the V5C , so you are not the registered keeper

But as hirer you are considered to be the day to day keeper

You may have been the driver , or not

You are not the owner either

chris0241

Castle said:

Umkomaas said:

I'm confused now!

Posting on two forums doesn't give you twice the advice, just double the confusion!

Someone told me on either MSE or Pepi forums yesterday that the customer on the rental agreement WAS the registered keeper. 

It must have been on one of your threads, so if you can find the quote for us (if it was just yesterday it shouldn't take long), we can help you straighten that out.

This is probably the thread and since it runs to 13 pages i wasn't going to go looking for the particular statement referred to above
.http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=102097&st=240&start=240

Yes, that is the correct thread, I'll still to updating the Pepi thread now. Thank you!

Coupon-mad

Do this please, because the MHCLG are listening for another week or so, and they are keen to hear from people like you, to find a way to stop this happening to people in future.  In your case, the parking firm are trying to pretend that a document they called a 'PENALTY' at an airport, isn't a penalty after all, and are pretending it's a contractual charge instead. 

You need to comment on the Parking Code of Practice draft urgently!   Comments are invited about the whole Code of Practice and most people feel that parking charges (double the amount of Council ones) are extortionate.   Also, you will find hidden in there that the Code says that where byelaws exist that regulate parking, those byelaws prevail (i.e. that a PPC can't alternatively offer a contractual charge, is how I read it).

Please now make a real difference because not enough people have yet, and time is running out.   The Government is consulting for just a few more days, about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework intended to rein in the rogue parking firms. 

Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation (two separate consultation documents).

HOW TO DO THE SUBMISSIONS:

BSI PAS 232 – COMMENTING ON THE CODE OF PRACTICE AS DRAFTED:

1.    You will need to register then log in, to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker.  

 

2.    Register, log into the BSI page, and download & read the cover letter here:

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

 

3.    Read the cover letter again and note the suggested extra questions... if you agree that, say, the 'loading/unloading and dropping off, asking for directions, and disabled people parking on double yellows as they can on street' activities listed should be exempt (not parking events, what do you think?) then please go to the Annexes at the end of the PAS Code and find the one about Exempt Vehicles and state what other activity you think should be added to the exempt list. 

 

4.    Download the PAS itself and start commenting on what you wish to say something about.  Quick links to each section appear on the left of your page. 

 

You don’t have to comment on everything, e.g. you might want to skip the definitions and focus on later sections, and certainly look at the Annex tables at the end that show things like consideration & grace periods and exemptions.

 

5.    Submit comments when you are happy with them. Don’t just ‘SAVE’ and forget!

 

THAT IS HALF THE JOB DONE!

THE MHCLG CONSULTATION IS EASIER AS IT IS JUST A LIST OF QUESTIONS. 

 

6.    You can do it first if preferred or pushed for time:

https://forms.office.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?id=EGg0v32c3kOociSi7zmVqAVPfAOtwRxLhHRwQ610oElUMzhQSVo0WUQ4SERVSEZaUU9DTUhFQ1VMUy4u

If your answers exceed 4000 characters (approx. 500 words to a single question or 16000 words (approx. 2500 words) for all the questions below, you can email your answers to parking@communities.gov.uk as long as you state who you are.

THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS YOU WILL SEE, FOR RESPONSES TO THE FRAMEWORK:

Q1 Do you agree or disagree that members of APAs should be required to use a single appeals service appointed by the Secretary of State?

Strongly agree/Somewhat agree/Neither agree nor disagree/Somewhat disagree/Strongly disagree

 

Q1.1 Please explain your answer

(free text)

 

 

Q2 Please provide any other feedback on the determination of appeals, including the funding model and features that an appeal service should offer e.g. telephone or in-person hearings, the ability to submit evidence online

(free text)

 

Q3 Please provide any comments you have on the proposal to enforce the Code by combining the ATA’s existing audit procedures with additional safeguards.

(free text)

 

Q4 Please outline any alternative means by which the Code could be monitored and enforced. You may wish to cite evidence from other regulatory frameworks which are relevant.

(free text)

 

Q5 Please provide any feedback you have on the proposed governance arrangements for monitoring the new Code of Practice

(free text)

 

Q6 Which parking charge system is most appropriate for private parking?

 a) the Three-tiered system

 b) Mirroring the Local Authority system

(free text)

 

 Q6.1 Please explain your answer. You may, for example, wish to make reference to other deterrent frameworks (for example, for railway tickets or traffic violations)

(free text)

 

 

Q7 What level of discount is appropriate:

40% as is currently offered in private parking and suggested in the three-tiered system, or

50% as is offered in Local Authority parking?

a) 40%

b) 50%

 

Q7.1 Please explain your answer, including whether the discount should be set at a different level

(free text)

 

 

 Q8 How should the level of parking charges be set and how should the levels be revised in future?

(free text)

 

 

Q9 Do you agree or disagree in principle with the idea of the Appeals Charter?

Agree/Disagree

 

Q9.1 Please explain your answer

(free text)

 

 

Q10 Do you agree or not that the examples given in the Appeals Charter are fair and appropriate? Agree/Disagree

 

Q10.1 Please explain your answer.

You may wish, for example, to suggest additional cases to be covered in an Appeals Charter or query existing examples.

(free text)

 

Q11 Do you agree or disagree that the parking industry should contribute towards the cost of the regulation?

Agree/Disagree

 

Q11.1 Please explain your answer.

(free text)

 

YOU CAN INSTEAD GIVE MORE CONCISE ANSWERS ONLINE, USING THE MHCLG PAGE LINK.

Don’t forget that answering these questions is the easier bit…

Looking at the BSI PAS (the draft code of practice itself) involves logging in and submitting comments again, and again and again and takes more time!

There is a discussion about PAS submissions and what the pages look like, here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6195417/am-i-doing-something-wrong/p1