It’s about thinking you’ve outwitted a parking firm for a ticket on a technicality
It's not really. It's about using their own appeals process to challenge a ticket I don't think was correctly issued, as I'm entirely within my rights to do. And then relying on due process to decide the outcome. If that outcome had found me liable I was more than prepared to pay.
My issue is i wasn't afforded due process.
Anyway, why don't we wait to see what happens with my court appeal, at which point you can either all point and laugh, or I can return and point out I was found not liable and was right to feel hard done by.
Not related to this necessarily but it's not the 90's - I'd be amazed if the address data was ever typed in manually at all.
The owner data would have come from the DVLA and fed into the PPC system automatically.
Those systems will then have used the same data for all subsequent processes (such as the court application).
If the letter came through once then it should come through every time because the exact same data would have been used for all correspondence.
Yeah, this is the strange bit. Perhaps I should have said 'mistake' rather than typo.
But this is what is interesting me. I'm not really interested in the moral aspect. I don't think there is really a moral aspect. Everyone (ie, both the PPC and the OP) just seems to be acting in the way you're supposed to act in a system where private parking is treated as a civil contract rather than administrative enforcement. Contract disputes are always going to be resolved either with litigation or the threat of litigation.
This is the natural result of neo-liberal laisez-faire capitalism being applied to parking. It's a feature, not a bug.
And, of course, in a pure neo-liberal system companies are always going to try to maximise profits so the incentive is always there to come up with innovative ways of making money. The business model of the PPCs is to get people to pay punitive fines, either with the threat of legal action or actual legal action. Therefore, when someone suddenly finds a judgement has gone against them without hearing anything about it, it's in all our interests that they find out what happened.
You can get the right result with the wrong methods. In this case, the right result would be that the OP paid the fine. However, how that happens matters.
If someone broke into my house and got caught and convicted that would be the right result. However, if it turns out they were convicted because a confession was extracted under duress then that would not be good for anyone. If it's acceptable for wrong'uns then the same methods are acceptable to be used on me, even if I haven't actually done anything wrong.
If there is something dodgy going with this judgement then finding out what it was is in all our interests.
Ultimately the solution to the PPC problem is to align with the rest of the EU in terms of how they operate and get away from this civil litigation based business model. It's really not doing anyone any good. But until then it is what it is and everyone just has to play their part, including the OP.
You can say ' he was an idiot he should have paid up front', but are you honestly saying I don't deserve due process?
I suspect that a lot of correspondents here, increasingly so as the thread gets longer, are skipping to the end to tell you why you're wrong without having read most of it. I'd suggest ignoring them, no good will ever come of pigeon chess.
This is thread of the year already.
The owner data would have come from the DVLA and fed into the PPC system automatically.
Which is how I understand it. Is it possible that when they sent me the initial letter they had the correct address, as I owned the car at the time. But by the time the court case came round I'd not had the car for 12 months so the dvla no longer registered it to my address?
That said, I find that unlikely given the court sends the summons, not the parking co (I think). And likewise, if the car is now registered elsewhere, it seems a coincidence that the case was held at my local sherrif court (unless the new owner also lives in fife)
If the summons comes from the court it should be fairly straightforward to obtain a copy of the letter, my solicitor is planning to do that next week. It should have my address on it. If it doesn't mystery solved.
Is it possible that when they sent me the initial letter they had the correct address, as I owned the car at the time. But by the time the court case came round I'd not had the car for 12 months so the dvla no longer registered it to my address?
Very doubtful as I would imagine the PPC would simply use the initial data as supplied for the date of the offence.
Plus the DVLA know who has owned every car for every day of it's "life" so could supply the correct registered keeper details for a specific date regardless of how long ago.
It’s about thinking you’ve outwitted a parking firm for a ticket on a technicality
It's not really. It's about using their own appeals process to challenge a ticket I don't think was correctly issued
It is. You're not challenging a ticket that was incorrectly issued, because you seem to [correctly] accept that the ticket was correctly issued but that you were not the driver. So it' a technicality.
