Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
It will no doubt have come to the notice of regular readers of this forum that there is a PPC in existence trading under the name of "Combined Parking Solutions"
As a matter of curiosity, given the 100 thousand plus members that
the CAG forums have, can anyone hold there hand up and say that they have received a "parking charge notice" from this partnership and if so would they care to either PM me or post the documentation here ?
Also, any correspondence or Court documents would be most welcome, given that this is a trading partnership with 8 partners and twelve staff then the revenue stream to support this huge organisation as well as paying "the highest level of compensation in the UK of £25 for every ticket issued" then by the simple law of averages we should get at least one.
You do not need to identify yourself and all information received will be treated in the strictest confidence unless you otherwise wish it disclosed.
All posts by myself are without prejudice and do not constitue legal advice, they are purely for the discussion of points of law and consumer rights.
I am however not affiliated in any way shape or form with any financial institution or parking company. And if i am elected I will make it mandatory that all persons posting on this forum make such a declaration just so we can all see who the trolls are
OK, in view of the lack of response so far I'll broaden the subject
Has anyone seen an area with one of their signs on it ?
Help me here guys I'm tring to track down a huge company that must have revenues in excess of 3 million pounds so that we can help them see the light of day on consumer rights ;-)
All posts by myself are without prejudice and do not constitue legal advice, they are purely for the discussion of points of law and consumer rights.
I am however not affiliated in any way shape or form with any financial institution or parking company. And if i am elected I will make it mandatory that all persons posting on this forum make such a declaration just so we can all see who the trolls are
OK, in view of the lack of response so far I'll broaden the subject
Has anyone seen an area with one of their signs on it ?
Help me here guys I'm tring to track down a huge company that must have revenues in excess of 3 million pounds so that we can help them see the light of day on consumer rights ;-)
Im a bit confused with this sign, if this was out side the shop i was going to shop at I wouldnt shop there .. reasons being.. 1. I am disabled and I certainly dont like to be told how long I can shop for and the fear that I may not get back to my car in time would cause a stressful shopping experience. 2. If I wanted to return an item I would have to wait an hour to return it. Being a disabled person I may not have the opportunity to return after the hour has lapsed.
It says nothing about disabled parking at all and I wouldnt class the wording 'designated' as to refer to disabled parking. Not being picky here but I for one would not shop /visit etc where I saw this sign and I doubt many disabled people will either, thus this business will lose my custom and money. Very Very disabled unfriendly .. I hope shops /business's consider very carefully placing one of these signs out side their place of business as they may risk losing customers.. sorry for the hijack
Well, the FAQ gives it away if the numbers are really true.
Only 5% of people refuse to pay. If now the costs are offset, which are marginal, almost all money can be booked as profits.
I'm not for a moment disagreeing with you - just interested in where the figures come from.
5% refuse to pay means 95% pay, are people really that gullible? I think I'll set up a business selling Tower Bridge to the Americans - thought it was an urban myth, but there may be some truth in it.
I'm not for a moment disagreeing with you - just interested in where the figures come from.
5% refuse to pay means 95% pay, are people really that gullible? I think I'll set up a business selling Tower Bridge to the Americans - thought it was an urban myth, but there may be some truth in it.
If you look on the faq page of combined parking solutions, it states that they take 5% to court, 10% are unenforceable, and the remaining 85% pay in the stages without taking it up to the hearing.
Certainly, we don't know if the numbers of such a website can be trusted. However, if you look at the letters, the misrepresentation they contain, and the fact that they are given the impression that it is a criminal matter.
I have made a unscientific survey among people I know, have to unfortunately say, I can imagine that the number of people who pay without a fight is very high, maybe not as high, but very high. That is exactly the percentage game that is played. It is not different that any other [problem] con-artists play. They don't have to be successful everytime, but unfortunately they are more often than not.
Also, don't forget, the scheme is built in such a way that people are not given time to make an informed decision (one of the attributes, the OFT describes [problem]s with). I would think 99% of people have never heard about the fact that it is a [problem]. They either have never encountered it, or believed the notice was sent/given by the local authority.
There is still not enough public relations to educate people. The only real way to stop these con-artists, is to make sure everybody knows the facts. Beating some of them up here, may be nice strokes for the ego, but at the end will not stop them.
