PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Help! Parking Ticket (UK P.A.O. Leeds)
tallgirl
post Fri, 20 Jul 2007 - 12:06
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 19 Jul 2007
Member No.: 12,879



I have reading other posts with interest and I am wondering what people will make of a ticket I have been issued. Photo here: (for the reason - under with out valid permit or authority! the writing says 'photo of me leaving site')

The ticket was issued 2 minutes after I parked!
The carpark was for Maplin and other some other stores in Leeds. I did leave the site to use a post box but returned to use the stores. I did not read the detial on the signs so did not think leaving the site for a short time would result in a ticket.
(will get photo of sign later)
On reading the signs after the event the signs say parking is allowed for 1 hour and that leaving site is not allowed.

Does this need to be paid?

In leaving site I have not complied with the sign but it looks from others on the site that this is not enforceable??
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
21 Pages V  « < 11 12 13 14 15 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (240 - 259)
Advertisement
post Fri, 20 Jul 2007 - 12:06
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
GretaGarbo
post Fri, 22 Feb 2008 - 18:42
Post #241


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 14 Feb 2008
Member No.: 17,292



Good to hear it Abbie!

I've just received a letter from them stating that, 'the registered keeper of the vehicle is responsible for any charge which is applied to that vehicle, [...] if you have loaned your vehicle to someone you can pass on their details just as a hire company would.'

And they enclose some nice colour photos of the vehicle - not of me, just the vehicle 'which will be issued to the county court', (these may come in handy when it comes time to sell it - they're really quite good!)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
leegomery16
post Fri, 22 Feb 2008 - 18:44
Post #242


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,080
Joined: 8 Dec 2007
Member No.: 15,918



Nice of them to make such a fraudulent statement. Off to trading standards with you.


--------------------
Someone not paying VAT when they should? Email: HM Revenue & Customs

Laws, like men, are born to die. Justice is immortal.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Abbie
post Fri, 22 Feb 2008 - 18:46
Post #243


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 23 Aug 2007
Member No.: 13,307



Oooh i got some of those pics originally as well!!

I reckon they must have spent close on to £100 going after me for what was their own error in the first place with a faulty machine.

Was it worth I ask....yes probably because out of the 1 in 100 that doesnt cave in there are 99 that dont know their rights or read this website!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jdfi
post Fri, 22 Feb 2008 - 19:54
Post #244


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 962
Joined: 29 Aug 2007
From: England
Member No.: 13,384



Abbie congratulations, but make sure you get confirmation from the court of this. If you don't, then turn up anyway with the letter.

If you wanted to carry on the fight, you could always be considerate and accommodating, and ask Stevie for dates that are convenient to him and his witness, and then write to the court to say that you'd like to adjourn.

Sounds like a victory in any event, even if it isn't the clear cut District Judge decision that we were all hoping for.

Please feel more than welcome to stick around the site, your legal and practical experience will doubtless be of use to others. Congrats.


--------------------
Everyone on this forum (even those who may be professionally qualified as something) give advice that is their laymans' opinion. This is given without liability. Everyone will assume you are telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and try to assist you if they can. Photos of signs/the area and scans of documents can help. Never throw anything away even if trivial! Tell all your friends about PePiPoo please!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bama
post Fri, 22 Feb 2008 - 21:05
Post #245


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,929
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323



Abbie, PM in its way


--------------------
Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.

Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Barnsley Boy
post Fri, 22 Feb 2008 - 23:40
Post #246


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 359
Joined: 11 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,403



I'm with JDFI on this - getting the confirmation from the court is vital. Sheenanigans like this have happened before - the PPC misleads the defendant into not turning up.

"vital witness" - what rubbish, no mention of this in the original statement.

Well done Abbie!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
whitewing
post Fri, 22 Feb 2008 - 23:56
Post #247


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,150
Joined: 5 Aug 2006
Member No.: 6,999



QUOTE (Barnsley Boy @ Fri, 22 Feb 2008 - 23:40) *
I'm with JDFI on this - getting the confirmation from the court is vital. Sheenanigans like this have happened before - the PPC misleads the defendant into not turning up.

Wouldn't that be attempting to pervert the course of justice? Wonder if the Police would get interested then....


