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 - The Slithy Tove

Pages: [1] 2
Private parking tickets / Re: PCN liability in driving lesson
« on: June 28, 2024, 07:28:12 am »
The Hirer, your instructor, should have known better than to teach you on private land, at least not before seeking out any terms and conditions for using the land beforehand.
I am surprised that any driving instructor would use a private car park for their lessons these days. Almost all are covered by such Ts&Cs, many with ANPR, making it a risky action.

The Flame Pit / Re: Airport liquid regulations
« on: June 22, 2024, 09:10:47 am »
Are all the scanners the new ones or are there still old ones in use? Until everything is upgraded, staff trained, etc., they have to stick to the "old" rules. The new rules were supposed to be in place by this summer, but there are delays. LHR and LGW aren't ready (things like floors needing strengthening to accommodate the weight of the new machines), so unfortunately I'll still have the hassle this summer (not just liquids but the rigmarole of having to unpack the myriad electronic devices).

How do I go about getting the traffic regulation order?
In the first instance, from the relevant Highways Authority, which in this case would be Surrey County Council. You'll probably need to ask for it, rather than being able to find it on their web site.

It can't go up now they have issued the claim. Even if you lose, with the right arguments, you should pay less than that in the end. You haven't mentioned how that sum is broken down. But from what is normally seen, the original charge would be £100. They can really claim only that plus the court fee and legal costs capped at that £50, and maybe another few small sums such as interest, which should see the total around £200. They cannot claim any further legal costs.

As for the extras, and guessing that they are trying to claim other "admin" costs or "debt collection fees", these are all bogus, and have been seen to be in many court cases.

There are many such cases if you search. MoneySavingExpert has a huge history of such things, as well as a guide for going through the process of defending. First thing is to acknowledge the claim on the online portal without submitting any defence at this point (leave it blank). That gives you additional time to do some research. Don't miss any deadlines.

I guess I'll just have to wait and see what happens. I'm not very hopeful, but I figured I might as well try!
Don't think for even a moment that they will accept those representations. They won't, so a rejection is inevitable.
It's all just a necessary step in the process towards adjudication.

Where does the public highway end and the private land start? Is it at the lamppost with the sign or at the start of the steel fence? The streetlamp is not on private property as it is the same as all the other streetlamps on Fenton Rd.
This is critical to the case, as I mentioned previously. Was the car parked on private land or public?

Looking at the Land Registry map at, it is somewhat ambiguous and not really possible to tell where the private land starts, as the car park and the whole of Fenton Road seem to be in the same "lot" of land. Coventry council's web site don't appear to have a definitive map of adopted roads, or not as far as I've been able to find.

The fact that the signage (on GSV) starts at the lamp post seems to imply that they think that's where their land starts. There is even a "bar" across the pavement at that point, though the road surface is the same. Only the local highways authority will be able to tell you for sure, so they need to be contacted and asked where exactly their land ends.

Are you sure the parking charge was issued for parking where indicated (is that your red car), and not for entering and leaving the car park without paying for the few seconds you were there? Their "claiming that the zone that I parked was a no parking zone" suggests it is, but need to be clear.

You need to establish definitively that the spot you parked in is part of the public highway. Most council highways authorities (county, London Borough or unitary authority) have maps showing exactly what is and isn't the public highway, and an email to them would confirm if there is doubt. If it's definitely the public highway, they they can go swivel, and you could even bring a claim against them for DPA breach, as they had no right to obtain the keeper's details. A complaint to the DVLA would be in order. Or you could save the DPA claim as a counterclaim if they attempt to pursue this to court.

Employment contracts often state that you will abide by/be bound by things like Company Handbook or Company Car Policy, and any changes made to them during your employment. Check carefully.

The use of the word "charges" alongside "fines" is, indeed ambiguous, and they would claim that it does include private parking charges.

Ultimately, though, how far this should be taken very much depends on the relationship the OP has with their employer, and what consequences may result in rocking the boat. Although challenging in this way shouldn't have an adverse effect, the smaller the company, and thus the closer the HR department is to the managers, the more likely it is to come back at you. I've worked in very large companies where I have felt no reticence in challenging HR where they are not sticking to what's in my contract. Also in very small companies where what's written down matters much less than my immediate relationship with the MD (which may be only one or two steps up the reporting ladder).

