dpg123

1 hour ago, 718as said:

assume it was this car?

2013 Blue Porsche Boxster 3.4 981 S PDK Euro 5 (s/s) 2dr for sale for £25,944 in Oldham, Lancashire (autotrader.co.uk)

Is it normal to have parking sensors at the front and not the rear?

Remember also a Tip is 5 speed (manual is 6 speed) and 0.7 seconds slower 0-60. 

I chose a manual but live in town and often wish I had an auto for those occasions. However, as I didn't buy it for town driving, I find a manual more engaging.

Good luck with the hunt!

1 hour ago, BBB said:

It looks like a ball bolted through the towing eye.

That happened to me once and, trust me, it hurts...

Just now, edc said:

Most cars if you unlock but don't open a door within a certain timeframe then it will lock. If you just switch off the ignition and get out the car and not lock it the car won't lock itself, at least for 986. 

Ah, that's it...good to know!

25 minutes ago, edc said:

I've always left mine unlocked ...

Do they not lock themselves if left unattended? If I recall, mine locks if I get out and leave it for 20-30 secs or so. No alarm though (at least no flashing lights) but you can hear it locking...

On 4/24/2022 at 5:15 PM, hj04 said:

Afternoon all,

I have realised is been over a year since I started this thread. As a brief update I kept the Boxster and added an MC Stradale to sit alongside as a nice contrast.

In the next few weeks or so I will be advertising the Boxster for sale, most likely on Autotrader. I don't think I am allowed to formally post in the for sale section due to not enough posts, but assuming I am not breaking any rules I thought I would drop a message here incase anyone is on the hunt. I am not sure yet what price I am looking to advertise for, I need to get myself upto speed on where the market is.

In terms of the car its a 981 S PDK 3.4 Boxster in Agate Grey and black roof,  registered November 2015. 1 previous owner, currently on approx 46,000 miles. Full Porsche service history and Porsche Warranty until Oct 2022 which of course can be extended. MOT due Oct 2022. I took ownership from approx 11,000 miles and all servicing has been through Porsche Harston. Fuel wise I always use Tesco 99 Momentum. Next service due the earlier of Oct 2023 or around 57,000 miles from memory.

I have pasted the spec below for reference again, highlights include PSE, PASM, PTV, PCCB, PCM, PDLS+, Sports Chrono, Burmester, 18 way Seats.

Reason for sale is being driven by looking to find a boring car for the daily commute and then patiently searching for another convertible for fun weekend/road trip duties. 

Finally @villaman , did you find a 981 spyder? They certainly do interest me.

Spec

220		PTV (MECHAN. REAR-DIFF. LOCK)
250		PDK TRANSMISSION (PORSCHE DOPPELKUPPLUNG)
342		ADJUST. SEAT HEATING, FRONT (LE + RI)
427		20” CARRERA CLASSIC II WHEEL
450		CERAMIC - BRAKES (PCCB)
454		CRUISE CONTROL
475		EL. DAMPER CONTROL (PASM)
498		NO MODEL DESIGNATION ON REAR
546		ROLL-OVER BAR IN EXTERIOR COLOUR
573		ELECTRONIC AIR CONDITIONING (HIGH)
583		SMOKER PACKAGE
619		MOBILE PHONE PREP., BLUETOOTH W/O CONSOLE
630		INTERIOR LIGHT PACKAGE
631		SPEED LIMIT DISPLAY (TRAFFIC SIGN RECOG.)
632		PDLS+ (DYNAMIC HIGH BEAM)
636		PARKASSIST (FRONT + REAR)
640		SPORT CHRONO PACKAGE PLUS
682		TOP PREMIUM SOUND SYSTEM (BURMESTER)
691		DIGITAL RADIO RECEPTION (DAB)
693		INTEGRATED AUTOCHANGER (DVD)
748		DOOR MIRROR, EL. RETRACTABLE (S-NO.)
840		SPORTS STEER. WH. (PDK W. PADDLE)
P07		Adaptive Sports seats Plus (18-way, electric)
P13		Automatically dimming mirrors with integrated rain sensor
P23		Porsche Communication Management (PCM) including navigation module with universal audio interface
XLF		SPORTS EXHAUST SYSTEM
XUB		HEADLIGHT WASHER SYSTEM COVER PAINTED
XXR		TAIL LIGHTS, DARKENED
XYB		FUEL TANK CAP IN ALUMINIUM LOOK

Hi! Did you advertise this yet? PM me the link if you have! On the hunt...