The PPC can only request the keepers details once under KADOE so selling the car after the event won't matter. (fun fact 15% of vehicles on the DVLA database are not registered to an individual or company which is quite worrying)
The PPC will have used the DVLA supplied address for the initial PCN (which got to you), subsequent reminders, and then the debt collectors will have sent their threatening letters out. The next point your address should have been prior to court action, to make sure you're not dead and to confirm they do have the correct address for service of the claim. If they don't and purely rely on the DVLA address and there is no response from the defendant the court takes a dim view of the PPC being lazy.
There's 3 possibilities here:
1. Your postie is eating your mail.
2. Between the initial notice to Keeper and the reminder letter your address somehow got changed, unlikely to be honest unless someone sent them a data rectification notice to confirm the address change.
3. Someone at your end was intercepting the letters so you didn't see them.
It will be interesting to know what addresses were used. As well as the court docs you need to see what else was sent so you need to submit a subject access request to the data protection officer at the PPC requesting copies of all correspondence they sent you. This could be very helpful in court if they had indeed been sending letters to the wrong address.
Sharkbait is right, the PCN probably was correctly issued. You're just using the fact the keeper can't be held liable in Scotland (yet) and there is no legal requirement for you to name the driver. That does not absolve the driver of liability, it just means the PPC doesn't know who they are due to a loop hole in Scottish law.
Bruce if you want to wang on about the evils of neo liberalism head to back to one of the political threads although they all seemed to have died for some mysterious reason since Ernie vanished before Christmas.
Double post.
This could be very helpful in court if they had indeed been sending letters to the wrong address.
Any idea where the court will have got my address from? When I pitched up on Friday to ask what it was all about they asked me for my name and address to pull-up my record. Initially they couldnt find it.
Only after giving them the judgement ref (from my credit file) did they find my case. It was 5 min before the court shut so didn't think to ask for a copy of the letters at the time, or where they have been sent.
I've been advised to not contact the ppc at this point. I'll double check this point with the solicitor once I have the court letters
Bruce if you want to wang on about the evils of neo liberalism head to back to one of the political threads although they all seemed to have died for some mysterious reason since Ernie vanished before Christmas.
Ah, we're playing thread bouncer now are we. OK.
Stumpy, if you want to wang on about the evils of challenging parking tickets on technicalities head to one of the philosophy threads.
This thread is about the somewhat interesting topic of how you can have a judgement made against you and have no idea about it.
I'm not arguing they weren't served, I'm categorically saying I never saw them. Whether they went to the wrong address, or my dog ate them doent matter. Serving does not equate to recieved. hence one of the reasons the recall process exists
In Scottish civil actions, service is very close to the same thing as being received. If PROPERLY served it’s quite unlikely that you would be unaware of the original court case, the outcome nor the subsequent enforcement action - unless you moved house in the meantime? Knowing this sort of stuff, and how to get a sheriff to sit up and take notice is why I would want a solicitor actually used to litigation representing me. You can do it yourself, and a the outcome may be the same for you - but if the PPC is cutting corners (like trying to use English rules in Scotland) it would be nice to see them rebuked rather than just “win” your case. There’s lots of “advice” in this thread which is nonsense based on applying English law in a different jurisdiction - it would not surprise me if the PPC are similarly naive.
This could be very helpful in court if they had indeed been sending letters to the wrong address.
Any idea where the court will have got my address from? When I pitched up on Friday to ask what it was all about they asked me for my name and address to pull-up my record. Initially they couldnt find it.
Only after giving them the judgement ref (from my credit file) did they find my case. It was 5 min before the court shut so didn't think to ask for a copy of the letters at the time, or where they have been sent.
I've been advised to not contact the ppc at this point. I'll double check this point with the solicitor once I have the court letters
the court is provided your address by the pursuer (the PPC). It’s quite likely the court never sent you any original notice of the case - they only do this (for an extra fee) if the pursuer requests it. A firm pursuing lots of parking cases is likely to serve the docs themselves rather than pay the court to do it.
It’s quite likely the court never sent you any original notice of the case - they only do this (for an extra fee) if the pursuer requests it. A firm pursuing lots of parking cases is likely to serve the docs themselves rather than pay the court to do it.
Say what?! So what's stopping the ppc just saying they sent the letter but not posting it? They'd win by default every time?
Not related to this necessarily but it's not the 90's - I'd be amazed if the address data was ever typed in manually at all.
ah, you may be surprised at the inefficiencies of our courts and our lawyers then! It could well be typed or at least copy and pasted - where missing the first digit of an address is quite easy. However simple address errors of multiple docs would often be spotted as the incorrect recipient is likely to send back a letter that says on the outside that it contains court documents.
In theory it could even have been served by email - but the OP should have explicitly agreed to that. I wonder if PPC’s put that in the small print of their “appeal process” T&Cs.
As Poly said, the PPC, hitting the PPC with a formal SAR isn't really the same as engaging with them about the case, it's just exercising your rights under GDPR legislation, you will then have a complete set of all the documents they sent you. It's pretty standard practice in these cases over on the FTLA forum although it's more usual for people to not even receive the original notice to keeper as their V5 registration document isn't updated but that's obviously not the case here. Of course check with your solicitor.
Stumpy, if you want to wang on about the evils of challenging parking tickets on technicalities head to one of the philosophy threads.
Erm this is a thread about private parking tickets and their consequences, you're the one who's trying to turn it into something it's not with your tired old moaning about neo-liberalism, whatever that is.
Ianal etc
This article suggests that unlike in England (where service is presumed when posted there needs to be evidence of service.
"evidence of delivery must be attached to the confirmation of formal service lodged with the court for the presumption that the document has been received to apply, the Sheriff Appeal Court has ruled."
"The first attempt at service must be by “a next day postal service which records delivery”. "
Erm this is a thread about private parking tickets and their consequences, you're the one who's trying to turn it into something it's not with your tired old moaning about neo-liberalism, whatever that is.
No, it's about a court judgement resulting from private parking tickets.
I agree, questions about morality and politics belong on another thread but why don't you go back and have a look at just how keen many people, you included, were on telling the OP just how immoral he was.
I'm quite happy to stop discussing the morality and politics of it but that's going to depend on others, including you, isn't it?
you included, were on telling the OP just how immoral he was
You'll have to quote that back to me as having been back through the thread I can't see where I've questioned the morality of tpbikers actions. I've actually provided quite a bit of reasoned advice and background as to how these companies operate which I hope will contribute to tpbiker getting this sorted.
What have you added other than trying to derail the thread with rogue meet and greet companies, picking fights and trying to turn this into yet another repetitive, boring politics thread?
What have you added other than trying to derail the thread with rogue meet and greet companies, picking fights and trying to turn this into yet another repetitive, boring politics thread?
I think my main contribution is keeping the subject on topic by offering an alternative explanation to the assumption of many of this thread's contributors that the OP is a moral degenerate for not simply paying up. I did this by pointing out that the UK is pretty much alone in the way PPCs operate and the way they rely on civil courts to coerce people into paying. Because the UK goes the PPC and civil court route, picking up on technicalities is what is supposed to happen. It's a contract dispute, after all. It's the way an unregulated enforcement system is supposed to 'work'. Or at least, it's the way it's supposed to work if you believe the state shouldn't be regulating these things and the courts should be the ones to judge who is right and who is wrong on a case by case basis.
I'd really like that to be the end of this part of the discussion since people seem to be actually discussing the issue at hand now, ie, how did the OP receive no correspondence at any point in the process. It's an issue that could affect any one of us if it turns out people can take us to court and we don't know anything about it.
However, if you want to continue with the politics and moral discussion you go right ahead.
Must say I'm a bit disapointed that the OP has taken some legal advice, much more fun to represent yourself in court 😎
Quite exciting waiting for the next announcement tomorrow, my bet is on the letters having been delivered and binned by a third party................
What we may well have discovered is, who here actually works in the industry TP is in dispute with. I don't think he/she/they/it has admitted it in this thread but it looks as if the lady doth protest too much...
It’s quite likely the court never sent you any original notice of the case - they only do this (for an extra fee) if the pursuer requests it. A firm pursuing lots of parking cases is likely to serve the docs themselves rather than pay the court to do it.