Same as with those banks. As long as nobody knew how illegal their actions are, they got away with it. The few, who protested got a refund in order to keep it quite. However, most times people either didn't bother, or didn't know that they could fight it, or didn't know how to.
The knowledge of people about PPC must get to the same level or even higher. No profits, the necessity to really work, is the best way to send those Sheriffs of Nottingham to the places they belong.
If you look on the faq page of combined parking solutions, it states that they take 5% to court, 10% are unenforceable, and the remaining 85% pay in the stages without taking it up to the hearing.
Doesn't this mean that 2 out of 3 tickets issued are unenforceable, even by perky's standards. It's just that 85% of people, across the board, pay up anyway.
(Assuming the tickets judged unenforceable are ruled so at the end of the 'threat process' rather than the start.)
I've done a little bit of on-line detective work on these guys. They are not listed under webcheck at Companies house under either Combined Parking or Combined Parking Solutions. I checked current, recently dissolved, dissolved, previous and proposed names.
I also checked the domain registrants details held by nominet.
combinedparkingsolutions. co.uk
Registrant: Combined Parkin
Registrant type: UK Limited Company, (Company number: 3821971) Registrant's address: Combined Parking Solutions, PO BOX 4487, Wolverhampton
West Midlands
WV1 9BP
GB
Registrar:
Pipex Communications UK Ltd t/a 123-Reg.co.uk [Tag = 123-REG]
URL: Domain name registration from 123-reg
Relevant dates:
Registered on: 02-Oct-2005
Renewal date: 02-Oct-2009
Last updated: 19-Aug-2007
Registration status:
Registered until renewal date.
Name servers:
ns.123-reg.co.uk
ns2.123-reg.co.uk
WHOIS lookup made at 11:37:37 22-Nov-2007
Another check made at Companies house based on the company number gives
Name & Registered Office:
OI MEDIA LIMITED
HIGHLAND HOUSE
LECKHAMPTON HILL
CHELTENHAM
GLOUCESTERSHIRE GL53 9QH Company No. 03821971
This is listed as a computer company. They may or may not be related to CPS. They may have set the website up for them and this may be the extent of their relationship.
Ok, Seen many silly posts on here and just to confirm the status of our company.
It is unincorporated, it has 8 partners to which I am one (I have NEVER stated anything else).
We have 12 back office staff processing tickets (9 of these work remotely).
We dont need to hide behind incorporation, why would we want to/need to ??
We (togeter with other PPCs) pay towards 2 members of staff who look at appeals on our behalf (working away from office at home) - we find this the only way we can be as independant as possible in appeals. (you will also note we DO NOT ask people to pay for their appeal to be considered ... EVER !! - unlike some PPCs which I have openely slated)
I (and partners) often cancel tickets myself/ourselves that have obvious errors on, issued unfairly but ones we dont ALWAYS get referred.
The PO Box number is to manage post - 4 of our partners work out of the office and have appeals directed to them directly at different PO BOX numbers under the same company - it saves us time & money.
You cannot hide behind a PO BOX, 1 call to Royal Mail will always tell you where it is being delivered to
So he is claiming that it is not a limited company
Help me here guys I'm tring to track down a huge company that must have revenues in excess of 3 million pounds so that we can help them see the light of day on consumer rights ;-)
I have a horrible feeling with a provocative comment like that, this thread could also get out of hand, the OP has stated for people to PM him as this is obviously a personal thing (with the history between muggerbee & perky so well documented).
I see this thread could turn into another silly one and would ask for the peace of the forum it be closed, it will still remain so people can PM the OP if required, which is what he asked for but will prevent things going crazzyyy.
Doesn't this mean that 2 out of 3 tickets issued are unenforceable, even by perky's standards. It's just that 85% of people, across the board, pay up anyway.
(Assuming the tickets judged unenforceable are ruled so at the end of the 'threat process' rather than the start.)
Well, good observation. And it is not even considered how many court actions are won, and how many of those are won due to poor defence. The ratio of unenforceable actions could even be lower.
I see this thread could turn into another silly one and would ask for the peace of the forum it be closed, it will still remain so people can PM the OP if required, which is what he asked for but will prevent things going crazzyyy.
In my experience, ignoring inappropriate things are usually the best thing. Let the mods do their work in silence, and let's focus on the topics.
All posts by myself are without prejudice and do not constitue legal advice, they are purely for the discussion of points of law and consumer rights.
