Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yep, I read that and thought about trying to find out what the consideration and grace period is at Riverside but not sure I can. I know they say "You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is"  but I doubt they would disclose it to the public, maybe I should have asked in my CPR 31.14 letter? Yes, I think I can get rid of 5 minutes. I am also going to include a point about BPA CoP: 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place. I think that is Deception .... They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other!
    • the Town and Country [advertisments ] Regulations 2007 are not easy to understand. Most Council planing officials don't so it's good that you found one who knows. Although he may not have been right if the rogues have not been "controlling" in the car park for that long. The time only starts when the ANPR signs go up, not how long the area has been used as a car park.   Sadly I have checked Highview out and they have been there since at least 2014 . I have looked at the BPA Code of Practice version 8 which covers 2023 and that states Re Consideration and Grace Periods 13.3 Where a parking location is one where a limited period of parking is permitted, or where drivers contract to park for a defined period and pay for that service in advance (Pay & Display), this would be considered as a parking event and a Grace Period of at least 10 minutes must be added to the end of a parking event before you issue a PCN. It then goes on to explain a bit more further down 13.5 You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is. 13.6 Neither a consideration period or a grace period are periods of free parking and there is no requirement for you to offer an additional allowance on top of a consideration or grace period. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________So you have  now only overstayed 5 minutes maximum since BPA quote a minimum of 10 minutes. And it may be that the Riverside does have a longer period perhaps because of the size of the car park? So it becomes even more incumbent on you to remember where the extra 5 minutes could be.  Were you travelling as a family with children or a disabled person where getting them in and out of the car would take longer. Was there difficulty finding a space, or having to queue to get out of the car park . Or anything else that could account for another 5 minutes  without having to claim the difference between the ANPR times and the actual times.
    • Regarding a driver, that HAS paid for parking but input an incorrect Vehicle Registration Number.   This is an easy mistake to make, especially if a driver has access to more than one vehicle. First of all, upon receiving an NTK/PCN it is important to check that the Notice fully complies with PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 before deciding how to respond of course. The general advice is NOT to appeal to the Private Parking Company as, for example, you may identify yourself as driver and in certain circumstances that could harm your defence at a later stage. However, after following a recent thread on this subject, I have come to the conclusion that, in the case of inputting an incorrect Vehicle Registration Number, which is covered by “de minimis” it may actually HARM your defence at a later stage if you have not appealed to the PPC at the first appeal stage and explained that you DID pay for parking and CAN provide proof of parking, it was just that an incorrect VRN was input in error. Now, we all know that the BPA Code of Practice are guidelines from one bunch of charlatans for another bunch of charlatans to follow, but my thoughts are that there could be problems in court if a judge decides that a motorist has not followed these guidelines and has not made an appeal at the first appeal stage, therefore attempting to resolve the situation before it reaches court. From BPA Code of Practice: Section 17:  Keying Errors B) Major Keying Errors Examples of a major keying error could include: • Motorist entered their spouse’s car registration • Motorist entered something completely unrelated to their registration • Motorist made multiple keying errors (beyond one character being entered incorrectly) • Motorist has only entered a small part of their VRM, for example the first three digits In these instances we would expect that such errors are dealt with appropriately at the first appeal stage, especially if it can be proven that the motorist has paid for the parking event or that the motorist attempted to enter their VRM or were a legitimate user of the car park (eg a hospital patient or a patron of a restaurant). It is appreciated that in issuing a PCN in these instances, the operator will have incurred charges including but not limited to the DVLA fee and other processing costs therefore we believe that it is reasonable to seek to recover some of these costs by making a modest charge to the motorist of no more than £20 for a 14-day period from when the keying error was identified before reverting to the charge amount at the point of appeal. Now, we know that the "modest charge" is unenforceable in law, however, it would be up to the individual if they wanted to pay and make the problem go away or in fact if they wanted to contest the issue in court. If the motorist DOES appeal to the PPC explaining the error and the PPC rejects the appeal and the appeal fails, the motorist can use that in his favour at court.   Defence: "I entered the wrong VRN by mistake Judge, I explained this and I also submitted proof of payment for the relevant parking period in my appeal but the PPC wouldn't accept that"   If the motorist DOES NOT appeal to the PPC in the first instance the judge may well use that as a reason to dismiss the case in the claimant's favour because they may decide that they had the opportunity to resolve the matter at a much earlier stage in the proceedings. It is my humble opinion that a motorist, having paid and having proof of payment but entering the wrong VRN, should make an appeal at the first appeal stage in order to prevent problems at a later stage. In this instance, I think there is nothing to be gained by concealing the identity of the driver, especially if at a later stage, perhaps in court, it is said: “I (the driver) entered the wrong VRN.” Whether you agree or not, it is up to the individual to decide …. but worth thinking about. Any feedback, especially if you can prove to the contrary, gratefully received.
    • Women-only co-working spaces are part of the new hybrid working landscape, but they divide opinion.View the full article
    • The music streaming service reports record profits of over €1bn (£860m) after laying off 1500 staff.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

NCP parking fines private car parks


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5858 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi

 

i have recieved a parking fine and a treatening letter from a debt collection comapny.