My Company Car Policy

7.3 Fines
You are responsible for paying any parking fines/charges, congestion charges and fixed penalty
notices incurred by you or any other authorised driver whilst using your company car. These must
be paid promptly and if you donít, or if the fine/charge is sent directly to 'The leasing company' as the registered
owner of the car, 'The leasing company' will pay on your behalf, and this will be deducted from your salary together
with an additional £12.50 plus VAT administration fee. Failure to pay any outstanding fines and
surcharges may result in disciplinary action being taken.
If youíre disputing any of these charges you must let 'the leasing company' know as soon as possible
This would seem to be an inherently unfair clause as it allows you, the employee, absolutely no chance of disputing a charge. I could go out and find a leased car (obvious from the number plate or sticker in the back window) and simply send an invoice dressed up as a parking charge to the lease company in the hope that they might simply cough up with no question. (OK, let's not get into the basic potential unlawfulness of my doing that.) So, you can tell the leasing company that you are disputing the charge, but what would then happen is not clear. The parking company has the money, and will simply not engage. The same would be true for any real "fine" where there is no initial notice for the driver, e.g. a council enforced traffic offence or congestion charge.

Is the other vehicle's registered keeper liable for the damage and costs caused by their vehicle?
No, but the driver of that vehicle, or the insurer of that vehicle (if it was even insured) is. But without any details of that vehicle, you're at a bit of a dead-end.

It might be a bit glib to say it, but that's what comprehensive insurance is for :-(

I really wanted to resolve this without a formal court conviction. Mainly as a court convictions become formal criminal convictions requiring disclosure as opposed to FPN's which are not 'convictions' per se and never have to be mentioned on any form ( be that VISA's jobs etc - I am aware speeding on it own is non-recordable but if asked motoring offences are not specifically excluded this will require disclosure).
Most forms I have filled in that ask such questions exclude such offences. You won't need to disclose it for example, for US immigration, DBS checks, even UK Government Security Clearance isn't bothered by such offences. I think you are over-worrying about an offence that a significant number of people have had over time.

I've put the notice away somewhere, can't bear to look at it again today so all actions deferred to tomorrow or perhaps the weekend, massive headache from the panic I experienced following receipt of the letter this morning
Seriously, it's not the end of the world. Your reaction is entirely understandable and not criticising you for it. While it's galling at the moment, and you're full of "what ifs" and "if onlys", at the end of the day you (or your husband) will be £100 worse off and have 3 points on his licence, which on an otherwise clean license won't really make a difference on insurance.

Is this not what airlines do (or at least, what I'm led to believe they do, it might just be a USA thing?) - overbook seats because they know some people won't turn up?
In the days of only full-cost airlines this is/was common, considering that a lot of bookings were on open/flexible tickets, so there would always be a good number of no-shows. With the advent of low-cost airlines where most tickets are non-refundable and check-in can be up to a month in advance, I suspect there are fewer no-shows. Putting Travelodge on the same level of service as RyanAir, does the latter overbook in the same way, and bump people? Even if they'd checked in (which is probably the equivalent of calling the hotel to warn of late arrival)?

The Flame Pit / Re: PePiPoo site down??
« on: March 28, 2024, 09:02:02 am »
But there's shedloads of advice given on Pepipoo (and hopefully increasingly on here) on how to deal with other matters such as s172 charges (when no NIP/s172 received), convictions in absence and others. The benefit that posters receive is arguably every bit as important as there is very often a good strategy to deal with those problems which posters otherwise would not be aware of.
Also educating posters about the likes of
  • the 14 day rule for first NIP
  • whether they are really the RK of a vehicle
  • futility and potential consequences of dodgy strategies to avoid naming the driver
  • even a modest van is subject to different (lower) speed limits than a car
  • timing out a prosecution if there have been delays in the paperwork, and conversely not hanging about if a the option for a course is about to expire
  • etc.

Took out a policy, a few days later I had a 'an at fault' accident - that's it as far as I can see.  Damage was to third party, no damage to my vehicle,
Have you actually called them and asked for an explanation yet? They are probably better placed to provide the reason than any of us here.

Pages: [1] 2