PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

Wobba
Posted on: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 - 20:05


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Thu, 30 Mar 2023 - 19:09) *
QUOTE (Wobba @ Thu, 30 Mar 2023 - 17:29) *
I wasn't too sure where to post this
Any thoughts?

Yes, you posted in the wrong place (so I’ve moved it).


Thanks! My mistake smile.gif

QUOTE (Boomer @ Thu, 30 Mar 2023 - 18:12) *
#Together are certainly fighting against 15-mins. ULEZs, CBDCs and other governmental overreach.
At the very least they are worth following on Twitter or GETTR.

Thank you!
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1771956 · Replies: 10 · Views: 1,302

Wobba
Posted on: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 - 16:29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


I wasn't too sure where to post this but it appears the Council's across the land have been preparing to action a plan to curtail private car use for some time now. People in some areas will be limited as to how many times a year they can leave their zone and enter another, with motorists being fined for going over this limit through the use of NPR cameras.

I was wondering if anyone had yet looked into this as I am sure there are plenty of holes in the way they will be 'enforced', with Council's rubbing their hands gleefully at all the extra revenue they will procure, they will probably be fining people with the usual sham of non-compliant wording and signage.

Any thoughts?
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1771923 · Replies: 10 · Views: 1,302

Wobba
Posted on: Sat, 5 Nov 2022 - 16:52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


QUOTE (andy_foster @ Sat, 5 Nov 2022 - 13:27) *
Not sure exactly what you redacted, but you didn't redact your friend's name.

Debt collectors' letters are essentially irrelevant and an utter waste of time posting.

Just because debt collectors add the words "Solicitors" after their name does not alter the above, and neither does it make them any more (or less) legitimate than any other debt collectors letters.

What matters is what signage was at the location (prominence and content), whether a notice was affixed to the vehicle or otherwise given to the driver at the time, when a notice was sent (and delivered) to the Registered Keeper, what that notice said (whether it complied with the requirements for keeper liability under Sch 4 PoFA 2012) and whether the driver has been identified.


Thanks! I edited the pic smile.gif

QUOTE (Dave65 @ Sat, 5 Nov 2022 - 10:51) *
Never phone a debt collector or a PPC, they will ask who was driving the vehicle.
Was the drivers ID given in any communication? very important.

The £70 cannot be claimed for their client's time and effort. This would be challenged in a defence.


Interesting. I suspected that might be the case about the £70. Sadly, my friend is a PCN/Invoice newbie and did ring them and possibly inadvertently revealed the driver.

QUOTE (Redx @ Fri, 4 Nov 2022 - 19:08) *
Nothing will halt the juggernaut, an MCOL claim will follow, so follow the LBC advice over on mse parking forum in the newbies faq sticky thread in announcements there, A SAR to the DPO at Premier Park and an LBC reply to Gladstone

Then the recipient should prepare for a court claim before the end of the year



Ok thank you. I am reading the newbie sticky with great intent!
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1745191 · Replies: 4 · Views: 266

Wobba
Posted on: Fri, 4 Nov 2022 - 18:23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


Hi all! Me again.

Just after a bit of advice on how best to proceed. A friend of mine was apparently issued a ticket and sent to her old address for parking in a private parking bay. She did not receive the letters as she moved home, but she later received a letter from Debt Recovery Plus after the used the DVLA trace facility:





She had thought that where she had parked was a local authority bay and she had bought a parking ticket from the nearby machine, she rang DRP and tried to explain but DRP were not interested and kept asking how she was going to pay. Looking on Google Maps street view, it is a weird parking area, not brilliantly defined.

So, she decided to ignore as she felt this was a stab in the dark to get money out of her and they would not try and enforce it any further...

Fast forward 2 or 3 months and she receives a letter from Gladstone. The letter seems legit as it starts with the reference '1xxxxx', which is the reference format Gladstone use:







I only have experience with PCN's and handling local council tickets, so these private ones are not my area. I've done a few searches and dug a bit up about Gladstone, but I am not up to speed and I am hoping there is something obvious I am unaware of that could bring the proceedings to a halt in my friends favour!

