Hello NMAG goodbye CAG

[green_and_mean]

Since the forum now seems to have been taken over by seemingly now defunct London Motorists Action Groups new reincarnation 'NMAG' I will no longer be posting advice on the board. I do not feel the aims of NMAG are the same as mine and I do not wish to be a part of a group that puts the rights of car drivers above those of the general population. There are plenty of anti speed camera, anti parking control websites its a bit sad that CAG sees the way forward as jumping on board the band wagon rather than giving unbiased honest advice on parking and motoring issues. I hope some of my 7,300 posts have helped some people even if a tad blunt at times. Good bye

 

[heliosuk]

Who the hell are nmag? At least cag has credibility.

 

Is this another case of the dictotorial attitude employed by the site team?

 

I personnally would like to know if it was sold off and if so for what reason.

 

Nmag does not represent the interests of a consumer.

 

This organisation is wholly inappropriate to be linked with cag.

 

PERHAPS THEY MIGHT HAVE THE COURTESY TO EXPLAIN WHAT IS GOING ON OR HAS GONE ON.

[postggj]

says it all

 

another senior cagger bites the dust

[havinastella]

This post has been flagged for the attention of site admin!

 

From a personal viewpoint, I'd hate to see G&M leaving this site! He is Black or White and his advice is awesome!

 

Lets hope this can be sorted!

 

Jogs

Edited October 9, 2012 by Andyorch
Andyorch typo

[postggj]

may i ask why my post has been deleated, it was not defamatory or offensive

 

has free speach on CAG been put off limits now also

[BankFodder]

NMAG will be launching next week but there is a website if you want to see it - www.nmag.co.uk

 

There is no financial tie-up bewteen CAG and NMAG. We are partnering with them because we think that there is value for consumers in what NMAG want to do - which is to focus on the special interests of motorists.

 

There is no conflict between consumers and motorists - but if there were to be, then CAG would do its usual job in the ususal way.

 

The CAG has simply agreed to be the forum for NMAG insofar as motoring issues are concerned.

 

NMAG has some commercial interests but they won't be reflected here.

 

Frankly, there is very little change other than different colours and a logo.

If you think that CAG is useful to you then that won't change.

If you think that CAG is of no use to you, then that may well not change either.

[BankFodder]

By the way, we have been feeding tweets from the motoring forums to the NMAG twitter account for almost a year now - as well as to our own Twitter account. I don't think that it has caused any problems for anyone or anything that CAG has been doing so far.

[Smart Cookie]

It is disappointing to see unjustified knee-jerk reactions from some commendable well-meaning but misguided bloggers to breaking news about NMAG.

 

CAGers may be assured that NMAG will NOT be 'putting the rights of motorists above anyone else'. Some 30 million long-suffering motorists ARE consumers whose lives and finances are being relentlessly blighted by variously incompetent and perverse authorities and by rogue companies - and increasingly so.

 

NMAG advice and activities will NOT be in competition in any way with CAG or other motoring organisations which have their own specific motoring activities and interests but will work harmoniously with and complement all of them.

 

Yes, CAG certainly does have great credibility. So will NMAG in time.

 

So, to these initially irritated correspondents I say - please calm down and wait and see. Great oaks from little acorns grow (as CAG has certainly proved).

[green_and_mean]

So, to these initially irritated correspondents I say - please calm down and wait and see. Great oaks from little acorns grow (as CAG has certainly proved).

 

What like the London Motorist Action group, where is their oak tree? The NMAG has numerous links to commercial 'advice' sites and actually directs you to click on the link to get advice on at least one page. It claims to fund the Motorists legal fund which is famous for several high profile cases that have swallowed up tens of thousands of well meaning donors cash but have yet to win a case in the High Court.

 

The appeals process is not as daunting as you may think.

A succinct overview can be seen here at our Penalty Charge Notice affiliate site; you have nothing to lose by challenging your PCN at the ‘informal’ stage as councils are prepared to freeze the 50% discount whilst they consider your representations. However, to increase your chances of success you can seek advice on the forum here or by signing up to our partner’s expert advice website. (my bold but its a commercial site)

http://www.nmag.co.uk/issues/local-authority-parking-and-traffic-enforcement.php

 

 

The site also states:

 

Recommended Companies

For motorists looking for specialist practitioners to take on their issues, NMAG is pleased to recommend a small number of affiliate companies and lawyers to deal with a range of problems.

http://www.nmag.co.uk/about-us.php

 

Who might they be then???

 

It also states that Councils are incompetant whilst at the same time stating:

 

Since March 2008 local authority parking and traffic enforcement must be operated in accordance with the Traffic Management Act 2004 and the associated Regulations of 2007. Penalty charge notices and related enforcement documents state this at the beginning.

