PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

798 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

DancingDad
Posted on: Today, 13:18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


Good question.
I understood that they had included the TRO that we had already seen and which doesn't require the time clock.
Inference now is that they have included totally the wrong TRO.

Could you confirm pls.

If the wrong TRO makes the note suggested before a little premature.

Always bear in mind with TPT that they accept a TRO not in physical evidence as long as it is in the TRO library.
There should be a reference to it within the evidence.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1452064 · Replies: 87 · Views: 2,685

DancingDad
Posted on: Today, 13:12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


IIRC correctly, seats and windows need adding.
But check this.
Was common with things like mini vans in the past
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1452061 · Replies: 2 · Views: 0

DancingDad
Posted on: Yesterday, 23:20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


QUOTE (stamfordman @ Tue, 15 Jan 2019 - 22:57) *
Hope it isn't the hairdresser - has there ever been an appointment that ends on time in history.



biggrin.gif biggrin.gif biggrin.gif

Makes no difference.
If OP can show a genuine belief (probably to an adjudicator) that they expected wife to be there, they are covered by the boarding exemption.
This applies even if wife is a no show.
It becomes a greyer area once OP did not immediately drive away but instead chose to leave the vehicle.
But is not insurmountable and can win as long as the adjudicator accepts this was simply trying to make contact and thus part of boarding.
I linked to Makda before.
I also recall a case from one of our prolific collectors of PCNs, Xtreme??
He had arranged to pick up his good lady, parked and wandered into her office to collect her.... won the case.
Though to be fair, he often seemed to win not on any specific but simply cos he brought every argument to bear and never gave up.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1451894 · Replies: 17 · Views: 213

DancingDad
Posted on: Yesterday, 22:43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


Don't wait for the NTO.
If only to clarify the situation and correct the misunderstanding, write back now.
They have offered a get out re loading.
You obviously cannot claim it or supply the evidence but if not dealt with is likely to haunt the rest of the process.
Can also use it to advance a more appropriate challenge point.

Dear Sirs
REf PCN ????
Your letter dated ????
May I correct an obvious misunderstanding.
I was not loading, I only mentioned this as a reason why a longer observation period should have been applied as is often the normal policy.
I had actually stopped solely for the purpose of picking up my wife who had been having her hair done (or whatever it was)
We had pre-arranged for her to be waiting at ???? time and I duly turned up to find she was not there.
I left the car briefly, knowing where she was likely to be (hairdresser???) and was told she was not ready.
I returned to the car immediately to move it, the boarding process frustrated but nevertheless, the stop was solely for boarding.
I attach proof of the appointment (receipts or the like) to verify the situation.
I trust this is now clear.
Hugs and kisses.


I've put in hairdresser as an example but put in what sort of shop, name, address and brief details that may make the story credible.
Ie dress fitting, ordering curtains, whatever it was.
Don't get carried away and don't tell lies.
This is only to correct the loading and set the scene for formal challenge at NTO stage.
Has an added benefit that they may simply ignore or come back with a comment like "you cannot challenge further until NTO stage"
Which adds technical reasons (failing to consider) to future challenges.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1451882 · Replies: 17 · Views: 213

DancingDad
Posted on: Yesterday, 17:06


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


Dear Sirs
Ref PCN ????
I accept that I was parked on an area of carriageway that is raised.
However, all indications are that this is raised as a traffic calming measure and not for one of the prescribed purposes that enable the restriction.
There is no evidence within the raised area that it is for pedestrian or cycle use nor for vehicle access.
Parking on a raised area in itself is not a contravention, it only becomes one if the area is not only raised for one of the specified purposes and this is obvious within the construction.
I therefore ask that you explain the purpose and how this is conveyed to the motorist or confirm cancellation of the PCN.
Hugs and Kisses
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1451736 · Replies: 8 · Views: 128