On 3/7/2022 at 4:10 PM, ATM said:

Exactly

 

I didn't escalate.  I just explained what EUR 4 means and the numbers on my certificate of conformity were all lower.  I was confused why they asked for this if there were then not going to look at it.  But I guess I am assuming too much from the people who do the first line of query handling.  Maybe they have some standard blurb which says tell anyone who asks they need to get a certificate of conformity.  But then to have an understanding of what this is and what the numbers mean is perhaps not realistic.  So anyway a good outcome in the end.

 

I have now sent my final appeal to the relevant body who deals with these and I am hopeful for a positive outcome.  If I look my car up now on the clean air zone checker type website it comes back as exempt.  that should say it all if you ask me.

 

The annoying thing is that this probably means that everyone with a 986 will have to go through this same laborious process just to drive on a road in a city where someone decided to draw a line and proclaim that anyone who drives over it needs to pay.

Sadiq, meanwhile, is busy making more millions a day from motorists. 

Sorry, I meant not making money, he's making the air cleaner and the millions of £££ needed to plug TFL's funding gap are just coincidental.

https://motortransport.co.uk/blog/2022/03/07/london-mayor-announces-ulez-extension-but-smart-charging-scheme-still-many-years-away/

On 3/4/2022 at 3:32 PM, ATM said:

Dear ATM

Thank you for your enquiry received on 05/01/2022. Your case reference number is Case Number Removed.

From the information available on your DVLA vehicle record, I can see that your vehicle was first registered in June 2001 and does not have a confirmed Euro status on record. The Drive in a Clean Air Zone service, in the absence of a confirmed Euro status, considers the Date of First Registration of your vehicle and the emissions values recorded at registration to determine whether it likely meets the Euro 4 minimum emissions standard for Clean Air Zones.

Based on the information available on your vehicles DVLA record and the information you have provided to support the emissions values for your vehicle indicates that your vehicle does meet the Euro 4 emissions standard, and your vehicle will not be chargeable to drive, into, or within, the Clean Air Zone.

I have requested for your record to be updated to reflect this.

This will be updated within 2 working days. Please check back on the Vehicle Checker before your next journey into or within the Clean Air Zone.

Please be aware, if you intend to drive into or within the zone before this has been updated, you will still need to pay for the journey. Local Authorities are responsible for all charging orders and refunds, if you have received a PCN, you should follow the instructions on the letter to complete a representation and use our email response as evidence of compliance.

If you have already paid a charge you will need to contact the Local Authority and ask for a refund.


Do not reply to this email. If you wish to contact us again about this response then please use our reply form Link Removed

Name Removed - Escalation Unit

Nice one, well done!!

My Boxster has a jet engine that you can strap on to the boot and makes it so fast it's invisible. I've never used it or seen it but that's what the seller told me. But then he might have been pulling my leg?

On 2/26/2022 at 9:28 AM, ½cwt said:

Download the EURO4 compliance standard, highlight the relevant emissions figures, do the same on the Porsche document and provide a covering table with and additional comment on each emissions value and state something like - 'Complies with Euro 4', or 'Within Euro 4 limits'.

Also send a copy to your MP, the AA and the RAC Foundation to highlight how far out of sync the official the central vehicle registrations data is and how poorly it has been administered to have what is now critical data missing or incorrect leading to false charges and fines being raised now we are acting on environmental issues. 