Apparently, the private bay she parked in was for use by Poundland staff and was not a public bay...

They state the extra £70 is for their clients time and effort, but I am not sure if this falls under a charge from the debt collector or not.
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1745090 · Replies: 4 · Views: 266

Wobba
Posted on: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 - 21:33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


I will do. I will scan the hard copy when it arrives smile.gif Thanks!
  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #604167 · Replies: 20 · Views: 5,947

Wobba
Posted on: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 - 23:44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


Right.

This went to the Adjudicator, the final decision was sent to me today.

Appeal allowed on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur.

biggrin.gif

I did not use the 28 day argument really, though I did mention it. I just focussed on the fact there is, as hcandersen & boggy0220 cleverly spotted, no requirement to display a permit in the regulations. The more I read into the regs after that, the more I found was lacking in their management for the Car Club system. After that, and a fairly decent appeal letter was emailed over to the Traffic penalty Tribunal, I was 90% sure it was just a matter of time till I got the good news. Interestingly, the Council still chose to try their luck, despite it being clear to me they had no leg to stand on, in technical terms.

Thanks for the pointers guys. I knew there was something not quite right about that PCN...I owe you a pint wink.gif

  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #603848 · Replies: 20 · Views: 5,947

Wobba
Posted on: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 - 10:45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


That's brilliant, thank you for the input guys. I will start building my case and let you know how it goes. Any other feedback will still be looked at though if someone else has any further input?

Cheers!

I am trying to find the NtO. I never throw these away, so it must be somewhere!
  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #585894 · Replies: 20 · Views: 5,947

Wobba
Posted on: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 - 22:52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


I've searched all the documents, (PPO's and amendments) I can lay my hands on, and though they mention 'Southbrook Road', there is no mention of Southbrook Road (s) car park or Southbrook Road (n) car park either, in any of the files. The PCN does say the contravention took place at Southbrook Road (s) car park.

Worth arguing? Next stage is Adjudicator.
  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #585831 · Replies: 20 · Views: 5,947

Wobba
Posted on: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 - 20:42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


Ask Salford Council for the relevant TRO and PPO first, before you appeal. It could just be the ones they have listed on the Adjudicators site have not been updated.

http://tro.parking-adjudication.gov.uk/files/SL02.pdf

^^
That's the only relevant one I can find.
  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #585794 · Replies: 17 · Views: 3,336

Wobba
Posted on: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 - 20:00


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


Right, I am very rusty at all this and I am sure someone will come along and tell me I am wrong lol....but...

That PCN refers to the TMA 2004, and as such the PCN correctly states the issuing officer as a 'Civil Enforcement Officer', and describes itself as a 'Parking Charge Notice'....but...

The (OFF-STREET PARKING PLACES AND CAR PARKS WITH DISABLED PARKING SPACES) ORDER 2002

The above PPO is the only document I could find relating to Hankinson Way off-road parking area. The document is a mess to be honest. I would double check with Salford Council but it looks to me like they have not updated it in some time. It still refers to :

'parking attendant' means a person authorised by or on behalf of the Council under Section
63A of the Act to supervise and enforce the restrictions imposed by this Order;

There are so many errors in that document, I am dubious as to whether it has not been superseded. If it has not, they can't enforce the PCN.

I may be wrong though.
  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #585785 · Replies: 17 · Views: 3,336

Wobba
Posted on: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 - 19:39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


QUOTE (mark312 @ Wed, 27 Apr 2011 - 20:22) *
QUOTE (Wobba @ Tue, 26 Apr 2011 - 23:14) *
Is this the place?


The very same! Guessing this was taken a good while ago?

The ticket machine is out of sight behind the trees...

QUOTE (alloageorge @ Wed, 27 Apr 2011 - 00:30) *
ticked looks ok and your pay and display
expired 3 hours early(according to council).
council normally preserve your discount if
you appeal within 14 days.you could try
appealing due to poor signage and see if
they cock up with the nto.