DancingDad
Posted on: Yesterday, 17:00


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


Boarding applies assuming pre-arranged ie, I'll pick you up at 4pm...…. then when no show, tried to find.
Time allowed includes time to locate the passenger.
Makda case applies.........https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/default/files/keycases/R%20%28Makda%29%20v%20The%20Parking%20Adjudicator.pdf
Not 100% an adjudicator would agree but I would argue that in preference to observation time or state of the lines.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1451735 · Replies: 17 · Views: 213

DancingDad
Posted on: Yesterday, 15:52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


Fair play to them but should not have had to wait for the press to get involved.
Council should have cancelled all the moment it became apparent that an error had been made.
At least they are not falling back on the "people will need to apply for a refund" or worse, "Those that have paid have admitted so will get no refund"
  Forum: News / Press Articles · Post Preview: #1451706 · Replies: 2 · Views: 62

DancingDad
Posted on: Yesterday, 15:48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


Jeez, what a set of numpties.

The video is clear, stopped solely for the purpose of letting another vehicle through the chicane.
This falls full square into the exemption to stopping within TSRGD 2016
"(b)a vehicle which is prevented from proceeding by circumstances beyond the driver’s control or which has to be stopped in order to avoid injury or damage to persons or property;"

Part six here.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/7/made

Appeal and include words that say "The video makes it clear that vehicle stopped simply because it had to in the normal course of driving, to continue would have caused an accident. The service of a PCN and subsequent Notice of Rejection in these circumstances is wholly unreasonable"

I would even question if the person who considered the challenge looked at the video, this is so clearly not a case of stopping.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1451705 · Replies: 16 · Views: 260

DancingDad
Posted on: Yesterday, 15:33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


While I take HCA's point, the note was not the appeal, it is simply a fast response to the evidence pack supplied by the council.
An evidence pack with a summary that relies solely on BB booklet guidance and ignores its own TRO.
I see no point it repeating what may have already been said or trying to sweeten the pill if it hasn't, it is simply a note that points out the glaring error in the council's position.

Does not harm at the hearing when an adjudicator asks what happens to say, "I parked and displayed my Blue Badge but forgot the time clock/didn't realise I needed one …" or to throw in words like "I realise that I am partially responsible for my misfortune" or to apologise.
But it changes not a jot that the council have no lawful standing to serve let alone enforce this PCN and have presented nothing that suggests there is lawful standing.

  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1451701 · Replies: 87 · Views: 2,685

DancingDad
Posted on: Yesterday, 10:14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


Now it is wait and see.
Is it a telephone hearing or on papers ?
If telephone, be prepared.
Have your papers ordered. Highlight important parts.
Have a summary list with bullet points with page number reference to where this point is mentioned.
Post it notes make good page markers and you can add bullet points/notes to them.
You do not want to be hanging on the phone saying "uhm, it's here somewhere, gimme a minute"
Chill, relax, don't panic and if needs be, open your mouth, polite but firm.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1451552 · Replies: 87 · Views: 2,685

DancingDad
Posted on: Yesterday, 00:34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


Jeez, if 5k fines and jail happened for that sort of error of judgement, I'd have been serving life and bankrupt before I was 30.


Doubt you will hear anything.
Treat it as a learning experience to apply for future overtaking.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1451505 · Replies: 9 · Views: 355

DancingDad
Posted on: Yesterday, 00:22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


I'd have included the DVLA email in the "evidence" but should make little difference.
If the Sheriff does it right, they will use that or at least contact you for confirmation.
If they don't, the new owner should use the ground, give your details and an NTO will come to you.
Pre warn the new owner, tell them to use the ground I was not the Owner and ensure they have your details correct. Full address and post code.

Stick with this one mate, you aren't ever going to have to pay unless you miss deadlines.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1451500 · Replies: 31 · Views: 676

DancingDad
Posted on: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 18:03


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


QUOTE (Jlc @ Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 13:29) *
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 09:43) *
Many are so scared of cameras that they allow a good few MPH under the limit.

It's a maximum not a target... laugh.gif



Quite biggrin.gif
But why does anyone travel at significantly less then the maximum when there is no need and sit in lane 2 (or 3) to do it ??

