DCB Legal for UKCP acting like jerks

Half_way

Appologies, but strugling to follow this thread due to the walls of text.

Question (yes/no answer) is this a straight up double dip case, that is two visits recorded as one where the camera has recorded the first entry but not the first exit, then counted the second exit as one long stay?

Next if it was a double dip, then what action has the registered keeper taken against the franchise, a Mc Donalds/Mc Donalds franchise ( as far as i can make out) 

MrMoonsPointofview

@Half_way.

Thanks for post.

To your first question, yes - double-dip, both were entries.

Secondly, none I'm afraid. Sorry.

Half_way

MrMoonsPointofview said:

@Half_way.

Thanks for post.

To your first question, yes - double-dip, both were entries.

Secondly, none I'm afraid. Sorry.

Never too late to go for the principal - assuming that it was a Mc Donalds site and not a shared retail park where the car park also serves other places.

If you have a smart phone it could have location history available - on a computer log into the same account thats used on your phone and you will see location history. go to google maps, log on, select time line and you should be able to see it if its there

patient_dream

Half_way said:

MrMoonsPointofview said:

@Half_way.

Thanks for post.

To your first question, yes - double-dip, both were entries.

Secondly, none I'm afraid. Sorry.

Never too late to go for the principal - assuming that it was a Mc Donalds site and not a shared retail park where the car park also serves other places.

If you have a smart phone it could have location history available - on a computer log into the same account thats used on your phone and you will see location history. go to google maps, log on, select time line and you should be able to see it if its there

I rather think MrMoonsPointofview is looking for blood and I think that's what he will get

These dodgy legals are really not that smart

MrMoonsPointofview

Half_way said:

MrMoonsPointofview said:

@Half_way.

Thanks for post.

To your first question, yes - double-dip, both were entries.

Secondly, none I'm afraid. Sorry.

Never too late to go for the principal - assuming that it was a Mc Donalds site and not a shared retail park where the car park also serves other places.

If you have a smart phone it could have location history available - on a computer log into the same account thats used on your phone and you will see location history. go to google maps, log on, select time line and you should be able to see it if its there

Thanks for suggestions. The first thing I'm doing is notifying the BPA on Monday. The car park is exclusively Macs and is rather small anyhow. As I've already said, there was another driver and I doubt s/he still has the handset s/he had in January 2020.... but I think the case against then is strong enough on a good half a dozen other defects on their part...   

Half_way

patient_dream said:

Half_way said:

MrMoonsPointofview said:

@Half_way.

Thanks for post.

To your first question, yes - double-dip, both were entries.

Secondly, none I'm afraid. Sorry.

Never too late to go for the principal - assuming that it was a Mc Donalds site and not a shared retail park where the car park also serves other places.

If you have a smart phone it could have location history available - on a computer log into the same account thats used on your phone and you will see location history. go to google maps, log on, select time line and you should be able to see it if its there

I rather think MrMoonsPointofview is looking for blood and I think that's what he will get

These dodgy legals are really not that smart

No reason why the blood shouldn't be that of the principal.
If I was a farmer, and kept dangerous animals on land with public access (ie a footpath) and someone was injured I would be liable.

The antics of PPCs are well known, the faults with ANPR are well known, yet land owners such as supermarkets, multi national fast food companies, and others who should know better and should have legal teams to vet everything still persist with allowing un regulated scum parking company's to operate on their land

KeithP

MrMoonsPointofview said:

Half_way said:

MrMoonsPointofview said:

@Half_way.

Thanks for post.

To your first question, yes - double-dip, both were entries.

Secondly, none I'm afraid. Sorry.

Never too late to go for the principal - assuming that it was a Mc Donalds site and not a shared retail park where the car park also serves other places.

If you have a smart phone it could have location history available - on a computer log into the same account thats used on your phone and you will see location history. go to google maps, log on, select time line and you should be able to see it if its there

As I've already said, there was another driver and I doubt s/he still has the handset s/he had in January 2020....

Google maps timeline isn't handset dependant.

fisherjim

Half_way said:

Appologies, but strugling to follow this thread due to the walls of text.

Question (yes/no answer) is this a straight up double dip case, that is two visits recorded as one where the camera has recorded the first entry but not the first exit, then counted the second exit as one long stay?

Next if it was a double dip, then what action has the registered keeper taken against the franchise, a Mc Donalds/Mc Donalds franchise ( as far as i can make out) 

No not quite!

There are no exit photos at all only two entry photos, the OP has suggested that the rear plate was unreadable.

patient_dream

Half_way said:

patient_dream said:

Half_way said:

MrMoonsPointofview said:

@Half_way.

Thanks for post.

To your first question, yes - double-dip, both were entries.

Secondly, none I'm afraid. Sorry.

Never too late to go for the principal - assuming that it was a Mc Donalds site and not a shared retail park where the car park also serves other places.

If you have a smart phone it could have location history available - on a computer log into the same account thats used on your phone and you will see location history. go to google maps, log on, select time line and you should be able to see it if its there

I rather think MrMoonsPointofview is looking for blood and I think that's what he will get

These dodgy legals are really not that smart

No reason why the blood shouldn't be that of the principal.
If I was a farmer, and kept dangerous animals on land with public access (ie a footpath) and someone was injured I would be liable.

The antics of PPCs are well known, the faults with ANPR are well known, yet land owners such as supermarkets, multi national fast food companies, and others who should know better and should have legal teams to vet everything still persist with allowing un regulated scum parking company's to operate on their land

You are so right. Sadly McDonalds don't give a monkeys toss about customers and the answer is only visit them if there is a drive-thru and never park the car. Get your meal and get out of their premises toot sweet

Right now supermarkets are losing business and trying to compete with the likes of Lidl and Aldi.  Now,, these two german companies do employ parking scammers but they have many car parks that do not have cowboys installed

The likes of Tesco, Waitrose, Sainsbury's, Asda etc must wake up and understand that matching prices means very little whilst they have a reputation for £100 cowboys around

Near to me, there are two TESCO COWBOYS

One Sainsbury's COWBOY,  One Asda COWBOY

One Waitrose and the car park is council operated, just £2 and NO ANPR ... of course

One Lidl and the car park is council operated, just £2 and NO ANPR ... of course

One Lidl 5 mins away, NO COWBOY and always busy

IMO ..... Tesco, Waitrose, Sainsbury's, Asda etc are doing a Liz Truss designed to drive customers away

MrMoonsPointofview

Hello folks.  I'm back with a simple question.

Three months have passed and I've still heard nothing, but I don't expect DCB Legal are the type to inform you that they have bottled it (unlike Gladstones who believe it or not, did in 2020 after a year of back-and-forth arguing advise me that their client no longer wanted to go ahead with court). 

Purely with regards the £60 add-on above the "legal" Notice to Keeper figure of POFA 4(5), I know that many cases such as Excel v Wilkinson are on the noticeboard at MSE. I've saved some of the URLs (and actual files in full) for my own benefit. But are these actually released into the public domain whereby a potential defendant such as I can cite them openly and hand them across to the likes of DCB Legal? How it helps with dialogue is it slows them down over 3(a) of practice direction when having provide answer for why is it not unlawful double recovery here (i.e. what makes this case different to that one?). Also which is the very latest case where the "debt recovery" costs were thrown out, and which was the first? (I think the first was around 2019...not sure). Thanks forum regulars.