Presume "nto" is notice to owner? So if I appeal, ask them to preserve the discount pending the outcome of the appeal, then pay up promptly if unsuccessful it's probably worth a try...?



That is an old photo, yea, on Google Street Maps...can you see the old info about the charges going up?

NtO is indeed Notice to Owner.

They should automatically preserve the lower charge amount, assuming they state that on the PCN, if representations are made within 14 days.
  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #585783 · Replies: 17 · Views: 3,336

Wobba
Posted on: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 - 16:34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


QUOTE (boggy0220 @ Wed, 27 Apr 2011 - 07:21) *
Just had a quick look at that TRO and have found definitions of Car Club but have not found it referred to in any of the schedules. Southbrook Road is mentioned but not Southbrook Road (s) car park. There are many TRO listed for SCC so I think you will need to look through a few more as this may throw up some useful info for you. If they have sent you this particular 2009 TRO as reference and there is nothing in it that covers the bays in which you were parked then I think you have some good grounds of appeal there.
Must fly, gotta go to work. Look carefully at ALL of the relevent TROs, look at which ones have been replaced and redrawn and you might be in luck. I hope so!


It is not referred to specifically in any of the schedules, period. However:

4. USE OF PARKING PLACES

(i) Each parking place in Schedules 9.01 to 9.12 may be used in accordance herewith
for the parking of all vehicles except:
(a) vehicles exceeding 3.5 tonnes gross vehicle weight and vehicles adapted to
carry more than 8 passengers exclusive of the driver;
(b) vehicles drawing trailers in Grosvenor Square, Eastgate Street, Marlands,
Salisbury Street and West Park Road multi-storey car parks;
© vehicles, any part of which exceeds 2.05 metres in height in Grosvenor
Square, Eastgate Street, Marlands, Salisbury Street multi-storey car parks or
1.88 metres in height in West Park Road car park; and
(d) vehicles of any description in Bargate Street car park, unless they are parked
for the purpose of using the Shopmobility Scheme and display in a prominent
position, so that it is facing forwards and can be entirely and easily seen from
in front of the vehicle, a valid permit in writing issued by the operators of the
Shopmobility Scheme, authorising the vehicle to be parked and clearly
indicating the period of validity of the permit.

(ii) No person shall cause or permit a vehicle to park in a space marked for Disabled
Persons unless the vehicle displays a Disabled Person's Badge in the manner
prescribed by Regulation 12 of the Disabled Person's (Badges for Motor Vehicles)
(England) Regulations 2000.

(iii) No person shall cause or permit a vehicle to park in a space marked for Car Club
vehicles unless the vehicle is a Car Club vehicle for which written permission has
been given by the Council for that vehicle to use that space; and

(iv) A maximum of six parking bays shall be reserved for car club vehicles in any one
car park at any time.


They don't define 'car park' in section (iv), I think the TRO presumes the reader will take that to mean their off-street parking areas. It appears this is SCC's way of blanket bombing their coverage of all their car parks for use with this 'Car Club' thing.

I will admit, there is not much to go on to base an appeal on from what I can see, hence my plea for some help here.

  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #585737 · Replies: 20 · Views: 5,947

Wobba
Posted on: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 - 14:48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 27 Apr 2011 - 14:19) *
If it's in a car park it doesn't need to be authorised.


Are you saying then, that any signs inside this car park cannot be used for an appeal in this case?

If so, I shall not waste any more time researching data about Car Club signs.
  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #585716 · Replies: 20 · Views: 5,947

Wobba
Posted on: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 - 13:15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


Apparently, though I am yet to see it from official sources, this is the DfT approved sign for 'Car Club' parking bays:



As seen here, in use currently in London:



I think, even had I seen the (660) 'Permit Holders Only' sign, shown by the Council above, it's too ambiguous.

The road marking vary from city to city as well. I guess there are variants which may be authorised separately?
  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #585689 · Replies: 20 · Views: 5,947

Wobba
Posted on: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 - 11:00


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


Thus far, all I can find is this:

SOUTHBROOK ROAD
Land on both sides of Southbrook Road bounded on the west by Central Station Bridge


It's in about three documents that I can see.