Had it this afternoon on the M54.
Relatively quiet, comfortable cruising at 70, overtaking lorries or slower cars as needed but a significant time in lane 1.
Then it got a little more crowded and suddenly there are queues in lane 2 (two lane motorway) who are going slower then lane 1.
I'll bet that at the front of the queue was one vehicle doing 55mph while trying to overtake a lorry doing 50.
May have been a lorry but is often a car that is quite capable of 70.
One vehicle that is heading up a progressively more frustrated queue of drivers, many tailgating the one in front and many tempted, if not actually undertaking to gain a few yards.
Brake lights every second or so that progressively slows the queue further.
That was my cue to sit in lane one with a reasonable distance to the lorry ahead and relax, next ten miles to the M6 at 50mph.
Not much slower then lane 2 but a lot less frustrating and dare I say it, safer, for me at least.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1451323 · Replies: 22 · Views: 429

DancingDad
Posted on: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 11:08


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


Get the appeal in today.

Grounds Contravention did not Occur
I did not stop on the restriction markings.
This is confirmed by authority
Full details to follow
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1451138 · Replies: 38 · Views: 479

DancingDad
Posted on: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 10:38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


QUOTE (typefish @ Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 09:55) *
What is even more depressing is that even folks I would consider to be rather smart fell foul to this hoax, and didn't believe me when I tried to explain how wrong it was.

Tell me.
Had one guy on a similar report (SPEC cameras in Devon IIRC) who was very certain that the police already ticket for 1mph plus.
And got very sanctimonious when told different, only missed out on "think of the children" but did include a "how it you feel if it was your loved one who didn't get home because of some lunatic speeding"
FFS, the days of hitting lane 3 and holding a steady 85 to 90 may be long gone but I remain to be convinced that all the speed controls and people's perception of them have made motorways any safer.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1451132 · Replies: 22 · Views: 429

DancingDad
Posted on: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 09:43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


QUOTE (nigelbb @ Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 09:28) *
QUOTE (Rallyman72 @ Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 10:17) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sat, 29 Dec 2018 - 21:12) *
Anyway, the question has been answered so thread closed before it gets crayoned on.

Highways Agency have gone so far as to issue a statement saying this is fake news.

Why? Surely anything that deters people from speeding is a good thing?


Trouble is it deters people from even travelling at the speed limit.
Many are so scared of cameras that they allow a good few MPH under the limit.
So is common to find people doing 60 on a motorway (often MLOC) and creating a mobile traffic block.
Fake news like this only makes them slow even more.
Which I wouldn't mind if the bu55ers would stay in lane one or actually speed up if they are overtaking.
There is little more frustrating then travelling at the legal limit when it is safe to do so and being forced to slow because of some twassock who doesn't trust their speedo, doesn't follow rules of the road and thinks that they will automatically get a ticket for one mile an hour over the limit.
These days I seem to spend most of my time on motorways in lane one.
It is simply far easier then playing with the twassocks in other lanes.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1451113 · Replies: 22 · Views: 429

DancingDad
Posted on: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 09:33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 08:44) *
I think the zig has lost its zag so IMO the road marking in the bay is defective.

I think (others please confirm) that Diagram 1001.4 applies.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/14/made

The remarks in column 4 indicate (my bold):-

4. Where the traffic authority is satisfied that the layout or character of the road means it is not practical to lay 8 marks, the number of marks can be reduced to not less than 2

Mick


Right diagram.
Two lines at different angles to each other so IMO minimum applies.
But agree that as the first is more or less parallel to the true line of the carriageway it is arguable that it is not a Zig (or zag) and just a spurious white line.
The whole set up is a right pig's ear.
I'm not convinced that we can convince an adjudicator that it is wrong but there is mileage in the confusion.