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
legaladviser
post Sat, 23 Feb 2008 - 13:15
Post #248


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,358
Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Member No.: 11,552



Abbie, I agree with the others. Write to the court enclosing the letter from UKPAO and ask for the action to the struck out. Also request your costs in having to defend this spurious action. These chancers never had a hope with this but you need to be careful as others have said that they are not trying to pull a fast one. Vital witness my eye - that must have been the pay and display machine then. Funnily enough it cannot attend as it is affixed to the ground that day.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bama
post Sat, 23 Feb 2008 - 14:08
Post #249


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,929
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323



oh yeah. this ain't over until UK PAO (Hiya Steve smile.gif ) have paid up... and the press informed....

footnote - seems this thread gets a large number of views. my bet is that it is a lot of 'Guest' viewing...

This post has been edited by bama: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 - 15:50


--------------------
Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.

Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Barnsley Boy
post Sat, 23 Feb 2008 - 21:15
Post #250


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 359
Joined: 11 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,403



Those of us who have been following the Abbie & UK PAO with more than a little interest have been somewhat deflated by this result.

I'm pleased for Abbie of course, it is apparent from her postings that she never wanted the hassle of a day in court anyway. She was simply put in a situation where she felt she could not in all conscience do otherwise than tell UK PAO where to get off.

The odds really are against a "proper" defence ever being aired in court. The PPCs may continue to fly kites, making the odd MCOL claim, reviewing the defence, which they get to see well prior to the actual court appearance. They then decide whether to proceed with the claim or run for the hills. I think there is something wrong with the system here. Once a party has started litigation it should only be possible to stop it by mutual agreement between the parties or by application to the judge. This right to unilateral cessation seems far too casual and leads to apparent abuse of process.

When does this vexacious litigation thing kick in - 3 in row? 7? 10? or is it a "suck and see" job?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
axeman
post Sat, 23 Feb 2008 - 22:58
Post #251


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,332
Joined: 10 Mar 2007
From: Midlands
Member No.: 11,071



QUOTE (Barnsley Boy @ Sat, 23 Feb 2008 - 21:15) *
Those of us who have been following the Abbie & UK PAO with more than a little interest have been somewhat deflated by this result.

I'm pleased for Abbie of course, it is apparent from her postings that she never wanted the hassle of a day in court anyway. She was simply put in a situation where she felt she could not in all conscience do otherwise than tell UK PAO where to get off.

The odds really are against a "proper" defence ever being aired in court. The PPCs may continue to fly kites, making the odd MCOL claim, reviewing the defence, which they get to see well prior to the actual court appearance. They then decide whether to proceed with the claim or run for the hills. I think there is something wrong with the system here. Once a party has started litigation it should only be possible to stop it by mutual agreement between the parties or by application to the judge. This right to unilateral cessation seems far too casual and leads to apparent abuse of process.

When does this vexacious litigation thing kick in - 3 in row? 7? 10? or is it a "suck and see" job?


how about some of us meet in this car park and all overstay, with the right reaction to the forthcoming UK PAO threats and keeping quietish here I bet we could lull them into taking some of us to court for a day(s) of fun.


--------------------
NOTICE The content of this post and of any replies to it may assist in or relate to the formulation of strategy tactics etcetera in a legal action. This post and any replies to it should therefore be assumed to be legally privileged and therefore must not be disclosed, copied, quoted, discussed, used or referred to outside of the PePiPoo forum on which it was originally posted additionally it must not be disclosed, copied, quoted, discussed, used or referred to by any person or organisation other than a member of PePiPoo appropriately paid up and in full compliance with the PePiPoo terms of use for the forum on which it was originally posted. The PePiPoo terms of use can be found at http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?act=boardrules. For the avoidance of doubt, if you are reading this material in any form other than an on-line HTML resource directly and legitimately accessed via a URL commencing "http://forums.pepipoo.com" then it has been obtained by improper means and you are probably reading it in breach of legal privilege. If the material you are reading does not include this notice then it has been obtained improperly and you are probably reading it in breach of legal privilege. Your attention is drawn to the Written Standards for the Conduct of Professional Work issued by the Bar Standards Board particularly under heading 7, "Documents".

Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved" and do not constitute legal advice. Liability for application lies with the reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bama
post Sun, 24 Feb 2008 - 01:18
Post #252


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,929
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323



the scumbags PPCs know how the Con works and how it fails.
there was never any chance of Steve (Hiya Steve smile.gif ) showing up to face a prepared defendant.

Axeman's suggestion may have some merit...


--------------------
Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.

Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
g_attrill
post Sun, 24 Feb 2008 - 01:45
Post #253


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,248
Joined: 12 Oct 2003
From: Hants, UK
Member No.: 412



I agree it sounds like a made-up reason, although I doubt anybody with the powers have the resources to check and follow this up.

It's possibly worth bringing it to the attention of the Court Service higher up - it might count against them as a "vexacious litigatant", although I think the bar is set very high, the case was not completely without merit (ie. it's for people sueing somebody for no reason, or a spurious reason).


--------------------
Found anything useful? Become a BB&G!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Barnsley Boy
post Sun, 24 Feb 2008 - 12:50
Post #254


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 359
Joined: 11 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,403



I'm not saying it should be the case here, Abbie has done her bit and has earned her right to leave the stage with a standing ovation, but for the next time.....

it is entirely possible (according to the Civil procedure rules) for a defendant to file for a set aside of the discontinuance.

Right to apply to have notice of discontinuance set aside

under

38.4 (1)Where the claimant discontinues under rule 38.2(1) the defendant may apply to have the notice of discontinuance set aside (GL) .
(2)The defendant may not make an application under this rule more than 28 days after the date when the notice of discontinuance was served on him.

[Info obtained from Tomterm8 @ CAG]

This post has been edited by Barnsley Boy: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 - 13:11
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bama
post Sun, 24 Feb 2008 - 13:23
Post #255


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,929
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323



Nice find Barnsley Boy !.

in the rare instances where a PPC is daft enough to issue real papers this closes the door on them chickening out. they still won't attend Court on the day IMV but doesn't this give the defendant the chance to make sure the Judge 'finds' appropriately. Althoough it is Civil and not binding AIUI it is still 'another case'.

As these are rare instances they should be pressed home to full advantage IMV.


--------------------
Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.

Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Abbie
post Mon, 25 Feb 2008 - 13:27
Post #256


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 23 Aug 2007
Member No.: 13,307



Well i have done a letter to the Court asking how I apply for my costs and a letter to UK PAO Ltd telling them that i have written to the Court for confirmation that the claim has officially been withdrawn.

So if they are lying....the Court is not going to look too favourably on them???

You have all got me wondering whether I should continue this now and go for the hardline on it...

Surely though if they withdraw it means I cannot pursue it further though..doesnt it?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bama
post Mon, 25 Feb 2008 - 13:36
Post #257


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,929
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323



see post #254 just above....


--------------------
Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.

Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
leegomery16
post Mon, 25 Feb 2008 - 23:16
Post #258


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,080
Joined: 8 Dec 2007
Member No.: 15,918



I'm not sure how pursuing the matter would fit in with the Overriding Objective in Civil Matters and I doubt the court would allow you to.


--------------------
Someone not paying VAT when they should? Email: HM Revenue & Customs

Laws, like men, are born to die. Justice is immortal.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Barnsley Boy
post Tue, 26 Feb 2008 - 07:48
Post #259


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 359
Joined: 11 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,403



Bad news about costs I'm afraid!

From www.justice.gov.uk/civil/procrules_fin/contents/parts/part38.htm

38.1 (1) The rules in this Part set out the procedure by which a claimant may discontinue all or part of a claim.
(2) A claimant who –
(a) claims more than one remedy; and
(b) subsequently abandons his claim to one or more of the remedies but continues with his claim for the other remedies,


is not treated as discontinuing all or part of a claim for the purposes of this Part.