Or fo course just bury the problem and pay the £120....

On 2/26/2022 at 9:14 AM, ATM said:

Birmingham Clean Air Zone - Appeal

I'm still fighting this and even though I thought I'd clearly win I am being beaten back into the losing camp. I'm tempted to just pay the £120 fine now but that is giving up. So please help inspire me with words of encouragement or ideally some genuine advice.

So my initial appeal was along the line of this car is ULEZ exempt in London, I know this because I checked it when I bought it, therefore I assumed it was ULEZ exempt everywhere. I now see it is not. This is a total surprise to me. I therefore expect that you use 2 separate databases from the TFL. They said yes thats right and you still need to pay up.

In the meantime I started an enquiry with the DVLA via the link above. They told me to get the Certificate of Conformity from Porsche. Which I did.

I then sent them electronic scans of this in 2 parts or 2 files - which is a challenge as their contact form only accepts 1 file a at time so I had to submit the for twice. Attached below.

Eventually after lots of back and forth with them just saying the document was not sufficient and does not show my vehicle is exempt someone there amazing helpful - yes I am being a bit generous - pointed out that the reason they were not accepting this document was that there was a difference in the chassis number. It is 7 characters from the end.

WP0ZZZ98Z1S640444 - Porsche
WP0ZZZ98Z15640444 - DVLA

So I then had to go through the process of changing this with a different department of the DVLA. I spoke to another helpful person at the DVLA about it. The process to get chassis number changed is to send a letter - no emails accepted. The letter has to include the old or current V5 and also the evidence showing the correct chassis number. The helpful person suggested a photo of the car - yes an actual printed photo as there is no email option. Letters to the DVLA can take 6 weeks to be processed apparently. I have done this and recently received back my updated V5.

So then I contacted the DVLA again via the link above with my Case number. The assumption was there would be no more barriers and they would say yes thanks well done etc.

No

Another canned response saying document not sufficient.

So just in case I wrote a new reply and submitted the document again - in 2 parts - and explained in as many words as possible - the form has a limit - without sounding like a knob - difficult - that I dont understand why they will not accept this so can they please explain in a few more words so I can understand what the problem is - I am paraphrasing. I will copy and past their response below the docs.

So I feel like where I am now is either - these will only make sense maybe if you have read their response below -


1. They only see half the document as their system only stores the latest attachment uploaded - IT issues

2. They want the document to state - Vehicle is EUR 4 tick

3. They dont understand what the numbers mean on the certificate of conformity and are not even trying to understand them - Feels unlikely given that they have asked for a certificate of conformity and this is what I have provided

4. The car really is not compliant or does not meet the EUR 4 standards

 

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DVLA Response

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear ATM

Thank you for your enquiry received on 05/01/2022. Your case reference number is Case Number Removed.

It may help to explain that the previous response provided to you is correct.

Thank you for supplying the document attached. After reviewing this, I can confirm that it does not meet the requirements for us to update the vehicle record with the relevant Euro status.

I can see that you have sent a Certificate of Conformity, however, in order for us to update the record it would need to confirm the Euro status of the vehicle.

If you wish to have the vehicle record updated, you will need to obtain the evidence stated above confirming the Euro status. Please use the reply link below and attach the relevant evidence.

When we have received this, we can investigate the details and where required, update both the DVLA record and the Drive in a Clean Air Zone Service. In order for it to be compliant it would need to have a minimum Euro 4 status.

I hope this information provides a further insight for you.

Do not reply to this email. If you wish to contact us again about this response then please use our reply form Link Removed

Name Removed

This is another complete joke - the council don't understand their own rules, let alone how to enforce them.

Your car needs to "meet the following standards...Euro4 or better for petrol engines". It does not say that the rule is that the V5C needs to state it is Euro4 compliant. It says the car needs to meet or exceed Euro4 standards, which is does, and you can demonstrate (indeed you already have). 

