3. Messages

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Korting

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
1
Speeding and other criminal offences / Re: Drink and Drive 57 mg
« on: January 04, 2026, 09:16:32 pm »
Quote from: roythebus on January 03, 2026, 12:11:19 am
Even though you may claim not to have been driving wrecklessly or similar, you were exceeding the speed limit, which is what attracted plod's attention.

In post #1, he O/P stated he was driving at 30mph in a 40mpH limit, so he was NOT speeding.

2
The Flame Pit / PCN parked in a space for electric vehicles
« on: December 14, 2025, 11:52:22 pm »
Posting for a friend who is severely ill!

He parked his car (non electric) in an electric only bay displaying his disabled badge but got a PCN for parking in the Electric cars only bay.

Is this correct?  I thought disabled badges can be used in any parking bay.

Thanks


3
The Flame Pit / Re: Do MET Police Act on Dashcam Footage?
« on: October 26, 2025, 01:15:31 am »
I reported someone driving on the pavement.  That was a couple of months ago, i haven't heard anything since.

4
Non-motoring legal advice / Re: TFL’s 60+ Oyster card
« on: October 19, 2025, 02:38:52 pm »
The lady in question has now got her 60+ oyster card, she managed to access the right webpage and her pass was delivered on her 60th birthday.

5
Non-motoring legal advice / Re: MCOL for a repair that has failed.
« on: October 07, 2025, 09:41:29 pm »
I have been offered mediation, is there anything I need to do in preparation for it? 

I'm going to bring up the fact that the pre action protocol has not been followed and that the case should be dismissed.

Can I have your thoughts please?

6
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: PCN parking on a red route
« on: October 06, 2025, 09:00:35 am »
I've now received the NtO, what do I do next?

https://ibb.co/Csh0R2Wd
https://ibb.co/gbvgHtGg
https://ibb.co/FL84VxwJ
https://ibb.co/Kz3Msjbx
https://ibb.co/HpC9Fdc3
https://ibb.co/BKNCW4TD

Thank you.

7
The Flame Pit / Re: U. Ithsham of Newham Council is dishonest and tells lies
« on: September 12, 2025, 09:55:48 am »
Quote from: cp8759 on September 11, 2025, 09:59:03 pm
Quote from: Korting on September 11, 2025, 09:43:55 pm
Ideally Mr Ithsham should be prosecuted for making false statements and attempting to pervert the course of justice.
Sadly the moving traffic legislation was drafted during more innocent times when it wasn't considered imagnable that a council officer would tell lies, while there is a specific statutory offence for making false representations against a London moving traffic PCN, there is no statutory offence for making false statement in support of one. The Traffic Management Act has remedied this and for parking (and moving traffic & bus lanes outside London) there is an offence that goes both ways, so in principle a council officer can be prosecuted for making false representations to the tribunal under that legislation.

Perverting the course of justice is a specific intent crime and U. Ithsham would have a bomb-proof defence: his counsel just needs to stand up and say that U. Ithsham  is a moron and had no idea what he or she was doing, such that the required intent could not have been held.

And here I was thinking that ignorance of the law was no excuse.

8
The Flame Pit / Re: U. Ithsham of Newham Council is dishonest and tells lies
« on: September 11, 2025, 09:43:55 pm »
Ideally Mr Ithsham should be prosecuted for making false statements and attempting to pervert the course of justice.

Perhaps people could get together to fund a private prosecution.

9
Non-motoring legal advice / Re: MCOL for a repair that has failed.
« on: September 11, 2025, 12:52:41 pm »
Quote from:
Reason for claim :
Michael took my boombox away to fix the speaker only! After about two months of him turning up at my house saying it’s working and it never did work each time he showed up! I finally got it back and the cassette tape was broke and the speaker he charged me for was working but broke down again a week later plus the ON-OFF button does not work anymore!!!




Is the claimant not required to send a letter before action?

10
Non-motoring legal advice / MCOL for a repair that has failed.
« on: September 11, 2025, 11:57:02 am »
A couple of months ago, I was contacted about repairing a Sharp boombox.

I explained my charges over the phone, that the cost would be £80 call out/inspection fee and the repair from £150+ the cost of parts, to which he agreed.

The machine had previously been worked on and there was quite a bit of bodging.  This was explained to the customer.

The fault was very intermittent, most of the time it worked.  I did find something that could have contributed to the fault and repaired it.

It has now failed again after a week and I offered to take another look at it but this was refused and a MCOL claim was issued.

The claimant did not comply with the pre action protocol, which could have had his claim negotiated and prevented court costs.

This is how I want to respond.

When the claimant cont contacted me, he was told that the cost would be £80 call out/inspection fee and the repair from £150+ the cost of parts, to which he agreed (to include the £80 inspection fee/call out fee).

When the machine was dismantled, I found that a previous person had carried out work that was bodged.  The original on/off switch was broken and a new one somehow fitted in very loosely.  The cassette lid had been broken and it would appear 3d parts had been printed but did not work well.

The fault was very intermittent and was nigh on impossible to reproduce.  I then checked several parts that could have contributed to the fault, repaired as necessary and then soak tested the unit.  The fault did not show up once I’d reassembled it.

When I returned the machine, the claimant put it on a chair to test it, but it appeared the record player didn’t work.  This is because there is a hidden switch which prevents it from being played unless it’s put on a table.

The claimant collected the machine from me, I showed it to him working, he tested the Bluetooth and the record player, I showed him also that the radio worked.

The original power switch is no longer available, nor is the cassette door.  I am not responsible for other peoples bodges.

The claimant reported that the machine had failed with the original fault after one week, I offered to take another look at it, but this was refused by the claimant.

The claimant did not comply with the pre action protocol.  Had he have done so, we could have come to an amicable agreement without incurring court fees.

For these reasons I refute the claim. 

I can either admit to a partial refund, or dispute the claim in full.

Can someone give me some advice.

11
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: PCN parking on a red route
« on: September 06, 2025, 09:07:37 pm »
Quote from:

The Contravention didn’t occur.

Please consider this as my informal representations regarding this PCN.

The car was not parked on the carriageway of the red route.  I consider that the red route refers to the 3 lane carriageway and not that part of the carriageway which is separated from the main carriageway and has boxes marked out for car parking.  Furthermore there are no signs to state that parking is only allowed in marked spaces. 

There are no markings or red lines on that part of the carriageway, whereas after Osterley Station, with the same carriageway layout as where the car was parked and approx ½ mile away, the road is marked as a red route with red lines, boxes and signs.

Because of the above I consider that the contravention did not occur and that the PCN must be cancelled.

Can someone please look at this and tell me if my informal reps are okay.

12
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: PCN parking on a red route
« on: September 04, 2025, 03:06:03 pm »
Can someone please advise?

13
Speeding and other criminal offences / Re: NIP has wrong location
« on: September 03, 2025, 02:31:14 pm »
Well done, Good result.  i wonder how many other 'wrong' NIP's have been sent out.

14
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: PCN parking on a red route
« on: September 03, 2025, 02:21:14 pm »
How does this look;

The Contravention didn’t occur.

Please consider this as my informal representations regarding this PCN.

The car was not parked on the carriageway of the red route.  I consider that the red route refers to the 3 lane carriageway and not that part of the carriageway which is separated from the main carriageway and has boxes marked out for car parking.   Furthermore there are no signs to state that parking is only allowed in marked spaces. 

There are no markings or red lines on that part of the carriageway, whereas after Osterley Station, with the same carriageway layout as where the car was parked and approx ½ mile away, the road is marked as a red route with red lines, boxes and signs.

Because of the above I consider that the contravention did not occur and that the PCN must be cancelled.

15
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: PCN parking on a red route
« on: September 03, 2025, 10:03:13 am »
Can someone please help me with this?

I've just won another case which is on a red route this one

Should I just put in a one liner appeal as per the case mentioned above?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7