The PCN describes the area to be 'Southbrook Road (s) car park'.
  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #585660 · Replies: 20 · Views: 5,947

Wobba
Posted on: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 - 09:40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


Here is the PCN:



  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #585641 · Replies: 20 · Views: 5,947

Wobba
Posted on: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 - 08:57


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


My memory is not what it was. PPO?

Boggy: Are you saying it appears they have not defined the car park correctly?

Is this relevant in any way?

4 USE OF PARKING PLACES
(i) Each parking place in Schedules 9.01 to 9.12 may be used in accordance herewith
for the parking of all vehicles except:
(a) vehicles exceeding 3.5 tonnes gross vehicle weight and vehicles adapted to
carry more than 8 passengers exclusive of the driver;
(b) vehicles drawing trailers in Grosvenor Square, Eastgate Street, Marlands,
Salisbury Street and West Park Road multi-storey car parks;
© vehicles, any part of which exceeds 2.05 metres in height in Grosvenor
Square, Eastgate Street, Marlands, Salisbury Street multi-storey car parks or
1.88 metres in height in West Park Road car park; and
(d) vehicles of any description in Bargate Street car park, unless they are parked
for the purpose of using the Shopmobility Scheme and display in a prominent
position, so that it is facing forwards and can be entirely and easily seen from
in front of the vehicle, a valid permit in writing issued by the operators of the
Shopmobility Scheme, authorising the vehicle to be parked and clearly
indicating the period of validity of the permit.
(ii) No person shall cause or permit a vehicle to park in a space marked for Disabled
Persons unless the vehicle displays a Disabled Person's Badge in the manner
prescribed by Regulation 12 of the Disabled Person's (Badges for Motor Vehicles)
(England) Regulations 2000.
(iii) No person shall cause or permit a vehicle to park in a space marked for Car Club
vehicles unless the vehicle is a Car Club vehicle for which written permission has
been given by the Council for that vehicle to use that space; and
(iv) A maximum of six parking bays shall be reserved for car club vehicles in any one
car park at any time.


  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #585634 · Replies: 20 · Views: 5,947

Wobba
Posted on: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 - 23:13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


Hello, gone and got myself another PCN in Southampton.

On the 11th January 2011, I had to catch a train to London for work from Southampton Central station. I've not had to park there in years, but drove my car into the pay and display car park, controlled by Southampton City Council. I parked my car in the first bay, noted there were other bays available, but stayed put and paid for my ticket, £8.00, and displayed it in my window. This is what I was told to do when entering the car park at the entrance, as seen here:



I have not seen the 'Car Club Only' sign on the floor and certainly not seen the small signs, which I believe are variants of the 'Permit Holders Only' sign (660).

Of course, I had a PCN when I got back to the car. I was shocked. I looked around a bit more and saw the writing on the floor, but even at that point I had no idea what a car club was or what the sign really meant. I did not see the smaller signs parked on the kerb behind the spaces. The parking bays themselves are no different in colour or line markings to any other bay.

The pic above is an old one, they have now extended it to three bays as you will soon see.

I appealed informally on the basis the the signage was inadequate and the signage at the entrance was misleading and also inadequate. Rejected.

Appealed formally. Here is the scanned reply:












They also gave me a copy of the TRO for offroad parking in the area, which I requested. It can be found on the Adjudicators website under 'Southampton' and then OFF-STREET PARKING PLACES TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDER 2009.

I will upload the PCN itself tomorrow, it's at work right now. I think, however, the Southampton Council has sewn up the PCN problems over recent years, and the contravention code (85) the attendant applied, is correct.

It appears at first glance that Soton Council have got this PCN covered. I am still not convinced though. I feel in my gut that there is something wrong with the way they include a separate permit holder parking section to what is advertised initially to drivers as a pay and display car park. I did exactly what was asked of me: I paid and displayed. I simply did not expect to have to check for further signage.

