G24 small claims

Gr1pr

No crime was committed,  it's a throwaway comment,  the case is only about money,  not your liberty or life , not important in the scheme of things,  despite what you think  ( a vinyl record can cost more than what's at stake here  )

1505grandad

Yes it was facetious comment  -  nothing disrespectful to you  -  from a skim read of the thread I could not see what t & c's the ppc are claiming was breached.

Humble_in_the_Jungle

i see what you mean now, I was overthinking it at the time. they claim "the maximum duration of stay permitted at the location was exceeded"

Gr1pr

So an overstay beyond the permitted times on the signage,  like the Beavis case a decade ago , no biggie

Not exactly the same as the Louvre heist  !  

Humble_in_the_Jungle

Gr1pr said:

So an overstay beyond the permitted times on the signage,  like the Beavis case a decade ago , no biggie

Not exactly the same as the Louvre heist  !  

hahahhahah (that made me chuckle) yes exactly. so my next step will be to compile my WS after studying the beavis case and then post on here to get clarification that it is sufficient 

Gr1pr

Not the Beavis case,  but recent  WS examples over the last 18 months

Humble_in_the_Jungle

Just to let you know I have finally received the n279 today, thanks to All!

1505grandad

1505grandad said:

AS above(s) -  can you remind us what heinous crime has been committed that the claimant is willing to reduce the amount by 82%?.

"i know this will come as a disappointment but i want to thank everyone for their input as you have helped me get this amount reduced by 82% which i will probably pay today,....."

Well done  -  particularly pleased to see this NoD in view of the above.

Calling @Umkomaas

Ralph-y

well done ..... make sure you let friends and family know where to come for private  parking problems 

Car1980

Sorry for the tough love!   

Well done on standing firm.