Enforcement under the 2004 Act requires that an enforcement authority’s PCNs and other documents themselves must comply with the Regulations which some do not in one or more respects. Enforcement documents must all be issued in accordance with prescribed timescales and certainly not prematurely.

There have been and remain too many instances of these penal documents which do not comply with the requirements prescribed by these 2007 Regulations which are very clearly written and easy to understand.

 

This is clearly wrong only parking is carried out under the TMA 2004 traffic enforcement is still carried out by statutes and regulations imposed prior to 2004

 

Where enforcement is operated by means of CCTV observation the CCTV equipment must conform to prescribed standards and have been officially certified as an Approved Device for enforcement purposes.

An enforcement authority must be able to produce an approved device certificate in relation to each different set of CCTV equipment they operate for civil enforcement purposes failing which there enforcement operations are unlawful.

Regulation 6 of the 2007 General Regulations prohibits the issue of any CCTV-originated PCN if the CCTV equipment is not certified as an approved device. Many thousands of such PCNs have been wrongly issued with no lawful basis and hundreds more are being regularly cancelled at parking appeals where the CCTV equipment involved is shown to be not compliant with regulatory requirements.

http://www.nmag.co.uk/issues/causes-of-unlawful-parking-and-traffic-enforcement.php

 

Also clearly wrong as only parking currently uses approved devices, moving traffic and bus lanes do not and no certification is required.

 

Whilst these mistakes may seem trivial they could lead a motorist to appeal on non existent grounds or use the wrong regulations and end up costing them money, not good from a site that claims to give honest helpful advice!

 

 

So basically the NMAG is a front for commercial companies touting for business and a political lobbying group that wants to stop fuel duty, speeding fines, parking tickets, permit schemes whilst at the same time giving incorrect free advice?

 

Sorry for being so negative 'smart cookie' but I think most people are smart enough to take anything said by a member with 1 post with a pinch of salt.

 

As they like to say on TV.........I'm out!

Edited October 6, 2012 by green_and_mean

[BankFodder]

Thanks for this. I've flagged this post to the NMAG team for a response or a correction

 

Let's see what they say. If these are erros on the NMAG site then clearly they need to be corrected and it is very useful to have people who are able to highlight them.

 

That is what a forum is for.

[heliosuk]

may i ask why my post has been deleated, it was not defamatory or offensive

 

has free speach on CAG been put off limits now also

 

This does happen occasionally where the site team get a bit jumpy when it appears they are criticised. Whole threads have disappeared in the past as well without explanation especially where a claimant has been told they have no case but been egged on.

[heliosuk]

Re post #9.

 

This is exactly what I am on about G&M. It's a blatently commercial site operating very differently from CAG and CAG's ethos. Whilst admittadely sites such as this need funds to operate the fact that NMAG advocates and uses links to services is a clear breach of CAG policy.

 

re post #7.

 

"If you think that CAG is useful to you then that won't change.

If you think that CAG is of no use to you, then that may well not change either."

 

CAG is useful to many existing members and new members who can find expert debate and opinionfrom members. Sometimes it can get heated but it gives a very good overview of a situation

 

The question is, given the commercial links that NMAG has and the controling influence of the site team over posts that criticise them, how long before the commercial interests take over and ruin a very good reference forum for all.

 

There may well have been tweets for over a year but twitter is just a rubbish gossip setup.....The vast majority of the population don't "tweet".

 

Re post#9.

 

Well said!!

[crem]

I don't like the new colours, they are too ,,, blue!

[green_and_mean]

I don't want to drag this out and was going to just go after the opening post but since others have voiced similar concerns I will respond. Sites like CAG and even pepipoo have always been run as forums where individuals can share knowledge free of charge to assist those in need. I have posted over 7000 times on CAG which if you calculate on a conservative minimum of just 3 minutes per post thats over 350 hours of MY time given to help fellow members. I probably have more knowledge of parking legislation than anyone at NMAG or the majority of law firms who have little experience of CPE. I have no intention of letting my professional advice that is given free of charge being used to entice people to sign up for commercial websites. The main affilate seems to be penaltychargenotice.co.*k a site that is so desperate to drum up trade on its home page it has a photo of a hearse being towed that is watermarked with their site address, yet was stolen from a viral spoof video from 2010 (you can see the boom mic above where they have ringed the coffin!).

The site is also heavily promoted on Neil Herrons blog page, Neil who you may remember spent most of the Motorists Legal Campaign money appealing against PCNs his own now closed commercial site (parking appeals.co.*k ) lost at TPT in the High Court and lost, his site now directs to penaltychargenotice BTW.