I am however not affiliated in any way shape or form with any financial institution or parking company. And if i am elected I will make it mandatory that all persons posting on this forum make such a declaration just so we can all see who the trolls are
I must admit to lurking, but from an outsiders viewpoint and from comparing posts etc, it looks to me like interesting, green and mean, perky88 and several others are either the same person or work together, I mean if you compare the posts, every time perky gets into trouble, intersting pops up and says lay off, I might not be able to read that well, but i'm not bloody stupid !!!
Seeing as this is meant to be a forum for people getting shafted by these sort of people then i must say i find it disgusting that the mods allow this behaviour.
I came in for some advice about a parking ticket i got in aldi but it seems that it depends on who you ask as to what answer you get.
I must admit to lurking, but from an outsiders viewpoint and from comparing posts etc, it looks to me like interesting, green and mean, perky88 and several others are either the same person or work together, I mean if you compare the posts, every time perky gets into trouble, intersting pops up and says lay off, I might not be able to read that well, but i'm not bloody stupid !!!
Seeing as this is meant to be a forum for people getting shafted by these sort of people then i must say i find it disgusting that the mods allow this behaviour.
I came in for some advice about a parking ticket i got in aldi but it seems that it depends on who you ask as to what answer you get.
Sorry Private-Pile I personally think you are on old member who has just joined in order to stir up this subject up again.
Your comments about people being perky are unfounded and for someone who joins and then starts posting comments like yours are just too obvious.
As you for problem with ALDI parking ticket please scan the ticket (removing personal details) and we can all take a look at it and advise, I am surprised you have not mentioned it as you joined the site to get advice on it.
I think Private-Pyle is muggerbee logging on as a different name.
I get notified (dont know why, there must be a way of switching it off, but thats another thing) when someone types a message and I received this email:
Dear interesting,
Muggerbee has just replied to a thread you have subscribed to entitled - Combined parking Solutions - in the Parking / Traffic Wardens forum of The Consumer Forums.
This thread is located at: http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/parking-traffic-wardens/121160-combined-parking-solutions-new-post.html
Here is the message that has just been posted:
***************
I've been hanging about for a couple of days and even i can see that Perky is has a demonstrative egotistical personality and believes everything he does is right, does that remind you of any austrians in the 1930's ? also from an outsiders view it appears that he has at least, interesting, green and mean and electron99 as either employees or partners in his business. I am amazed that the original ambitions of bankfodder have come down to this. It is just like a certain 1930's european dictator with a posse of rent boys and if no one else can see that then i'm amazed, this will be my first AND last post here as i feel totally let down that bankfodder could allow this sort of crap on a forum that was meant to defend consumer issues...
Sometimes, as much as it hurts the previously mentioned austrian might have had a point regarding certain elements of the community.
Also if i ever win the lottery, or even a few grand, i know what social project i will be investing it in !!
***************
Then the post gets deleted, as he obviously realises hes done it wrong and a very similar post is made by a new member ???
Can anyone else see the link ?
MODS ... As I suspected this thread is being used by the OP to stir things up, it should be closed.
I see that I am accused of being an employee of perky, or other PPC's.Just what is it with these people.You dare question what they say, and you are automatically a troll, or a parking company under a different user name.What arrogance.I have been a member here for over a year, and although I have not been able to contribute much;I hope one day I shall.I have also been around long enough to know that the internet is notorious for mis-information, which was why I asked for transcripts of cases where the arguments used by the Peppipoo mafia resulted in a victory.They may well be right, but if in the future I need to use their information as a defence I want to be ABSOLUTELY sure, and that means a little more evidence than "Muggerbee says on the internet it is right, so it must be so."
Congratulations to members of both this forum and to members of www.pepipoo.com for enlightening so many previously uninformed individuals about the unenforceability of Private Parking Charges.
Some recent posts made over the last few days on this forum are clearly from individuals who have a vested interest in Private Parking Companies – I personally consider that their advice should at best be regarded as dubious for obvious reasons.
Perhaps the excellent advice given on this site (and Pepipoo) is beginning to hit the pockets of someone!
Combined parking Solutions
forums have, can anyone hold there hand up and say that they have received a "parking charge
notice" from this partnership and if so would they care to either PM me or post the documentation here ?
Originally Posted by Muggerbee
The fact remains that the best advice available for dealing with Private Parking Companies is contained in the Pete Jones post:
