|
--
Terminator The Sarah Connor Chronicles S02e11 Hdtv Xvid Notv (nzb) has just been added.
--
Terminator The Sarah Connor Chronicles S02e11 Hdtv Xvid Notv (nzb) has just been added.
PRIVATE NOTICE FROM snookered
--
If you see advertising/spam in the forums, please click
for that post. Thank you
(Today, 10:20 AM) snookered
--
If you see advertising/spam in the forums, please click
for that post. Thank you
PRIVATE NOTICE FROM lut
--
nope but i had it since some time just want to get rid of it before going to uk
(Today, 09:58 AM) lut
--
nope but i had it since some time just want to get rid of it before going to uk
|
||
|
This topic is about Parking Ticket, the author, yourmercifulgod, wrote about: So, several weeks ago, I was happily eating my breakfast when this little gem dropped through the letterbox; [attachment=28430:01_ticket.gif] It was ... To read more just scroll down
![]() ![]() |
Aug 28 2008, 01:43 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Yourmercifulgod™
Group: Global Moderator Received 123 Thanks Posts: 6,506 Joined: 22-March 04 From: Faroe Islands Member No.: 204 ![]() |
So, several weeks ago, I was happily eating my breakfast when this little gem dropped through the letterbox;
01_ticket.gif ( 157.28K )
Number of downloads: 2It was allegedly for an overstay of 11 minutes in a 2 hour free parking slot at the Co-op supermarket in my home town. Now, I know a little bit about the law and I was a little annoyed that these f*cktards thought I was just going to hand over £45-£90 (US$82-$165) of my money by trying to dress-up a demand for cash as a Road Traffic Act Penalty notice. In these circumstances the law of contract applies, so I wrote back with the following: QUOTE (YMG's first letter) Dear Sir or Madam: Subject: Enforcement Notice As you may or may not know, in England and Wales, a Private Parking Company’s (PPC) Enforcement legitimacy is obtained through contract law. That implied contract exists only between the landowner (and/or their agents) and the driver of the vehicle, not the registered keeper. As the vehicle in question is, and has been, driven by a number of people, please provide (at your expense) clear evidence of the driver’s identity at the time the alleged breach in contract took place. If you do not, can not, or are unwilling to, provide such evidence within 14 days, I will assume that the matter is closed, and I will require that you cease all contact with me. If you do not provide such evidence and continue to pursue the matter, I may be forced to contact the police to make a formal complaint of harassment against you AND the landowner. Any complaint of criminal activity would in no way limit or restrict my right to also take civil action against your company (and/or the landowner) should the need arise. The ticket clearly said they had photographic evidence, so my response was a very long winded way of saying "Prove it or shut up." Clearly they didn't think that I'd made a good enough case for them slinging their hooks, because shortly afterwards, I got the following reply:
02_2nd_demand.gif ( 230.26K )
Number of downloads: 2As the registered keeper they still hold me liable for the actions of the driver (whoever that may have been) do they? Well, fortunately for me, what they do or do not do is of little relevance to me, and even less so to the law... I certainly wasn't going to cough-up £10 just to find out what evidence they did have. I replied as follows: QUOTE (YMG's second letter) Dear Sir or Madam: Subject: Response to your letter In my first correspondence to you, I pointed out that in England, matters such as this are governed by contract law. I further pointed out that any implied contract that may or may not exist, is solely between the driver of the vehicle and the landowner (or their agents) and not the registered keeper. I feel that I should point out, that in my last letter to you, I asked you to clarify the situation for me by providing (at your expense) evidence of the driver’s identity. Unfortunately, you chose to use this as an opportunity to try and charge a £10 administration fee. Whilst I understand that you are entitled to charge a maximum of £10 for Data protection enquiries, you should understand in turn, that this does not entitle you to use that right as a way to make demands for money without providing evidence. The request that I made for the driver’s identity was a good faith one, but I hope you realise that I have no moral or legal obligation to cover your costs. As I’m sure you are aware, should you proceed to the County Court, I will formally demand (and be entitled to) any such evidence under Civil Procedure Rules. It is difficult, then, to understand your reluctance to clarify certain basic details and resolve this issue ex curia by freely providing the information now. Once more, and finally, I now demand that you either provide evidence of the driver’s identity or cease all further demands for payment. I will not respond to any further demands for money, and will consider any such demands as harassment. As you have ignored my requests to either cease contact or establish a case, I have no option but to bill you for my time and expenses thus far in dealing with this matter. Please find enclosed my itemised bill which is payable immediately. Any further items may be added to a separate invoice. Attached to this letter was my bill for £30... At this stage I was hedging for a counter claim. In simple terms, if these clowns actually took me to court, I would have a valid and existing counter claim to present. A little of my reasoning here.... Under English contract law the claimant can ONLY sue an individual for losses incurred as a result of the breach of contract. He/she/they absolutely cannot apply for compensation if it is a penalty. Now, seeing as how this car park offers free parking, the Co-op would have to establish what losses they had actually suffered by my vehicle being parked their for an extra 11 minutes that amounted to £45-£90. They would also have to explain why those damages arbitraily double after 14 days. Quite simply, they could do neither with any realistic chance of success... On the other hand, because I'd billed them for responding to this unenforceable claim, and they then chanced their arms in court, I had a prima facie counter claim that I could have then used to claim back any legal fees and out of pocket expenses. As expected, though, they wrote back with another demand for the money:
03_3rd_demand.gif ( 183.54K )
Number of downloads: 2This was followed several days later with another threatening (full of wind and p*ss) demand for money:
04_final_reminder.gif ( 178K )
Number of downloads: 1By now I was getting a bit p*ssed-off with all this, so I wrote back and laid down the law to them: QUOTE (YMG's third letter) Dear Sir or Madam: Subject: Response to your letter I refer to your previous correspondence. Please take notice that I dispute your claim. On two separate occasions, I have asked you to provide evidence to substantiate your claim against me, and you have failed to do so. Your intransigence in this matter has left me in a position where I am unable to assist you further. For the third time, I request and require that you cease and desist all contact and correspondence with me, save for providing the evidence requested in my previous letters to you. Should you continue to harass me for money, I may be forced to make a complaint to the Police under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. I note that you continue to claim that I, as the registered keeper, am responsible for your claim and not the driver. Under English law this is not the case so I feel I must point out the following to you; Claiming that money is owed when it is not is a criminal offence under Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970. I may be forced, if you continue to harass me for money, to pursue a complaint to the Police and/or pass-on details of your behaviour (and possibly unlawful practices) to the OFT and/or the Trading Standards. Further to this, I may contact the Office of the Information Commissioner to make a formal complaint about your practices, which are clearly a contravention of your obligations under the DVLA code of conduct for PPCs requesting personally identifying information from the DVLA database. Finally, I note your threats of court action. I will welcome the opportunity to defend your allegation in court and am confident of success. Of course, prior to that hearing, you will be required to produce the evidence that I have requested under the Civil Procedure Rules. You may also have to answer to the court as to why you failed to do so prior to initiating legal action. Also under the Administration of Justice Act 1970, any person or organisation is jointly liable for the actions of their agents regardless of whether or not they take part in the illegal activity... All I needed to do, was make sure that the Co-op had no defence of "ignorance" of what Civil Enforcement Ltd were up to, I sent the following letter (recorded delivery) to the Co-op head office in Manchester: QUOTE (YMG's letter to the Co-op) Dear Sir or Madam: Subject: Civil Enforcement LTD – Refer to PCN reference number Please take formal notice I have today sent your agents Civil Enforcement LTD, a third letter requesting and requiring that they cease and desist contacting me by means of repeated correspondence demanding money. You should be aware, that as your agents, Civil Enforcement LTD are acting on your behalf, and I consider you jointly liable for their actions in this matter. Civil Enforcement LTD have stated that, as the registered keeper of a vehicle, I am responsible for a penalty notice issued for the car park at ***** ****** ******* ******* *******. As you may or may not know, such matters are governed by contract law in England and Wales. Any alleged contract exists ONLY between the driver and the landowner (or their agents) AND NOT the registered keeper. The vehicle in question is, and has been, driven by several people, and as such you and your agents should address the matter to the driver of the vehicle at the time the incident is alleged to have occurred, and not the registered keeper. Civil Enforcement LTD has implied that they posses evidence of the driver’s identity, but have thus far refused to supply it despite more than one request. I must inform you then, that such repeated demands for money by you (via your agents) can be construed as being criminal in nature insomuch as: Claiming that money is owed when it is not is a criminal offence under Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970. Further to this, repeatedly demanding money in such a way may also be a criminal offence under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. With this in mind I now insist that you instruct your agents to either present their case or cease all further contact with me. You should be aware that I consider your continued demands for monies (via your agents) as criminal harassment. Should it continue, I may be forced to contact the police to make a complaint against the Co-operative Group. You should also know, that should such harassment continue, it is my intention to make a formal complaint to the OFT and Trading Standards about the Co-operative Group’s behavior. Yours faithfully, Obviously, that was the right button to press, because this morning, the following arrived:
05_cancelled.gif ( 115.46K )
Number of downloads: 2Which was nice This post has been edited by yourmercifulgod: Aug 28 2008, 02:07 PM |
|
|
|
Aug 28 2008, 02:01 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Call of Duty 2 Champion!![]() Woman
Group: Moderator Received 187 Thanks Posts: 11,013 Joined: 23-August 07 From: Southern USofA Member No.: 10 |
Am I going cross eyed or did they not send the same form letter each time in response?
