PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Car park fine in Wakefield
harryharoon
post Sat, 31 Oct 2020 - 12:05
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 168
Joined: 5 Jun 2012
Member No.: 55,315



hello there,

This is with regards to the parking in a private car park in Wakefield.
The case was transferred from the parking company to DCBL who chased the car owner for the fine for about a year but now they have decided to take the car owner
to court.
Reading through the paperwork it appears that if the case is lost by the owner, there will be a judgement against the owner. I don't understand this because what is the point of fighting a case when you know the consequences could be that harsh.

Regards

Harry


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4  
Start new topic
Replies (60 - 71)
Advertisement
post Sat, 31 Oct 2020 - 12:05
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
harryharoon
post Fri, 10 Dec 2021 - 15:50
Post #61


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 168
Joined: 5 Jun 2012
Member No.: 55,315



2 - Was the tariff paid? (And did they check their records thoroughly)

The defendant did ask to check their records because if the cash that was paid did not register on their system, where did it go?
Would the claimant disclose the entries that were registered at the time the alleged contravention took place?


I am not sure what you meant by "they incorrectly quoted POFA" as I am able to see post #17 on this thread.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Fri, 10 Dec 2021 - 15:55
Post #62


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



That they didn't meet the required wording,,nor meaning, as prescribed by pofa.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
harryharoon
post Fri, 10 Dec 2021 - 16:25
Post #63


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 168
Joined: 5 Jun 2012
Member No.: 55,315



Thanks

do you by any chance have the thread which is linked with #post 17
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Fri, 10 Dec 2021 - 17:50
Post #64


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Huh? Post 17 is YOUR post.

They state this isn't a pofa notice
So you don't even need to look for compliant wording, but of course you point out, as it's own argument, that even if they go back on saying it isn't pofa based, it still doesn't meet the requirements of pofa in the following ways...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
harryharoon
post Tue, 21 Dec 2021 - 07:20
Post #65


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 168
Joined: 5 Jun 2012
Member No.: 55,315



The case got stood down due to court work load.
They will reschedule it in next 12 months.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 21 Dec 2021 - 11:02
Post #66


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Likely 3 months
Where's the post 17 issue?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
harryharoon
post Tue, 21 Dec 2021 - 22:01
Post #67


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 168
Joined: 5 Jun 2012
Member No.: 55,315



I found post 17 so it is ok now:)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
harryharoon
post Wed, 7 Dec 2022 - 13:05
Post #68


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 168
Joined: 5 Jun 2012
Member No.: 55,315



Finally got a letter from DCB Legal who were acting as solicitors for I Park Services Ltd.

They are confirming that the case has been closed however there has not been any notification from I park Services themselves.
Is it something we should worry about ?

Again a massive thanks to all of you who offered support on this issue.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Umkomaas
post Wed, 7 Dec 2022 - 16:56
Post #69


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,124
Joined: 8 Feb 2013
Member No.: 59,842



QUOTE
They are confirming that the case has been closed however there has not been any notification from I park Services themselves.
Is it something we should worry about ?

Why should the PPC do that when they are paying their solicitors to represent them? The discontinuation confirmation from BWL is enough.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
harryharoon
post Thu, 8 Dec 2022 - 12:04
Post #70


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 168
Joined: 5 Jun 2012
Member No.: 55,315



Agree.

They tried their best.

They got the court hearing date set. The court had written to the owner to inform them of the date and the time of the hearing.
Then the date was changed to sometime in October (gone) and then they decided not to pursue things any further.
I wonder what was the point? To intimidate the owner of the car?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Umkomaas
post Thu, 8 Dec 2022 - 13:11
Post #71


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,124
Joined: 8 Feb 2013
Member No.: 59,842



QUOTE
I wonder what was the point? To intimidate the owner of the car?

A key component in their business model. Intimidated motorists deliver profit!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
harryharoon
post Thu, 8 Dec 2022 - 17:06
Post #72


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 168
Joined: 5 Jun 2012
Member No.: 55,315



I agree.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 23:09
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here