@Bernie.
The multiples.
Get them together and check both contraventions and dates.
List them all out along with cited contravention, date and whether or not vehicle was moved between first and last of each group.
This situation seems to have been ongoing for some time and that the council seems to have put on hold pending the permit situation lends credence to the challenge on confusion.
It would suggest that they are as confused as the driver was.
And if even one of the PCNs is for not displaying permit, that would really seal the argument.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1451109 · Replies: 23 · Views: 301

DancingDad
Posted on: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 08:29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


You can also take the route of writing now to the council

Dear Sirs
Ref PCN ????
Ownership.
I sold the vehicle on ???? date to ????name and address.
They may now be shown as the Registered Keeper but at the time of the alleged contravention, I was the RK and the Owner.
Accordingly any further correspondence should be sent to myself, reliance on DVLA records after the date above will be incorrect.
I attach a copy of the Bill of Sale, V5c Registration Document, Road Tax Reminder, Insurance Certificate (whatever to evidence) and a recent utility bill to show correct address to be used.
For the avoidance of doubt, any further correspondence must be sent to:-
Name
Address.
Hugs and Kisses

If sent, if they do send an NTO to the new owner, you have another ground to challenge the NTO on which should be a winner (once the NTO gets to you)
Keep a copy of what you sent.

Their rejection is total cr4p BTW, they simply cannot win this one.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1451084 · Replies: 31 · Views: 676

DancingDad
Posted on: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 08:16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


QUOTE (kernow2015 @ Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 06:38) *
Are the zig-zags not placed in the wrong position?
Normally when there are parking bays the ZZ run parallel alongside the outside of the bay and not angled inwards.



ZZs must run along the edge of the carriageway.
But here it is confused/open to argument as to what is the edge of the carriageway.
HCA offered a draft earlier based on this is obviously a parking bay and you cannot have ZZs in a parking bay.
I happen to disagree with that it is obviously a parking bay but cannot offer anything better.


@Bernie

Once a Notice to Owner has been served you can only Formally Challenge against the NTO.
Which is not to say that errors on the PCN cannot be raised.
Damp but readable is not a winner.


You will need to explain multiple PCNs as well.
Does this mean PCNs on different occasions or one parking session and PCNs placed on consecutive days?
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1451079 · Replies: 23 · Views: 301

DancingDad
Posted on: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 08:10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


Obviously the CEo saw the BB but also felt that the standard exemption did not apply for some reason.
Time clock missing or wrongly set, BB obscured or BB upside down (wrong face up) are common reasons.
Less common but happens is that the CEO felt parking was dangerous such as too close to a corner. This is not a valid reason to serve a PCN.


We need CEO pictures and confirmation that BB and Clock were displayed correctly.

  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1451076 · Replies: 5 · Views: 115

DancingDad
Posted on: Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 14:34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


QUOTE (Darkatmosphere @ Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 14:00) *
...........He was reported for "using a motor vehicle when television receiving apparatus was visible to the driver". not cinematography and its a stretch of the imagination to suggest a mobile phone is cinematography apparatus. Does the regulation apply there? I think it doesn't and is self explanatory as to why its aimed at cold cathode ray tubes from the 80 and 90's. I think reg 104 or RTA 88 C.52 Part 1 sec 3 Careless, and inconsiderate, driving, would have been a safe TOR.

The important bit will not be what the tweet from the cops or the BBC says.
It will be what is written on the summons should he decide to fight it.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1450885 · Replies: 25 · Views: 585

DancingDad
Posted on: Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 13:56


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


QUOTE (Darkatmosphere @ Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 13:16) *
So is everyone of consensus that (2) is not applicable to 109 in its entirety and that it can be cherry picked to mean what ever someone wants it to mean?

I think (2) is very important wording there, when it relates to "television receiving apparatus".

Cinematography is recording equipment like a camera and sounding equipment rigging and booms for recording, it aims for films crews and amateur film recordings in and on vehicles on public highways without express permission and permits etc. It think it does not relate to a mobile phone receiving and displaying Images or recording or live tv.