Looks like they did not, in fact, read your letter at all. I'll be watching for YMG Goes to Court on youtube. |
|
|
|
Aug 28 2008, 02:11 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Yourmercifulgod™
Group: Global Moderator Received 123 Thanks Posts: 6,506 Joined: 22-March 04 From: Faroe Islands Member No.: 204 ![]() |
Sorry to disappoint Coyote, but they chickened out... Sorry edited the last bit in while you were writing (pressed the post button instead of the preview one before I'd finished)
Clumsy bugger that I am |
|
|
|
Aug 28 2008, 02:12 PM
Post
#4
|
|
![]() Advancing Member
Group: Global Moderator Received 523 Thanks Posts: 8,328 Joined: 5-August 04 From: Scotland Member No.: 228 ![]() |
Very well done mate. I applaud you
|
|
|
|
Aug 28 2008, 02:20 PM
Post
#5
|
|
![]() Woman
Group: Moderator Received 187 Thanks Posts: 11,013 Joined: 23-August 07 From: Southern USofA Member No.: 10 |
No movie?
Well hell. But I'm glad they cancelled it for you. |
|
|
|
Aug 28 2008, 02:22 PM
Post
#6
|
|
![]() Advanced Member
Group: VIP Received 9 Thanks Posts: 1,149 Joined: 12-March 07 From: United Kingdom Member No.: 268 ![]() |
Good for you, I love a good victory for the normal man.
|
|
|
|
Aug 28 2008, 02:26 PM
Post
#7
|
|
![]() Advanced Member
Group: Community Leader Received 16 Thanks Posts: 3,727 Joined: 8-October 04 From: Sheffield Member No.: 129 |
Sweet.. nice going YMG... and I notice it looks like Fidel has signed it too, so thats why no-one has seen him lately in Cuba....
|
|
|
|
Aug 28 2008, 03:24 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Yourmercifulgod™
Group: Global Moderator Received 123 Thanks Posts: 6,506 Joined: 22-March 04 From: Faroe Islands Member No.: 204 ![]() |
|
|
|
|
Aug 28 2008, 03:41 PM
Post
#9
|
|
![]() Advanced Member
Group: Member Received 6 Thanks Posts: 42 Joined: 27-August 08 Member No.: 48,841 |
Nice going, dude =]
now send them that invoice again! they still owe you that £30 right? |
|
|
|
Aug 28 2008, 04:03 PM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Yourmercifulgod™
Group: Global Moderator Received 123 Thanks Posts: 6,506 Joined: 22-March 04 From: Faroe Islands Member No.: 204 ![]() |
I was considering it... but in the end, I think I just couldn't be arsed.
|
|
|
|
Aug 28 2008, 06:48 PM
Post
#11
|
|
![]() Advanced Member
Group: Global Moderator Received 34 Thanks Posts: 2,455 Joined: 23-January 08 From: The Far Side Member No.: 387 ![]() |
Any chance of representing me m8? I got my decree absolute 10 years ago then last weekend got papers from the PBFH's solicitors saying they wanted to go back to the courts as the financial side had never been resolved.
How the f*^k was I supposed to know this. As far as I was concerned it had all been sorted and I could get on with my life. Spoke to a local firm who reckon it will cost £10-15K to take this to a conclusion! They can poke that I will represent myself if needs be. Personally I think it's bloody mad that I have to put my life on hold again all because of the PSYCHO BITCH FROM HELL !!!!! |
|
|
|
Aug 28 2008, 07:38 PM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Yourmercifulgod™
Group: Global Moderator Received 123 Thanks Posts: 6,506 Joined: 22-March 04 From: Faroe Islands Member No.: 204 ![]() |
Ouch, that's not good is it mate
My only advice is to shop around for a good solicitor... get references from people who've used them for matrimonial disputes (everyone's been divorced these days, so it's not hard) and get a good one... don't just take-on the first brief whose office you wander into. Most will give you half an hour's free consultation, so use it to interview them like you would any prospective employee that you were considering hiring. If someone recommends a solicitor, don't just assume he/she still works in the firm... when you phone to make an appointment, check by asking for the person by name. ALWAYS ask for a cost estimate, and quiz them on what that cost entails and how it breaks down. Clean break settlements are not usually costly, but they do require both parties consent to get it done cheaply and quickly. If one party starts getting shirty, it can get messy, but even so 15K sounds excessive, just for fees. When you find a brief, ask them if there are any arbitration services in the area and get him/her to propose that to your ex... it may work out cheaper, and if she refuses, it doesn't look good in court. Of course, failing that there's always faking your own death or hiring a hitman |
|
|
|