 

The commercial parking advice business seems to be a very small world in 2009 a chap called Paul Pearson was the spokesman for the LMAG in the Standard http://www.standard.co.uk/news/west-end-parking-charges-rocket-6732664.html the London Motorist Action Group was housed at 38 Swains Lane Highgate London the same address used by the 'new' National motorist action group. Rather curiously the owner of the penaltychargenotice website highly recommended on the NMAG site is also owned by a chap called Paul Pearson........small world!!

[heliosuk]

Well that perhaps says it all G&M!

 

Expect to see your post deleted as you have single handedly pointed out why this apparent afiliation shoud not occur.

 

It is not in the interests of CAG and will demean and weaken the interests of members in the transport section of the forum to the extent it becomes a laughing stock such as sites like someone john and martins money saving.

 

CAG has credibility and is gaining this on a non for profit basis so there is no rationalle to affiliate with a two bit for profit background site which does not serve the interests of the consumer.

 

Get rid of this alliance asap I say.

[green_and_mean]

Whilst on the subject of little acorns growing into oak trees maybe the acorns need a bit more 'fetiliser'? Back in 2000 John Squires (aka the Parking Doctor) set up a website called parkingticket.co.*k, in 2004 he asked for someone to take it over and eventually it was decided that a certain Paul Pearson would be given the opportunity to carry on the Docs good work. The site was eventually taken over by a commercial company run by Paul Goodlad and Paul Hensher (parking ticket ltd) but strangely it was Paul Goodland and Paul Pearson who posted on the site not Hensher, the company was dissolved after a few years of failing to grow into a proverbial oak tree. Paul Hensher however went on to a career in property development and is now a director of numerous companies one of which is Welfare Dwellings Trust ltd.

Moving on a few years and a few more failed parking websites penaltychargenotice arrives on the scene and guess who owns the domain none other than Welfare Dwellings Trust ltd owned by Paul Hensher or is that Paul Pearson it does get confusing?? Anyway the point of this story is 8 years on nothing has come of mr Hensher or Pearsons efforts to put the world to rights so why has a succesful and prosperous forum been handed over on a plate to a property developer with a track record of shutting down parking advice sites?

[BankFodder]

I've had a response from NMAG and, yes, you are right about the innaccuracies. They will be fixed.

If anyone spots anymore then do flag them up.

 

Very silly of them to have been there in the first place

[BankFodder]

... individuals can share knowledge free of charge to assist those in need....

 

What has changed?

 

If NMAG conjures up more publicity and this brings more people onto the CAG, then that means that more people will understand that they don't have to accept unreasonable or unlawful treatment. That also means that there will be more people puttng pressure on the organisations which mete out this kind of treatment.

 

I'm not too sure what has changed.

[green_and_mean]

What has changed?

 

If NMAG conjures up more publicity and this brings more people onto the CAG, then that means that more people will understand that they don't have to accept unreasonable or unlawful treatment. That also means that there will be more people puttng pressure on the organisations which mete out this kind of treatment.

 

I'm not too sure what has changed.

 

What has changed is the forum for all intents and purposes now seems to be the forum for NMAG where people are encouraged to join and support NMAG not CAG. NMAG in turn then directs people to sign up for a commercial company or use its 'affialate' companies for professional advice. Both NMAG and the commercial site already even at this early stage are using members freely given advice and success stories as their own content.

I have no intention of giving up my time for example to prove that the tickets issued by a Council are invalid only to find the next week the case is used on a commercial website as an example of how they can assist people in order to get someone to pay £4.99 for further advice. In all the years I have been here I cannot recall ever seeing a member that could not get all the help they needed from the motoring experts that are members apart from the odd occasion that they needed to be directed over to the baliff section to get further free help. NMAG on the other hand seems to direct its readers to use commercial companies rather than the advice provided on the site.

The site team have done nothing to explain what NMAG are bringing to the party other than a new website full of information that has been copied and pasted from elsewhere and is already readily available on CAG.

NMAG are not a 'powerful' consumer group, they appear on the surface just to be another reincarnation of LMAG that sunk without trace some time ago. What attracted me to CAG was its non 'political' stance based on giving factual advice not on changing the law. Its fairly simple: a member gets a speeding ticket we advise as to whether it was fairly issued ie was the limit exceeded and was the procedure correct. What we have not done is gone off on a tangent moaning about getting done doing 50 in a 30 is about raising money, speed cameras are not fair, or that its safe to do 90 mph on motorways there are plenty of other sites with clear agendas that you can join with a view to change the law to suit your own motoring needs.

If the 'experts' at NMAG cannot even ensure the information posted on their site is correct at the launch then its not a good start and doesn't fill one with confidence at their competance.

