Nuxx:116a90c6-d140-426b-b547-f2e03d5cd007@c11g2000yqj.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!c11g2000yqj.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <116a90c6-d140-426b-b547-f2e03d5cd007@c11g2000yqj.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Look, Tom Crispin: How Councils Treat "Plebs" Re Parking Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 11:08:09 -0700 (PDT) References:  <185ts4h224ok5cr1dnqkbitn8alm2ii510@4ax.com>  Lines: 29 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.156.251.147 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1238350089 12713 127.0.0.1 (29 Mar 2009 18:08:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 18:08:09 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: c11g2000yqj.googlegroups.com; posting-host=81.156.251.147; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.8) Gecko/2009032609 Firefox/3.0.8 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 2554 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:692046

On Mar 29, 7:05=A0pm, Nuxx Bar  wrote: > On Mar 28, 10:24=A0pm, Tom Crispin > >  wrote: > > On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 16:42:01 -0700 (PDT), Nuxx Bar > > >  wrote: > > >Now do you see why I think your "contacts" helped you get off your > > >parking ticket? > > > And here's the letter that got me off... > > >www.britishschoolofcycling.com/misc/pcn > > > I hope it makes your day. > > Well, it's good that you have the decency not to deny that blatant > favouritism has occurred here (hardly surprising that it has, > considering that "One rule for us" is a cornerstone of socialism, and > socialism is what really lies behind this assault on the motorist). > > If only more people here were like you and Simon Mason...I may > disagree with you strongly, but you do at least keep it civil, genuine > and truthful.

BTW, I note that your (successful) appeal was a formal rather than informal one (otherwise there would be no Notice to Owner for them to cancel). Which of the "grounds for appeal" did you tick? And had you made an (unsuccessful) informal appeal? Just curious. ;-)