Say what?! So what's stopping the ppc just saying they sent the letter but not posting it? They'd win by default every time?
the simple procedure rules for Scotland are all online. Intentionally lying on the form is likely to be contempt/perjury and have significant consequences if caught! There are rules on who can declare service was completed - typically a solicitor who has a duty not to mislead the court beyond that of an ordinary claimant. Knowingly not properly serving documents and implying to the court they were served would be career ending if you were found out, even without the perjury/contempt.
I can think of about half a dozen possibilities that don’t require wilful deceit. It might be slightly clearer after you talk to the Sheriff Clerk tomorrow.
ah, you may be surprised at the inefficiencies of our courts and our lawyers then! It could well be typed or at least copy and pasted - where missing the first digit of an address is quite easy. However simple address errors of multiple docs would often be spotted as the incorrect recipient is likely to send back a letter that says on the outside that it contains court documents.
Assuming an incorrect recipient actually exists, of course.
My door number is hyphenated. Cockups are more common than you might imagine, despite most processing these days seemingly being digital. Sometimes the dash gets lost (not a number, I guess), so "7-9" becomes 7 9 or 79. I've also read it out as "seven to nine" and had it corrupted to 729. That one lead to an amusing conversation with a delivery driver; the last house number on the street is in the 30s or 40s and then it gets a bit rural, he was halfway to the next county going "where are all these bloody houses?!"
(example here may not be my actual door number)
my bet is on the letters having been delivered and binned by a third party...
It is objectively plausible, likely even, that the partner in question was intercepting the mail and binning letters before tpbiker saw them. Now I'm not for a second suggesting that this is what's happened here, but if a bunch of cyclists are considering it then the PPC's lawyer surely will.
Ok..we have an update. It's not a great one but since you've all been on tender hooks to find out
Below are the simple steps in the process.
1 - PPC sends a simple procedure doc. I can either contest or ignore.
2- if i contest it goes to court, I get an invite. If not then I don't get a court invite, rather court automatically rules against me and I have 30 days to pay
3-after 30 days I get a ccj on my file
But here is the kicker....the court have a recorded delivery to my address for the simple procedure doc in point 1. its clearly not my signature, nothing like it. (Not even close when I do it on one of those machines the postie uses). I was not even in at the time.
But...my girlfriend also lives in the house. She swears blind she can't remember signing for a letter, it looks nothing like her signature, but she admits 'well I sometimes just put a squiggle in the box'
So basically, I'm pretty sure she signed fir something addressed to me, then binned it. I'm absolutely xxxxing furious with her. If you've read another post by me about her disorganisation this may not come as a surprise. But quite frankly I'm done with this behaviour. I can't live with someone like this
I can still appeal, based on fact I coukd claim I wasn't engaged even if they have confirmation of receipt, likewise there is still no sign of the outcome letter and ways to pay (which again comes from the ppc) but I imagine they've probably got another squiggled receipt in their files from another binned letter. Either way at this point I have zero to lose by appealing, court told me it was free to do, but my case is damaged
But tbh right now I'm more worried about what to do about my other half than a ccj because I'm absolutely fed up with this crap.
As a point of note..I noticed the parking co made zero mention of the fact I'd explicitly told then I wasn't driving on the form (which also went to the court). Obviously they didn't need to legally disclose it, much the same as I didn't need to legally disclose who was driving. Luckily fir them however the admin on their side is alot better than on mine..
Ahhh bugger. Some up there ^ speculated as such. Suppose the basis for the appeal is you didn't sign for it or know anything about the proceedings but you carry the can for the errrm, 'admin' snafu. Assuming no/low cost, is there anything to lose in appealing? Sounds like SWMBO will also be looking for someone else's post to torpedo...
If you've read another post by me about her disorganisation this may not come as a surprise. But quite frankly I'm done with this behaviour. I can't live with someone like this
The standard STW response is a new patio - but I guess you can't get a loan for one now. 😬
I just spoke to the companies solicitor. They sent a letter to my address on 25th Nov with the outcome, but this time it wasn't recorded.
Given I receive all other expected post, I'm now second guessing what's going on. Did that one genuinely not arrive, or is someone opening mail addressed to me and binning it when they don't like the contents. None of my other post is opened though, so maybe paranoia is setting in.
Hmmmmm...
Sorry to hear that tpbiker.
That’s horrible. Good luck with whatever this uncovers personally.