A mobile phone transmits and receives televised data and displays images and video live or recorded, it would fall into 109 but for one thing (2)In this regulation “television receiving apparatus” means any cathode ray tube carried on a vehicle and on which there can be displayed an image derived from a television broadcast, a recording or a camera or computer. Which means that a mobile phone is not a cathode ray tube device and don't fall within the scope of 109, this is my interpretation, some may not agree but I think the regulation is too old and needs to include LED/OLED "mobile device".



Interpret how you will.
At your peril.
To quote many learned judges, "When read as a whole"
Don't pick words and try to fit that into what you want it to mean, look at the whole lot and work out what the draftsman is trying to say.
Many have tried and failed with the make it fit approach in courts and at adjudications.

For instance, where does Cinematography being recording equipment et al fall into " ...cinematographic apparatus used to display anything other than..."
The very word display gives a very strong inference that the wording relates to display screens.
Item 2 is simply interpretation on what "television receiving apparatus" meant then.
But is qualified with the catch all in (1) " or any other cinematographic apparatus used to display anything other than..."


Does it need to be updated to include any possibility of type of display ?
Not in my opinion when that catchall is in the wording.
Could update to remove the specific about CRT but why when it has no effect on whether an LED or OLED screen falls into the "any other.." category.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1450874 · Replies: 25 · Views: 585

DancingDad
Posted on: Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 12:35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


Not saying don't try it but looking on streetview, ZZs are clear.
And can make out a faint line (which may or may not be clearer in reality) demarking the end of the parking bay, the two do not overlap.

It would have been clearer without the landscaped "layby" but I cannot fault the markings unless it can be shown that the parking bay markings are warn to the point of misleading.
The ZZs certainly are not from the CEo photos.

Which really makes any challenge "I parked on ZZs believing they were wrongly inserted into a parking bay".... not a winner IMO.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1450829 · Replies: 23 · Views: 301

DancingDad
Posted on: Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 12:28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 12:16) *
……….
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 09:58) *
If the authority were aware that the BB was correctly displayed was an offence committed? Yes.
By whom? THE COUNCIL, who acted ultra vires in issuing a PCN.

That's not an offence, at worst it's a civil wrong (trespass).

Dunno, it offends me when CEOs or Councils make up the rules to suit their perceived wisdom without regard for the legalities.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1450825 · Replies: 36 · Views: 610

DancingDad
Posted on: Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 12:24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,010
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559


QUOTE (Half_way @ Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 11:48) *
......….So from that, anything that falls outside of A-D could be interpreted as illegal...…...

Yup
Include inbuild equipment such as my Bluetooth phone connection with contact lists, the display screen for that lot does not fall into A-D.
Could even be argued that an outside temperature display only loosely falls into D.
Whether any cop would cite a relatively bland information screen or in car app for voice txts, especially if built in, is open to question.
Whether or not in the public interest or interest of justice is another question.


Most video display systems have an inhibitor (or recommendation if retro fitting) to prevent videos being shown when vehicle is moving/in gear.
Some screens have diverters so driver cannot see the video but passenger can
Watching the latest film is not a good idea for the driver and would IMO be suitable for prosecution


QUOTE (typefish @ Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 12:06) *
QUOTE (Spandex @ Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 11:01) *
Wouldn’t the phone display count as “or other cinematographic apparatus used to display anything other than information” in this case? S109 doesn’t just cover CRTs.


I never knew phones recorded the output of YouTube

"Cinematographic apparatus" does not mean "thing with a screen", it means "dash cam displaying recording" or "camcorder"


Phones do not need to record youtube, they can simply play it.


A display screen is Cinematographic Equipment ergo, a thing with a screen falls into it, especially as it is being "used to display"
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1450822 · Replies: 25 · Views: 585

798 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

New Posts  New Replies
No New Posts  No New Replies
Hot topic  Hot Topic (New)
No new  Hot Topic (No New)
Poll  Poll (New)
No new votes  Poll (No New)
Closed  Locked Topic
Moved  Moved Topic
 

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Wednesday, 16th January 2019 - 13:18
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.