 

The car park in question is a privatly owned NCP. Where my car was allegedly parked without a ticket.

 

I dont remember getting the ticket and would always get a ticket and display it.

 

i recieved a letter from a firm called Rocburge demanding payment. They also have viseted my property.

 

can someone tell me if this letter will work?

 

 

 

WITHOUT PREJUCTICE

 

 

name

ad post code

 

 

REF:1234567

 

 

Dear sir/Madame

 

I have been contacted by your debt collecting agency and call centre run by the threatening and demanding ROXBURGE.

 

The parking ticket you fine you have attempted to levy on me is in dispute.

 

I in no way accept the vehicle was parked illegally if at all the car was parked at the location on the date in question. If it was a valid parking ticket is always purchased and displayed.

 

I therefore ask that you supply your evidence to me in relation to this alleged parking fine.

 

If you cannot supply me with enough evidence to support your claim that the vehicle was parked by me at the location at the specific time, I ask you to cease contact about this matter and instruct your debt collection company to do also.

 

I have already reported to the police your debt collections field agent accessing through a secure door and on private property to bang on my door and demand funds.

 

A log with the police of this has been made with the end view of pressing charges for Harassment and trespass.

 

I have been in contact with the citizen’s advice who has advised me of my rights.

 

Your debt collecting agency has been told to stop contact with me as this issue is in dispute.

 

 

 

 

 

 

WITHOUT PREJUCTICE

 

 

 

Any further contact being made without sending me the evidence of the fine. (Which on private land you have no legal right to impose) I will consider any visit by your debt collection staff to be harassment and trespass, as my property is situated on private land with clear signs telling visitors to report to security (whom have been told specifically that they are not to grant access to this company)

 

I will also be contacting the serious fraud squad to report what I believe to be your company levying fines on random people without evidence and passing there details onto unscrupulous parties in an attempt to harass them into paying an unenforceable fine.

 

 

 

Regards

 

Mr Im not paying your stupid fine!!!!

 

 

 

what do you think?

As the car park is private i dont think they can do anything to me.

 

Is this tactic just used to try to harass me into paying an unenforcable fine?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd write to Roxburghe not NCP. Debt collection agencys are more tightly regulated than Private Parking Companies. I must admit it is very rare for DCAs to visit and hound people for private parking tickets as they are known to be virtually unenforceable.

 

Write to RoxBurghe as follows:

 

Re: Your letter dated [dd/mmmm/yyyy] Reference[#]

 

This alleged debt is in dispute. I have written to your principal on a number of occasions and they have failed to substantiate their claim.

 

In the circumstances please refer this matter back to your client.

 

Any further correspondence from you in relation to this matter may result in a complaint to the authorities under the Protection From Harassment Act 1997.

 

Yours faithfully

 

[Taken from Bernie's template letters - see sticky at top of forum]

 

If you've not already written to NCP then don't admit to being the driver.

 

Read up the following on private parking companies. These "fines" are a [problem]. They have no basis in law.

 

DO NOT PAY!

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/119802-private-parking-tickets-template.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/65341-private-parking-companies-charges.html

 

If you want to go on the offensive, log Roxburghe's bahaviour in a complaint to your local trading standards office. You should be able to get the email address here:

 

Trading Standards Central - Trading Standards and Consumer Protection information for the UK

 

Oh, and you could complain to this lot too.

 

welcome to the csa group - x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some [not all] train station car parks are governed by the railway bylaws. I don't know the situation re: London Underground but I suspect they have bylaws too.

 

However I don't think this is the case here as the route would have gone Fixed Penalty Notice then Magistrates Court not as this case NCP "notice" then Roxburghe acting as Debt Collector. I'm 99% sure this is just a standard PPC BS [problem]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some [not all] train station car parks are governed by the railway bylaws. I don't know the situation re: London Underground but I suspect they have bylaws too.

 

However I don't think this is the case here as the route would have gone Fixed Penalty Notice then Magistrates Court not as this case NCP "notice" then Roxburghe acting as Debt Collector. I'm 99% sure this is just a standard PPC BS [problem]

 

Dead right. If the carpark in question was subject of byelaws then you would have received an OFFICIAL FPN, followed by a summons for non-payment of the Fixed Penalty Notice to the Magistrate's Court.