There is also something about the signs which does not seem correct. Has anyone got experience of these Car Club signs? I have read of other boroughs using signs for these types of bays but there does not seem to be a universal type, or specific wording. Some just say 'Car Club', some of the raised signs mention Car Club on them, whereas here they do not.

If you go get the TRO, it mentions they are allowed to place up to six car club bays at any given time in various parking areas. It does not mention they have to adhere to any regulation, or be specific in their mapping of which bays are reserved as permit only. It all seems a rather grey area to me.

Any advice here, or second opinions? Am I barking up the wrong tree perhaps? Is this worth taking to Adjudicator?
  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #585598 · Replies: 20 · Views: 5,947

Wobba
Posted on: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 - 22:14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


Is this the place?

  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #585581 · Replies: 17 · Views: 3,336

Wobba
Posted on: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 - 12:42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


Any news on this case yet?

I have a similar one with Southampton (Car Club bay) ongoing at this stage, about to go to adjudicator.

  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #585453 · Replies: 150 · Views: 64,316

Wobba
Posted on: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 - 11:55


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


QUOTE (greatscot @ Sat, 2 Aug 2008 - 11:55) *
I'd agree with Wobba. They don't look like they comply to me.

Then quote this case as part of your appeal;
QUOTE
Davies v Heatley [1971] R.T.R 145
"Because by s.64(2) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 traffic signs shall be of the size, colour and type prescribed by regulation, if a sign the contravention of which is an offence contrary to s.36 is not as prescribed by the regulation, no offence is committed if the sign is contravened, even if the sign is clearly recognisable to a reasonable man as a sign of that kind"




P.S. Wobba have you got similar drawings for 1032 bays?


http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/023113bm.gif

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tss/workin...thindividua4419

The above are for 1032 guidelines. I do not believe they are out of date.

Referring back to OP's post, here is an example of a p1028.4 bay, with an ajoining disabled bay, in the same format. I believe the bays to be non compliant:







You cant see the disabled bay in the pics.

At the other end of the road where they use the 1028.4 variant, The gap is down to about 380mm, almost half the allowed variation:



Hope this is of use. Perhaps an expert can confirm my suspicions that your bay is also outside the limits of variation allowed for the P1028.4/3 bay design.
  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #280114 · Replies: 26 · Views: 6,918

Wobba
Posted on: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 - 10:07


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


Hmm, the gap between the end lines, I believe, should be 600mm minimum for both 1028.3 and .4. Does not look like 60 cm to me.

Not sure if that means it is non-compliant and thus unenforceable...

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tss/workin...rkingbay2sheets

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/023113bj.gif

Note that you can join a disabled bay to the same width as a normal 1028.4 bay with minimum width of 1800mm applies in tight roads.
  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #280089 · Replies: 26 · Views: 6,918

Wobba
Posted on: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 - 08:31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sat, 2 Aug 2008 - 00:02) *
The inability of councils to get the paperwork right never ceases to amaze me, considering it's all laid out for them in bite-size chunks.


Aye, it amazes me it too. They have no excuses.

Well, just to prove the point, I went out to check the bays I park in last night, 1028.4's. Guess what? First thing I check is wrong. Council have failed to get it right, again, and despite me telling them over a year ago they were wrong. They corrected some errors in the whole street and nearby streets, but not fully.

Ahh well, guess it means free parking and another couple of unenforceable PCN's for me...
  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #280070 · Replies: 11 · Views: 2,624

Wobba
Posted on: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 - 22:59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490


QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Fri, 1 Aug 2008 - 23:57) *
PCN looks alright.

Yea, so it should be after they got dragged through national press on the last bunch I had lol.
  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #280036 · Replies: 11 · Views: 2,624

Wobba
Posted on: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 - 22:44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 4 Jul 2006
From: Southampton
Member No.: 6,490






There we go smile.gif Southampton City Council PCN, exhibit a.
  Forum: Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalis... · Post Preview: #280027 · Replies: 11 · Views: 2,624

4 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: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 19:42
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.