(The procedure for amending a statement of case, set out in Part 17, applies where a claimant abandons a claim for a particular remedy but wishes to continue with his claim for other remedies)




Right to discontinue claim
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

38.2 (1) A claimant may discontinue all or part of a claim at any time.
(2) However –
(a) a claimant must obtain the permission of the court if he wishes to discontinue all or part of a claim in relation to which –
(i) the court has granted an interim injunction (GL) ; or
(ii) any party has given an undertaking to the court;

(b) where the claimant has received an interim payment in relation to a claim (whether voluntarily or pursuant to an order under Part 25), he may discontinue that claim only if –
(i) the defendant who made the interim payment consents in writing; or
(ii) the court gives permission;

© where there is more than one claimant, a claimant may not discontinue unless –
(i) every other claimant consents in writing; or
(ii) the court gives permission.


(3) Where there is more than one defendant, the claimant may discontinue all or part of a claim against all or any of the defendants.





Procedure for discontinuing
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

38.3 (1) To discontinue a claim or part of a claim, a claimant must –
(a) file a notice of discontinuance; and
(b) serve a copy of it on every other party to the proceedings.

(2) The claimant must state in the notice of discontinuance which he files that he has served notice of discontinuance on every other party to the proceedings.
(3) Where the claimant needs the consent of some other party, a copy of the necessary consent must be attached to the notice of discontinuance.
(4) Where there is more than one defendant, the notice of discontinuance must specify against which defendants the claim is discontinued.





Right to apply to have notice of discontinuance set aside
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

38.4 (1) Where the claimant discontinues under rule 38.2(1) the defendant may apply to have the notice of discontinuance set aside (GL) .
(2) The defendant may not make an application under this rule more than 28 days after the date when the notice of discontinuance was served on him.





When discontinuance takes effect where permission of the court is not needed
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

38.5 (1) Discontinuance against any defendant takes effect on the date when notice of discontinuance is served on him under rule 38.3(1).
(2) Subject to rule 38.4, the proceedings are brought to an end as against him on that date.
(3) However, this does not affect proceedings to deal with any question of costs.





Liability for costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

38.6 (1) Unless the court orders otherwise, a claimant who discontinues is liable for the costs which a defendant against whom he discontinues incurred on or before the date on which notice of discontinuance was served on him.
(2) If proceedings are only partly discontinued –
(a) the claimant is liable under paragraph (1) for costs relating only to the part of the proceedings which he is discontinuing; and
(b) unless the court orders otherwise, the costs which the claimant is liable to pay must not be assessed until the conclusion of the rest of the proceedings.

(3) This rule does not apply to claims allocated to the small claims track.


(Rule 44.12 provides for the basis of assessment where right to costs arises on discontinuance)




Discontinuance and subsequent proceedings
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

38.7 A claimant who discontinues a claim needs the permission of the court to make another claim against the same defendant if –
(a) he discontinued the claim after the defendant filed a defence; and
(b) the other claim arises out of facts which are the same or substantially the same as those relating to the discontinued claim.






Stay of remainder of partly discontinued proceedings where costs not paid
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

38.8 (1) This rule applies where –
(a) proceedings are partly discontinued;
(b) a claimant is liable to pay costs under rule 38.6; and
© the claimant fails to pay those costs within 14 days of –
(i) the date on which the parties agreed the sum payable by the claimant; or
(ii) the date on which the court ordered the costs to be paid.


(2) Where this rule applies, the court may stay (GL) the remainder of the proceedings until the claimant pays the whole of the costs which he is liable to pay under rule 38.6.





Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Grimsby Man
post Tue, 26 Feb 2008 - 08:21
Post #260


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,785



QUOTE (GretaGarbo @ Fri, 15 Feb 2008 - 12:17) *
QUOTE (Grimsby Man @ Fri, 15 Feb 2008 - 08:18) *
Don't write to UK PAO Ltd at all,

Try and find the owner of the land and write to them. UK PAO LTd have to give a name of person who can cancel tickets, this can be achieved by writing to the FEE paying section of the DVLA Swansea SA99 1ZZ, do not email DVLA, they will not send all the information via email. Remember you must have cause to believe that Uk POA Ltd as acted unlawfully in asking for the details of the Vehicle.


What advantage is there in writing to the owners of the land rather than the PPC? Surely they would just refer it back to UK PAO who are acting as their agents in the matter?



Got my notice cancelled 3 days after writing to owners
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

21 Pages V  « < 11 12 13 14 15 > » 
Closed 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: Saturday, 27th November 2021 - 08:41
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.