Here are the limits as provided by the AA: https://www.theaa.com/driving-advice/fuels-environment/euro-emissions-standards

Highlight the relevant sections of your certificate of conformity and refer them back to the above emission standards. 

The way they're enforcing the rules currently makes no sense - they're effectively banning all cars before approx 2005 when Euro4 came into force. Most cars before then wouldn't have "Euro4" on their V5C as it simply didn't exist, even though many would have complied had it existed when they were built. If that was Birmingham Councils intention they should simply have said your car needs to have been registered in 2005 or later to come into the city.

It's another example of lazy local authority operations and "computer says no" attitude. 

I agree with @1/2cwt says - copy in your MP. This fine has been incorrectly applied - your car meets their criteria.

21 hours ago, Menoporsche said:

Sounds like the payment was made conditional on non-disclosure, don't push him too hard.

 

 

 

...or at least, not in public.

I couldn't possibly disclose whether this is the case or not...

So, my journey towards a resolution has come to an end. I can neither confirm nor deny that the costs have been covered, and not by the 16yo. 

If anyone else ever has the misfortune to have this happen to them, happy to explain the process...

On 2/27/2022 at 12:26 PM, Bradders59 said:

I lived not too far away from the age of 11 until almost 20, and this is the first time Ive ever heard of the place. 😄

It's literally a school and a collection of houses (and lots of Unionists).

39 minutes ago, Araf said:

 Oh, you are naive.

How many times do you see "Porsche driver caught speeding" when the type of car has nothing to do with the offence?

Ha, I agree with you. And "John, who lives in a £350,000 house, was attacked by a cat last night", as if it's in any way relevant. But I'd need to volunteer the info in this case...

6 minutes ago, Araf said:

I wouldn't bother bringing the media into it.  Whilst all on here know that ordinary, hard-working people (and @John K ) can afford a Porsche, I wouldn't mind betting that the story would get written up as you being a self-entitled egotist,  trying to screw a local council service provider.

I agree that's how it might be written, but who says the make of car needs to be advised? The story is more about dock-less bikes becoming an unsightly, damaging and dangerous reality on our streets and those that own them acting irresponsibly and potentially illegally. If you want to take the green option, there are plenty of alternatives which are run in a much more community friendly manner - Santander Bikes for example, which involve picking up from and returning to a bike dock.

I'll be writing to the Telegraph, Times, Guardian, Metro, Evening Standard, Daily Mail, Sun...whoever will listen, should I not have this fixed. I keep thinking "what if this was my parents" or someone without the skills / knowledge to research and fight this. It's not about the money, it's totally about the principal.

1 hour ago, EXY said:

 

So perfectly reasonable to assume he has money and can pay?

Aren't most payment methods tracked back to a bank account somewhere?

Apologies I'm from N. Ireland and we are hoping to have running water and electrickery later this year

 

Thanks, I am conscious you were probably more that a little annoyed.

I really hope you get sorted, and am definitely getting the feeling from you that while the money matters the principle is very much part of your thinking. 

EXY, I'm originally from Legacurry, Co Down! I visit several times a year still as my parents still live there. They recently discovered that the "big fire in sky" is actually the sun and that it's not going to kill them. 

I think I'm getting somewhere with the Council in Wandsworth. I've been in touch with the Senior Transport Planner and there is actually a relationship between LIME and local authorities where they operate. LIME are supposed to have Public Liability Insurance for situations such as this. I get the feeling that the council are highly unimpressed with LIME's conduct so far. The council are in direct communication with LIME's UK Public Affairs Manager - let's see.

1 hour ago, EXY said:

Oh dear, I really didn't want to get into an argument as I suspect you are p*ssed off enough already.

If I have read the above correctly the (car) rental company is responsible at all times for their property unless they can pass it on?

If you rent a car on a one way hire and park it at the top of a hill without applying the hand brake correctly, jump out and walk off as it rolls down the hill into the side of your car we are getting close to your predicament. 