 

You can write to NCP if you want to to try and get this resolved. State that your are only the registered keeper and cannot be certain as to who was driving the car at the time, and they must direct their collection at the driver of the vehicle.

Roxburghe have no powers to take you to court, and may consider your writing to them to be an admission, despite stating that you do not acknowledge the debt. NCP have to prove that the RK was the person driving the vehicle at the time, and without your input, cannot do so. IMHO the best bet would be to ignore the letter from Roxburge, as it is of little importance, and probably just for show. They will know they have no chance of recovery through legal means, and are just trying their usual scare tactics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Robin Castle

Roxburghe have a very good success rate in court, as one of Britain's most successful debt collection agencies.

 

You can either pay them now, or pay after they take you to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Go on then Robin, tell us their sucsess rate - point us towards some figures.

 

I smell a PPC troll.

All opinions & information are the personal view of the poster, and are not that of any organisation, company or employer. Any information disclosed by the poster is for personal use only. Permission to process this data under the Data Protection act is NOT GIVEN to any company, only personal readers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I smell a PPC troll.

 

I rather think you do :)

..

.

 

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Roxburghe have a very good success rate in court, as one of Britain's most successful debt collection agencies.

 

You can either pay them now, or pay after they take you to court.

 

I'm not totally against debt collectors. They do have their place. Some people will not acknowledge their obligations without a big old push. I do object however, to unlawful collection of debts. Some of these companies play fast and loose with the OFT code of conduct for debt collection.

 

Debt collectors simply should not take on debts which they are not prepared to go to court with. This is the case with virtually all PPC "debt". NCP, Euro Car Parks, CEL, UKPC, in fact all the big players, use debt collectors. When it comes to it, they all shy away from court action because they know they would lose

 

I'm with others on this, show us all these acclaimed Roxburghe PPC court successes.

 

Are there any? - didn't think so!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Roxburghe have a very good success rate in court, as one of Britain's most successful debt collection agencies.

 

You can either pay them now, or pay after they take you to court.

 

Funnily enough, i can't see this to be true either. Especially since I've been running them ragged for nearly two years for a debt that I refuse to pay on principle, despite the fact that they DO have a valid credit agreement.

 

More bloody trolls in here than in a library full of Billy goat gruff books.

Link to post
Share on other sites

More bloody trolls in here than in a library full of Billy goat gruff books.

Time to get your gun and go troll hunting.....lol

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

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

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

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I am aware these days PCN's (Penalty Charge Notices) are issued to the person listed on the V5s.They also normally arrive together with an image of the vehicle concerned on the letter, well for moving, bus lane, box junction and Congestion Charging anyhow. A vehicle parked in a Car Park and I did not see the location (or might have missed it in the thread(?) if owned by a local council or seems in this case London Underground(?) means that the issuer will probably be that public body. You'll see the Terms and Conditions posted at the respective locations. Most public bodies have outside management companies to operate on their behalf as in the case of NCP.

I'd suggest you ask them for proof initially. DCA's tend to only get involved (like council tax etc) when the person sent the initial PCN('s) does not reply or contend or pay it. I'm surprised in your case the vehicle was not clamped as it's always contended station parks are for (paying) travellers and that's why you see local streets with heavily enforced parking regulation to stop people parking on them.

Michael

When I was young I thought that money was the most important thing in life; now that I am old I know that it is. (Oscar Wilde)

--I like to be helpful wherever possible however I'm not qualified in this field. I do consider carefully anything important (normally from personal experience) however please understand that any actions taken are at your own risk--

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I am aware these days PCN's (Penalty Charge Notices) are issued to the person listed on the V5s.

From what the OP has said and nothing from the DCA has indicated otherwise, this is not a PCN or a FPN issued under the byelaws or any DPE scheme. It has all the hallmarks of a civil parking ticket or more correctly invoice that has been referred to a DCA.

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

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

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

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what the OP has said and nothing from the DCA has indicated otherwise, this is not a PCN or a FPN issued under the byelaws or any DPE scheme. It has all the hallmarks of a civil parking ticket or more correctly invoice that has been referred to a DCA.

 

Agreed, a fake "PCN" mimics a real one. It is a bit like comparing a wasp and a hoverfly. They look similar, but one has a sting whereas the other just buzzes around a bit in an irritating way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I have had parking tickets from all over London ,York, Blackpool and never paid one .Challenge any pcn in the St Kathrines court Northhampton I did with the 1689 bill of rights asking the County court Judge what juristiction he had because of the 1689 bill of rights and he said to go back to the Council and see them I had 47 local ones and they never came for the money

Advice was from Neil Herron

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...