Parking fine.

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Parking fine.

there is signs but it is the usual story too small and hung high hence why the news has put big signs up at entrance to warn folk

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/pol...blem_1_2902023

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Parking fine.

Sorry correction £40,000 in one month is the figure quoted in the Portsmouth News and at over £200 a time tow fee it would not take long to rake up.

Still a lot of money

The news has put massive signs at the entrance beware tow away area while they seek to challenge the extortion

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/tra...onth_1_3008398

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Parking fine.

We have a situation in Portsmouth where there is a strip of land or rather a 50 space car park this is public owned land and is leased by the council to a property developer.

It was meant to off been built on years ago, however it was left as a car park for many years and the property developer carried on allowing free parking.

Now this property developer has handed the car park to a chum of his to manage it and he has decided to bring the clampers in yes they are clamping on land that is publicly owned and leased for building with no terms for clamping.

Yes it is a right mess legally and they have made £400.000 in the last 3 months with towing fees.

The local paper has started a campaign to get the lease withdrawn from the property developer as clearly he is using the land as a money making machine

If the property company has broken the terms of the lease, couldn't the council seek an account of profits from them and their agents?

What signs or notices - if any - have been erected or displayed by the parking parasites and do they have planning permission to erect or display such signs or notices? If planning permission would be needed - it depends on the size and number of the notices - and no such permission had been granted, they may be ordered to remove them and, if they don't, the council can get the work done, then charge the company for the cost!

If no signs are displayed, then the clamping operation is plainly illegal even under the somewhat addled English Law.

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Parking fine.

sorry, did you say £400,000 (ie four hundred THOUSAND) in 3 months?

* Time for Niddy to reconsider his position I think - easy money does exist then eh?

Theft, extortion and blackmail have long tempted those determined to leech from his fellow men - for other examples, look at the retail banks.

Unlike the banks, though, the clamping parasites are not allowed to operate in Scotland and, when Doolally Dave decides to carry out his election pledge, the vermin may be outlawed in England and Wales too.

[oscar]

Re: Parking fine.

sorry, did you say £400,000 (ie four hundred THOUSAND) in 3 months?

* Time for Niddy to reconsider his position I think - easy money does exist then eh?

Want a business partner?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Parking fine.

sorry, did you say £400,000 (ie four hundred THOUSAND) in 3 months?

* Time for Niddy to reconsider his position I think - easy money does exist then eh?

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Parking fine.

We have a situation in Portsmouth where there is a strip of land or rather a 50 space car park this is public owned land and is leased by the council to a property developer.

It was meant to off been built on years ago, however it was left as a car park for many years and the property developer carried on allowing free parking.

Now this property developer has handed the car park to a chum of his to manage it and he has decided to bring the clampers in yes they are clamping on land that is publicly owned and leased for building with no terms for clamping.

Yes it is a right mess legally and they have made £400.000 in the last 3 months with towing fees.

The local paper has started a campaign to get the lease withdrawn from the property developer as clearly he is using the land as a money making machine

Regards

[MrsD]

Re: Parking fine.

i had one of these in totally ridiculous circumstances about 2 years ago, ignored first one (which looked a bit like a real one but wasn't), ignored the second one and never heard anything since. Was a really dark photograph so impossible to tell who was driving although I knew it was me.

[garlok]

Re: Parking fine.

Legalese? :whistle

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Parking fine.

Bit of understatement from you there CC. Robust retort?

How else should one describe the vulgar argot used?

[garlok]

Re: Parking fine.

Bit of understatement from you there CC. Robust retort?

regards
Garlok

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Parking fine.

lol. I had to gogole Arkell, but when reading it, I recgnised it from previously, but still think it was a great response.

It may be worthwhile to point out that the robust retort to Messrs Goodman Derrick elicited no further response because it clearly indicated to the would-be plaintiff that Pressdram could prove the truth of their allegations of impropriety.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Parking fine.

Mate just search CC's last posts

[oscar]

Re: Parking fine.

ps the above is cleverclogs rubbing off on me! Blame him

lol. I had to gogole Arkell, but when reading it, I recgnised it from previously, but still think it was a great response.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Parking fine.

Hahaha

Or simply quote Arkell v. Pressdram (1971).

(fuckoff)!

ps the above is cleverclogs rubbing off on me! Blame him