Gives me no real satisfaction that my speculation turns out to have been right, when the outcome is as shit as it is. TPbiker, despite my thoughts about the 'morals' of loopholing out of a legit parking ticket, the situation you are now in wrt both the ccj and your relationship has my sympathy, neither are easy to fix.
Hopefully you get one of those human Sheriffs that's able to apply some sense rather than just letter of the law, and can find a way to backtrack to where you pay the fine and have the ccj removed.
I think a few need now to wind their necks back in and leave TPbiker to sort stuff out.
And lesson to all - first find the ****ing facts, before starting the name calling
Oh, this is pants. I'm guessing there isn't much you can do with the CCJ now there is evidence of a delivered (but disposed of) letter ?
I just spoke to the companies solicitor. They sent a letter to my address on 25th Nov with the outcome, but this time it wasn't recorded.
Given I receive all other expected post, I'm now second guessing what's going on. Did that one genuinely not arrive, or is someone opening mail addressed to me and binning it when they don't like the contents. None of my other post is opened though, so maybe paranoia is setting in.
Hmmmmm...
Documents which require to be served have a stamp or label on the outside stating that it contains a court document - its hard to miss and certainly not going to be mistaken for junk mail. The outcome may still be in a similar envelope - we sometimes get 'earnings arrestment' notices for chaotic employees and they stand out a mile away, so if you were trying to intercept them, it would be obvious. Why you would do it is a different question.
Sorry to hear about this. I remember your other thread now. It really can't be easy so I hope everything works out in the end.
Thanks guys. I appreciate the sentiments. My op last week was born out of frustration as I've been having a shitty past few weeks (my dog died) so if my responses were curt then I apologise
Oh, this is pants. I'm guessing there isn't much you can do with the CCJ now there is evidence of a delivered (but disposed of) letter ?
I can still technically appeal according to the lady at the court. I can still argue i never got the chance to engage and im not liable. It will all depend if the sherrif believes i didnt see it rather than ignored it. Either way it is in no way helpful. The nice lady at the court gave me the forms.
Tbh right now I'm almost past caring about the ccj. More concerned about my relationship. This isn't about one letter, it's a clear trend of irresponsible behaviour
The standard STW response is a new patio - but I guess you can't get a loan for one now
You are correct unless I crowd fund a cement mixer.
I can't even go with the frozen sausages, as whilst I can afford them, it's my own front lawn they'd be going in.
What i will categorically say ..She'll not be getting any pudding though...ever..
But...my girlfriend also lives in the house. She swears blind she can't remember signing for a letter, it looks nothing like her signature, but she admits 'well I sometimes just put a squiggle in the box'
As someone who has a commercial mobile app being used in anger I can confirm that 99.5% of the time a digital signature bears very little resemblance to a paper signature.
(a cool app would record the geolocation when the signature was done .... just sayin 😉 )
As a point of note..I noticed the parking co made zero mention of the fact I'd explicitly told then I wasn't driving on the form
I think the form you completed was to dispute the issue of the parking ticket, but you simply said you weren't driving which does not invalidate the issuing of the ticket and so was not relevant.
Unfortunately, as with most things, the truth is normally a lot simpler than you may think. Hope you get your issues sorted and sorry for the loss of your dog ☹
All I can say at this point is fair play to you coming back here and posting what you have, if your integrity was questioned in previous posts I think we can put that to bed, took some strength of character to face up to what appears to have happened and post about it here. Good luck sorting the relationship out, you seem to know what needs to be done.
I think the form you completed was to dispute the issue of the parking ticket, but you simply said you weren't driving which does not invalidate the issuing of the ticket and so was not relevant.
Whilst not particularly relevant anymore, I think the last sentence of their justification for action is a bit misleading.. .
'despite repeated requests for payment, the respondent refuses or delays. This action is accordingly necessary,'
No mention of fact I'd stated categorically I wasn't actually driving! I'm not going to debate the 'despite repeated requests' bit mind you given i no longer have any confidence in what was or was not delivered
I'm waiting to hear back from my solicitor. At this point I'm definitely going to appeal, as there is no reason not to. If However there is anyway I could say to the company 'get the order overturned and I'll pay today, otherwise I'll appeal and you take your chances with the judge' I'd do that
Clutching at straws there mind you as I can't see a process for that to happen, but ultimately as someone pointed out, they want my money, they don't care about my ccj.
No mention of fact I'd stated categorically I wasn't actually driving!
But that fact is irrelevant to the actual issuing of the ticket.
But that fact is irrelevant to the actual issuing of the ticket.
All that is covered comprehensively in the first 3 paragraphs. I just think the last statement is misleading. But not unexpected. They aren't going to cite my defense for me after all. I take your point though.
That said, i doubt the sherrif even reads this form if it's unopposed, so it's probably completely irrelevant what's on it!
The issue isn't whats on the form, it the fact i didnt oppose it.
Going to be a very uncomfortable evening in my house tonight. The costs of this fine pales into insignificance compared to what I'll probably end up having to shell out to remove my girlfriend. As immoral as I may be fir not paying a parking ticket, I'm not going to kick her out without ensuring she has somewhere to live. Somewhere I suspect I'll be paying the deposit for given her current financial situation
@tpbiker I’m really sorry to hear this outcome. Hope you can sort things out.
Going to be a very uncomfortable evening in my house tonight. The costs of this fine pales into insignificance compared to what I'll probably end up having to shell out to remove my girlfriend. As immoral as I may be fir not paying a parking ticket, I'm not going to kick her out without ensuring she has somewhere to live. Somewhere I suspect I'll be paying the deposit for given her current financial situation
I hope you are joking. Or would you really throw out a girlfriend over a parking fine? It a minor matter. Stop fussing, pay the fee, tell her she should have told you sooner, then forget it.
its more than that, read the linked thread
It sounds like this all is an indication of a wider malais/the straw that broke the camels back etc - just reading between the lines.
It sounds like this all is an indication of a wider malais/the straw that broke the camels back etc - just reading between the lines.
I hope you are joking. Or would you really throw out a girlfriend over a parking fine? It a minor matter. Stop fussing, pay the fee, tell her she should have told you sooner, then forget it.
As has been indicated, I suspect it's far more than that. I'm not going to be rash, but this feels like the final straw.
Either way, nothing will be said tonight. My dogs ashes were just returned so this is not the right time
This always was a spikey thread, the outcome is pretty grim all round.
Hopefully the OP can get things can get things sorted the right way.
If I'm reading this right, TP, your Mrs incurred a ticket, ignored it and ****ed you over? Now you've got a CCJ?
That's pretty ****ed up. Get rid of her, pay the bill and move on.
If I'm reading this right, TP, your Mrs incurred a ticket, ignored it and ****ed you over? Now you've got a CCJ?
Not quite...
She didn't ignore it. I appealed it as it was sent to me not her. She then signed for, but didn't pass on a subsequent letter from the company that meant I ended up with a court order (scottish ccj equivalent)
Ultimately though, this sorry tale appears to be less about me not paying originally, nor my gf not passing on 1 letter, but a chain of things leading to this point.
I'm waiting to hear back from my solicitor. At this point I'm definitely going to appeal, as there is no reason not to. If However there is anyway I could say to the company 'get the order overturned and I'll pay today, otherwise I'll appeal and you take your chances with the judge' I'd do that
How good a friend is he? does he deal with litigious stuff in court regularly? It’s not impossible for him to call up the other party’s solicitor and explain the situation with the g/f and negotiate the sort of solution you are proposing. If he doesn’t normally do contentious work or he’s going to Want an hourly rate then it might not be a good start, although someone sending out parking ticket claims will be very junior and they may neither have the authority to agree anything or their boss may think sending them into the lions den with a sheriff and a litigant in person is good training which doesn’t cost them anything if they lose! But for the sake of your lawyer making a phone call.
How good a friend is he?
Honestly, not an especially good mate, just a girl I've known for years
But is there actually a process for that? Ie even if they wanted to, surely the sheriff had already made judgement so 2 lawyers can't hash out a deal to overturn that can they?
The recall process is pretty much explicitly for folks that don't turn up to defend themselves, for whatever reason. I'm not sure how much the other companies solicitor would be able to influence that either way. I can ask however.
Ultimately I suspect it'll be down to the sheriff and whether he thinks I just ignored the letter or not. Or if he's feeling in a generous mood on that specific day
It’s not impossible for him to call up the other party’s solicitor and explain the situation with the g/f and negotiate the sort of solution you are proposing.
Be sure to tell your lawyer that you’re getting advice from randoms on a mountain bike forum on the best way to for her to proceed with the matter, I’m sure she’ll love that.
"It wasn't me driving so in scotland im not liable, it was my girlfriend."
So liability is clear.
One of you is gonna have to pay.
So why all this posturing? pay it and move on. Or tap your girlfriend up, or sue her for fraud, I don't care.
This just seems like a massive waste of time and effort.
Fact of the matter is you and your girlfriend are both complicit/culpable, and running around in legal circles is just going to cost you more money and effort in the long run, as evidenced by the CCJ you now have, lol.
'cutting losses' and 'quitting whilst you are ahead' I feel are phrases you don't really grasp.
So why all this posturing? pay it and move on. Or tap your girlfriend up, or sue her for fraud, I don't care.
This just seems like a massive waste of time and effort.
I think this thread has moved on somewhat from 'just pay up and move on' . That ship sailed. The first time when I challenged the ticket, the 2nd when I never received the verdict so couldnt pay it within 30 days.
The money is irrelevant. The ccj is an inconvenience and something i definitely want rid of. My relationship matters far more than either of those however.
'cutting losses' and 'quitting whilst you are ahead' I feel are phrases you don't really grasp.
I'm not sure of you've fully followed this thread but I'm in no way 'ahead here' unfortunately. In any way whatsoever.
Just to be re emphasise though, I am at the stage now where 'cutting losses' achieves nothing. I have absolutely nothing to gain by paying up now vs appealing the decision.
Fact of the matter is you and your girlfriend are both complicit/culpable, and running around in legal circles is just going to cost you more money and effort in the long run, as evidenced by the CCJ you now have, lol.
'cutting losses' and 'quitting whilst you are ahead' I feel are phrases you don't really grasp.
The 'should have paid' faction (myself included) have had their say. All moot now and OP has more important things to worry about. Lets leave the pile on there.
Good luck OP, hope it all works out in the end.
Fact of the matter is you and your girlfriend are both complicit/culpable, and running around in legal circles is just going to cost you more money and effort in the long run, as evidenced by the CCJ you now have, lol.
'cutting losses' and 'quitting whilst you are ahead' I feel are phrases you don't really grasp.
The 'should have paid' faction (myself included) have had their say. All moot now and OP has more important things to worry about. Lets leave the pile on there.
Good luck OP, hope it all works out in the end.
I must have missed that bit in all the comments.. My apologies.
I'm not judging.. I'm the first person to wriggle out of a speculative invoice given half a chance.
Apologies again if I skimmed past a pertinent development.
It seems wild to me that for all the correspondence you may or may not have received and processes you may or may not have followed, ultimately this is about an offence which you did not commit. The CCJ is for non-payment of a fine you weren't liable for. People have been banged up for murder and released decades later when their innocence has been subsequently proven.
Anyway. It sounds like you've had a shit run of things, I think I'm most upset about the loss of your dog. Keep buggering on, mate.
Oh, for what it's worth,
But...my girlfriend also lives in the house. She swears blind she can't remember signing for a letter, it looks nothing like her signature, but she admits 'well I sometimes just put a squiggle in the box'
I do this sometimes. I'm reasonably confident that I'd recognise my own handwriting sufficiently to go "I didn't write that" even it was just a nonsense squiggle.
even it was just a nonsense squiggle.
Tbf I don't think it matters 'in law' who signs for it, could have been a burglar for all the difference it would make! And tbh, I can't argue the 'law is the law' when it comes to not paying originally, then question the fairness of a different law when it bites me on the ass!
, I think I'm most upset about the loss of your dog.
Thanks cougar. You and me both. He arrived back home yesterday which was quite emotional.
I've been having a shitty past few weeks (my dog died) so if my responses were curt then I apologise
And some of us (me!) were pretty unpleasant in response which by the sounds of it you didn't need. Sorry about that.
Sounds like you've had a tough run. I hope you can resolve your relationship concerns and keep everything in perspective.