My understanding was you were able to ascertain the last rider AND the fact they had left the bike parked poorly. I have no doubt this is in breach of their (LIME's) T&C's. 

If LIME passed the previous hirers details on to the Police would that satisfy, have you contacted the Police to report criminal damage. What did they say?

What is still confusing me is how was a 16 year old with no money able to hire what is I assume to be an expensive bike. 

 

Oh no, not at all! No argument here! You make good points!

1 hour ago, EXY said:

As I said yesterday, I'm sorry to see this.

However I can see where the company is coming from.

They hired/rented an individual one of their bikes with presumably T&C's presented and accepted.

And here is where the problems start, can a 16 year old accept the hire without leaving a valid Ccard etc. What happens if the bike suffers a total loss, who pays, presumably the last renter? What happens if the hirer causes an Road Trafic Infringement (sorry fek knows what they call fekwittery nowadays) , who's responsible etc.

LIME rented the bike in good faith and the renter left it lying at their ar*e, I am struggling to see how that is the responsibility of LIME and not the renter.

I suspect your best chance of recovery is by pursuing the person responsible for the damage which is the renter/16 year old who walked off and heard it hit your car but kept walking. Is it possible he did it on purpose (fek yer man with the sw*nky Porsche stylee) with the plethora of other bikes falling over. Considering where the bike was abandoned is it safe to assume they live nearby?

I really am sorry to see your car was damaged through absolutely no fault of yours, I hope you get it sorted and it doesn't prevent your enjoyment of it.

If you rent a car and get caught speeding or other infringement, the fine will go to the owner of the car who then forwards it to you. The police do not have to investigate who the driver was, the owner is responsible for the vehicle and it is their role to identify the driver and ensure the Police are aware. Same applies here. LIME is responsible for their property AT ALL TIMES and any damage or fines are LIMEs responsibility to identify and pursue the hirer to ensure they are settled. If their bike is off hire, no matter where it’s left, it’s not my job to try to work out who last rode it. It is LIMEs responsibility to pass on a claim.

53 minutes ago, mike597 said:

maybe we need a BoXa collective twitter onslaught to start it trending?

I'd encourage this!

38 minutes ago, mike597 said:

It certainly appears that they are doing their level best to hide.  I would definitely flag your concerns as you have suggested to as many political players as you can.  My fear though is that someone further up in the political ladder is getting a regular brown envelope stuffed with cash and will suppress any concerns.

 

 

Exactly...that's when I start spending my evenings on Social Media. People are sucked in by the marketing of companies like this - "green", "ethical", "responsible", "community" etc. People need to wake up to the idea that companies like this are having them on...

2 hours ago, mike597 said:

Tried 

UK: +44 800 808 5223

 

? 

Indeed, it goes straight to their US call centre, where they don't understand terms like "pavement" or "footpath". You have to talk their language and refer to "sidewalk" etc. They're also exceedingly unhelpful.

Again, I appreciate the help!

2 hours ago, mike597 said:

We generally require that all legal documents be served at the following address: 6^th Floor, South Bank House, Barrow Street, Dublin 4, D04 TR29, Ireland.

I understand that that is for their operations in Europe, mainly Germany. I sent a pre-action letter to them by email and also forwarded to this address. 

Thanks for the info though!!

Just now, mike597 said:

I would send a formal letter before action.  That gives a fixed time frame for a response.  No response then lodge with small claims court for them to decide.  If sounds like the evidence is pretty clear cut. You can lodge it all online it's pretty simple. 

Of course even if they rule in your favour it doesn't mean they will pay. 

Other option is claim on your insurance and let them persue lime for recovery. However they might not bother and it may go as a, claim against you. 

 

The company is based in US and has no publicly available contact details at all in the UK to submit a small claim to. They have plenty of UK based employees (on LinkedIn) but no way of contact here. Any email goes to the US, zero emails/addresses/phone numbers in the Uk at all.