Who is NMAG? Why are their no names mentioned anywhere on the site who is going to be on the BBC etc as the face of NMAG? In the past we used to see Neil Herron as a parking ticket expert across all the media very cleverly using the press as free publicity for his commercial site. Is Mr Pearson going to be a spokesperson if so will he be using NMAG/CAG exposure in the media to get free publicity for his commercial site? I have always been very uneasy about the term 'parking ticket campaigner' used as regards people like Herron, Pearson, Segal when behind their campaign is a commercial enterprise dependant on people getting parking tickets. These people would advise you your tickets are unlawful as their commercial enterprise is dependant on that belief, hardly a good basis for honest advice, something CAG is famous for.

[BankFodder]

Well the people who come onto this site for help will still need to advice and support which they will continue to receive here for free as usual.

I don't see anywhere the people are being to join NMAG and not CAG. Maybe you can point to that because if it exists then it is an error and will be corrected. If you think that NMAG compromises its campaigning stance for commercial reasons then flag it up here.

I'm glad that you feel that we have a non-political stance. Other dtractors would disagree with you but I agree with you (naturally enough). Nothing has changed.

 

So far as the identities of NMAG spokespersons, you should direct that question to NMAG. We are the CAG - but we are happy to associate with an organisation which we think will be come a valuable campaign asset for UK motorists.

[dw190]

Just been over to the site following the link that has taken over every page on here.

 

Only info of any value on the site is a link to this site. Anything else is just links to others work or links to sites asking for a premium.

 

One thing I noticed on the first click on the link was a popup in the background.

[heliosuk]

Exactly dw. NMAG is piggy backing on CAG's very succesful independant site.

 

NMAG serves no useful purpose other than to make money for the site owners. I could post a shed load more but don't carry lible insurance.

 

This so called affiliation is not in the best interests of CAG and I urge the site team to disassociate CAG from it asap.

[dpick]

Very simple I have add block plus no image now.

 

dpick

[Nev Met]

One of the frustrations that I have is that whilst consumer forums are very good at helping out people, in the main, on a case by case basis, I see this very much as a reactive process. As such, the fight isn't taken to the authorities which means that we are simply not impacting on the actual causes of the problems in the first place.

 

At this current time it appears that the motorist is being viewed by those authorities as public enemy number one and is being milked at every available opportunity. My own specialized(?) area of concern is the DVLA's complicity with the private parking companies. It didn't take me long to realise that however much advice that I or others give concerning individual cases it is merely a drop in the ocean when measured against the (anticipated) 2.3 million AOS private parking tickets that will be issued in the next year.

 

As an individual I have tried my level best to challenge and change the system and if I'm honest, whilst I may have made a nuisance of myself, the reality is that I've changed little.

 

I see NMAG as exactly the type of punchy and feisty consumer organisation that motorists have been crying out for. The reason being is that because they are focused on solely motoring issues and clearly intend to be extremely pro-active.

 

It is this type of approach that will get results - pro active campaigning on behalf of motorists.

 

Do I mind that they appear to be a commercial venture - not really, I will keep an open mind and as long as they do get results then I see that as a win/win situation.

[green_and_mean]

One of the frustrations that I have is that whilst consumer forums are very good at helping out people, in the main, on a case by case basis, I see this very much as a reactive process. As such, the fight isn't taken to the authorities which means that we are simply not impacting on the actual causes of the problems in the first place.

 

At this current time it appears that the motorist is being viewed by those authorities as public enemy number one and is being milked at every available opportunity. My own specialized(?) area of concern is the DVLA's complicity with the private parking companies. It didn't take me long to realise that however much advice that I or others give concerning individual cases it is merely a drop in the ocean when measured against the (anticipated) 2.3 million AOS private parking tickets that will be issued in the next year.

 

As an individual I have tried my level best to challenge and change the system and if I'm honest, whilst I may have made a nuisance of myself, the reality is that I've changed little.

 

I see NMAG as exactly the type of punchy and feisty consumer organisation that motorists have been crying out for. The reason being is that because they are focused on solely motoring issues and clearly intend to be extremely pro-active.

 

It is this type of approach that will get results - pro active campaigning on behalf of motorists.

Do I mind that they appear to be a commercial venture - not really, I will keep an open mind and as long as they do get results then I see that as a win/win situation.

 

Who are 'motorists'? 'Motorists' is such a general term and applies to anyone that drives from a professional driver to a boy racer. Who is going to decide on the campaign issues I hate people who speed think speed cameras only catch those that break the law and think they are better than wasting a PCs time standing at the roadside with a speed gun, others think they should be scrapped.....who gets to campaign? I think people with large cars should pay more to use the road, others probably do not? I want the motorway speed limit kept at 70mph I'm sure a lot of people don't. Lumping the motorist as some sort of demographic group is impossible. Campaigning to get an unlawfully marked bus lane corrected and campaigning to get rid of bus lanes are poles apart, yet are both motoring issues. I have always viewed CAG as the former looking to ensure the law is followed, rather than an nameless undemocratic organisation looking to change the law to suit its own agenda.