IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.
We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum. This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are - or become - political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

PCN from Parking Control Management

Options
24567

Comments

  • Not_A_Hope
    Not_A_Hope Posts: 766 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Name Dropper
    Options
    I think your para 7 should be renumbered as 5 before adding the rest of the template. You have added an unnecessary 'within' to this para and might want to add briefly that the permit failed and was provided by the claimant. 
  • MadMunk
    MadMunk Posts: 40 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Name Dropper
    Options

    The joys of copy paste and tweaking bits here and there @Not_A_Hope.  Something to do with wood and trees comes to mind :lol:  Yeah, I kept the same numbers in case I cut too much out from the original.  Makes it easier if I keep the same numbers and only fix that in the final draft.  Else 7 becomes 5, becomes god knows what.  Too much confusion for my tiny brain.

    2. It is admitted that the Defendant is the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question.

    3. The Defendant is a resident, living at the estate where the Claimant performs its parking enforcement activities. The vehicle in question is used infrequently and remains parked the rest of the time.

    4. The parking rights stated within the Defendant’s tenancy agreement allow for quiet enjoyment, and use, of communal areas and parking.  The Defendant displays a permit as a courtesy not an obligation.

    7. The Defendant had displayed a permit upon leaving their vehicle.  The permit failed between visits to the vehicle.  The Defendant expected that said permit would remain displayed between visits to their vehicle. That is the intended purpose of the products. Products which are sold to consumers and therefore subject to the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 133,884 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post Photogenic First Anniversary
    Options
    The permit failed between visits to the vehicle. 
    I don't think that explains what happened.  I would say the permit was fully visible but very flimsy and had curled up in sunlight, despite being untouched and within the holder supplied by the Claimant.  The Defendant avers that these permits are not fit for purpose and any contract was frustrated not by any action or conduct of the Defendant, but by the Claimant's unsuitably flimsy paper. 
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • Le_Kirk
    Le_Kirk Posts: 22,518 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Photogenic Name Dropper
    edited 24 June 2022 at 10:11AM
    Options
    "Thanks gents."
    A heads-up  -  at least one is a "Lady"
    Selects gruff voice "but it ain't me"!
    Not sure about your paragraph 7, surely you meant to say that the permit or permit holder supplied by the claimant was not fit for purpose.
  • MadMunk
    MadMunk Posts: 40 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Name Dropper
    Options
    I gathered it was you from grandads original post.  Twas hastily deleted but I caught it before it was gone.  My apologies m'lady.  Good gruff voice though, well practiced :wink:

    It seems there's a fine line between too much info and not enough.  I took your earlier post a little too literally I think.

    Back to business then!

    2. It is admitted that the Defendant is the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question.

    3. The Defendant is a resident, living at the estate where the Claimant performs its parking enforcement activities. The vehicle in question is used infrequently and remains parked the rest of the time.

    4. The parking rights stated within the Defendant’s tenancy agreement allow for quiet enjoyment, and use, of communal areas and parking.  The Defendant displays a permit as a courtesy not an obligation.

    7. The Defendant had displayed a permit upon leaving their vehicle.  The permit was fully visible but very flimsy and had curled up in sunlight, despite being untouched and within the holder supplied by the Claimant.  The Defendant avers that these permits are not fit for purpose and any contract was frustrated not by any action or conduct of the Defendant, but by the Claimant's unsuitably flimsy paper permit and holder.  The Defendant expected that said permit would remain displayed within its holder between visits to their vehicle. That is the intended purpose of the products. Products which are sold to consumers and therefore subject to the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

  • Le_Kirk
    Le_Kirk Posts: 22,518 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Photogenic Name Dropper
    Options
    MadMunk said:
    I gathered it was you from grandads original post.  Twas hastily deleted but I caught it before it was gone.  My apologies m'lady.  Good gruff voice though, well practiced :wink:
    Still not me, it is @Coupon-mad
  • MadMunk
    MadMunk Posts: 40 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Name Dropper
    Options
    Hahaha, well... male, female, binary, non binary, unspecified.  Makes no difference.  In my world you're all simply "experts".
  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 133,884 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post Photogenic First Anniversary
    Options
    MadMunk said:
    I gathered it was you from grandads original post.  Twas hastily deleted but I caught it before it was gone.  My apologies m'lady.  Good gruff voice though, well practiced :wink:

    It seems there's a fine line between too much info and not enough.  I took your earlier post a little too literally I think.

    Back to business then!

    2. It is admitted that the Defendant is the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question.

    3. The Defendant is a resident, living at the estate where the Claimant performs its parking enforcement activities. The vehicle in question is used infrequently and remains parked the rest of the time.

    4. The parking rights stated within the Defendant’s tenancy agreement allow for quiet enjoyment, and use, of communal areas and parking.  The Defendant displays a permit as a courtesy not an obligation.

    7. The Defendant had displayed a permit upon leaving their vehicle.  The permit was fully visible but very flimsy and had curled up in sunlight, despite being untouched and within the holder supplied by the Claimant.  The Defendant avers that these permits are not fit for purpose and any contract was frustrated not by any action or conduct of the Defendant, but by the Claimant's unsuitably flimsy paper permit and holder.  The Defendant expected that said permit would remain displayed within its holder between visits to their vehicle. That is the intended purpose of the products. Products which are sold to consumers and therefore subject to the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

    Very good, she says in a ladylike voice...
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • MadMunk
    MadMunk Posts: 40 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Name Dropper
    Options
    LOL, apologies coupon, and thank you very much for taking the time to review.  All the stuff I cut out of the original will go into the WS instead.

    I'll be back to post again if I get a letter from the courts summoning me to defend myself against these hoodwinking ambulance chasers.
  • MadMunk
    MadMunk Posts: 40 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Name Dropper
    edited 6 July 2022 at 6:27PM
    Options
    I was digging around looking for paperwork the other day and came across something linked to this which both amused me and made me wonder... is this something I can submit as evidence in the arena of conflicting information from PCM if the dullards are mental enough to take me to court?

    On the one had we have the signs, their process etc of... YOU ARE GUILTY! Screw the facts :lol:

    While on the other we have this...  which pretty much says I did what was expected and checked before leaving my vehicle.  I'm assuming they think folks don't keep such paperwork.  Transferable permits step 4.  Trollolololol



    It says nothing about having to return in case the permit self fails.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 12 Election 2024: The MSE Leaders' Debate
  • 344.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 450.1K Spending & Discounts
  • 236.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 609.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.5K Life & Family
  • 248.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards