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 - ghostivv

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
Is this worth challenging for on the ground of not adequate and non compliance? Thanks.






2
Edit: what a timing. I just received forwarded email and looks like refund was issued on 15th June. Need to confirm on account as the payment card was credit card.

Here's the part of reply from complaint department:
Quote
My findings
Thank you for your email. We identified that case FR65785438 was subject to a revocation order issued by the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), despite a Paid
Statutory Out of Time (SOT) application having been submitted within the required timeframe. Further correspondence was received on 18 May 2026. To clarify the basis on which the application had been granted, we contacted the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) on 3 June 2026. TEC subsequently confirmed that the application had been approved in accordance with the relevant regulations. Following receipt of this confirmation, we contacted the Enforcement Authority (EA) on 15 June 2026 and requested that the refund be processed. The EA confirmed on the same day that the refund had been actioned. The remaining administrative steps were then completed, and Box 1 was finalised on 22 June 2026, bringing the matter to its conclusion.

Conclusion and decision
For the reasons set out in my findings above, your complaint is not upheld.

4
Many Thanks.

Edit: I just noticed small mistake in court order on PCN number. There is extra 0 in end (eg FR 65796438 vs FR 657964380) . Does that make any difference?

5
Can I have a draft letter please? or what need to be included. Thanks.

6
Still looking for email but if it's not in sent folder, I suspect probably was using council's webportal. Definitely the email was just about notifying of the court letter only and 100%  not demanding for the refund of enforcement fees. We thought it's auto process once the order is made by court. Anyway thanks for reminder and will appreciate a draft demand letter. Thanks. 

7
it was PCN not received and letters were sent on wrong address. Dealer made mistake in address when applying for V5C. Evidence like letter from car dealer, some address proof and V5C were attached.

After copies of court letters were sent to council via email, no replies received back. So no PCN reissued or not delivered to registered address so far. Nothing from bailiff too but from my understanding of the past cases posted here in forum, i believe it's the council who has to order to refund the enforcement fees? TEC when called said to wait until 90 days from receipt of court letters before contacting council again.

8
sorry for late replying as didnt' had copy of the letter and had to wait until return back to UK. Once the letters were received, we sent email to council but still waiting for any kind of replies. Attached:
Letter 1
Letter 2

9
No and both were called soon after. He was asked to read skeleton argument and judge dismissed the claim.Dont have anymore details at the moment but the skeleton was a patched up version from one of the thread here. Will update once have more details.

I was not very helpful as defence was based on Entrance sign and PoC defects.

10
Appointment was for 10:00 today but looks like court is too busy as they're saying it'll be at least 15:00 for hearing. Other party is also present and both agreed to walk out for another day's hearing. Too much hassle and not worth the time effort.

11
update: Received letter from court revoking order of recovery and order to cancel Charge certificate.

12
Private parking tickets / Re: Court Hearing Witness Statement NPM received
« on: February 26, 2026, 02:21:56 pm »
attached WS. Need to send it before today's closing time. Pls have a look and advice on what needs to be removed or add. Also if unable to attend court, how to correctly word.

Witness Statement

13
Private parking tickets / Court Hearing Witness Statement NPM received
« on: February 23, 2026, 03:43:07 pm »
Hi all

My family member is the registered keeper.

The NtK was received on 7th Oct 2024 and I advised him to search here for guidance. The defence was submitted on 14th July 2025. I looked into the defence and it was standard POC CPR replies found here. Received Witness Statement on 20th Feb and hearing is on 13th March. Initially the hearing was in Bromley court but received another notice of trial date dated 16th Jan 2026 from Bromley court to be held in Wandsworth.

Anyway looking for advice on how best to word defence witness statement. One strange thing is claimant claiming that defendant's defence has not been received.

I'll post WS and other related later as ImgBB is not working atm and also can't seem to find the option to attach files directly.

Not sure if drive links will work here but anyway whole folder : Drive Folder

14
Received reply from Martson when requested for the "current legislation" in regard to delivery of Notice of Enforcement. Their reply:

Quote
In line with the Interpretation Act 1978 regarding notice, we are required to post the letter, and this is sufficient for us to presume that notice has been given. For us to consider that notice hasn’t been received, you would need to provide evidence in support of this.

The act :

Quote
7 References to service by post.
Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression “give” or “send” or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.

Anyone care to explain in simple words? I still believe the Enforcement firm (and agents) were in breach of laws even if they're relying on above act.

Also what kind of evidence to provide? Address proof, V5C showing the correct address? 

15
sorry for confusion. Quoted part is the response from Martson Holdings, the enforcement firm.

Pages: [1] 2 3