Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I understand confusion with this thread.  I tried to keep threads separate because there have been so many angles.    But a team member merged them all.  This is why it's hard to keep track. This forum exists to help little people fight injustice - however big or small.  Im here to try get a decent resolution. Not to give in to the ' big boys'. My "matter' became complicated 'matters' simply because a lender refused to sell a property. What can I say?  I'll try in a nutshell to give an overview: There's a long lease property. I originally bought it short lease with a s.146 on it from original freeholder.  I had no concerns. So lender should have been able to sell a well-maintained lovely long lease property.  The property was great. The issue is not the property.  Economy, sdlt increases, elections, brexit, covid, interest hikes etc didn't help.  The issue is simple - the lender wanted to keep it.    Before repo I offered to clear my loan.  I was a bit short and lender refused.  They said (recorded) they thought the property was worth much more and they were happy to keep accruing interest (in their benefit) until it reached a point where they felt they could repo and still easily quickly sell to get their £s back.  This was a mistake.  The market was (and is) tough.   2y later the lender ceo bid the same sum to buy the property for himself. He'd rejected higher offers in the intervening period whilst accruing interest. I had the property under offer to a fantastic niche buyer but lender rushed to repo and buyer got spooked and walked.  It had taken a long time to find such a lucrative buyer.  A sale which would have resulted in £s and another asset for me. Post repo lender had 1 offer immediately.  But dragged out the process for >1y - allegedly trying to get other offers. But disclosure shows there was only one valid buyer. Lender appointed receiver (after 4 months) - simply to try acquire the freehold.  He used his powers as receiver to use me, as leaseholder, to serve notice on freeholders.  Legally that failed. Meanwhile lender failed to secure property - and squatters got in (3 times).  And they failed to maintain it.  So freeholders served a dilapidations notice (external) - on me as leaseholder (cc-ed to lender).   (That's how it works legally) I don't own the freehold.  But I am a trustee and have to do right by the freeholders.  This is where matters got/ get complicated.  And probably lose most caggers.   Lawyers got involved for the freeholders to firstly void the receiver enfranchisement notice. Secondly, to serve the dilapidations notice.  The lack of maintenance was in breach of lease and had to be served to protect fh asset. The lender did no repairs. They said a buyer would undertake them. Which was probably correct. If they had sold. After 1y lender finally agreed to sell to the 1st offeror and contracts went with lawyers.  Within 1 month lender reneged.  Lender tried to suggest buyer walked. Evidence shows he/ his lawyers continued trying to exchange (cash) for 4 months.  Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been to renege and for ceo to take control.   I still think that's their plan. Lender then stupidly chose to pretty much bulldoze the property.  Other stuff was going on in the background. After repo I was in touch by phone and email and lender knew post got to me.   Despite this, after about 10 months (before and then during covid), they deliberately sent SDs and eventually a B petition to an incorrect address and an obscure small court.  They never served me properly.  (In hindsight I understand they hoped to get a backdoor B - so they could keep the property that way.)  Eventually the random court told them to email me by way of service.  At this point their ruse to make me B failed.  I got a lawyer (friend paid). The B petition was struck out. They’d failed to include the property as an asset. They were in breach of insolvency rules. Simultaneously the receiver again appointed lawyers to act on my behalf as leaseholder. This time to serve notice on the freeholders for a lease extension.  He had hoped to try and vary the strict lease. Evidence shows the already long length of lease wasn't an issue.  The lender obviously hoped to get round their lack of permission to do works (which they were already doing) by hoping to remove the strict clauses that prevent leaseholder doing alterations.   The extension created a new legal angle for me to deal with.  I had to act as trustee for freeholders against me as leaseholder/ the receiver.  Inconsistencies and incompetence by receiver lawyers dragged this out 3y.  It still isn't properly resolved.  Meanwhile - going back to the the works the lender undertook. The works were consciously in breach of lease.  The lender hadn't remedied the breaches listed in the dilapidations notice.  They destroyed the property.  The trustees compiled all evidence.  The freeholders lawyers then served a forfeiture notice. This notice started a different legal battle. I was acting for the freeholders against what the lender had done on my behalf as leaseholder.  This legal battle took 3y to resolve. The simple exit would have been for lender to sell. A simple agreement to remedy the breaches and recompense the freeholders in compensation - and there's have been clean title to sell.  That option was proposed to them.   This happened by way of mediation for all parties 2y ago.  A resolution option was put forward and in principle agreed.  But immediately after the lender lawyers failed to engage.  A hard lesson to learn - mediation cannot be referred to in court. It's considered w/o prejudice. The steps they took have made no difference to their ability to sell the property.  Almost 3y since they finished works they still haven't sold. ** ** I followed up some leads myself.  A qualified cash buyer offered me a substantial sum.  The lender and receiver both refused it.   I found another offer in disclosure.  6 months later someone had apparently offered a substantial sum via an agent.  The receiver again rejected it.  The problem of course was that the agent had inflated the market price to get the business. But no-one was or is ever going to offer their list price.  Yet the receiver wanted/wants to hold out for the list price.  Which means 1y later not only has it not sold - disclosure shows few viewings and zero interest.  It's transparently over-priced.  And tarnished. For those asking why I don't give up - I couldn't/ can't.  Firstly I have fiduciary duties as a trustee. Secondly, legal advice indicates I (as leaseholder) could succeed with a large compensation claim v the lender.  Also - I started a claim v my old lawyer and the firm immediately reimbursed some £s. That was encouraging.  And a sign to continue.  So I'm going for compensation.  I had finance in place (via friend) to do a deal and take the property back off the lender - and that lawyer messed up bad.   He should have done a deal.  Instead further years have been wasted.   Maybe I only get back my lost savings - but that will be a result.   If I can add some kind of complaint/ claim v the receiver's conscious impropriety I will do so.   I have been left with nothing - so fighting for something is worth it. The lender wants to talk re a form of settlement.  Similar to my proposal 2y ago.  I have a pretty clear idea of what that means to me.  This is exactly why I do not give up.  And why I continue to ask for snippets of advice/ pointers on cag.  
    • It was all my own work based on my previous emails to P2G which Bank has seen.
    • I was referring to #415 where you wrote "I was forced to try to sell - and couldn't." . And nearer the start in #79 .. "I couldn't sell.  I had an incredibly valuable asset. Huge equity.  But the interest accrued / the property market suffered and I couldn't find a buyer even at a level just to clear the debt." In #194 you said you'd tried to sell for four years.  The reason for these points is that a lot of the claims against for example your surveyor, solicitor, broker, the lender and now the receiver are mainly founded in a belief that they should have been able to do something but did not. Things that might seem self evident to you but not necessarily to others. Pressing these claims may well need a bit more hard evidence, rather than an appeal to common sense. Can you show evidence of similar properties, with similar freehold issues, selling readily? And solid reasons why the lender should have been able to sell when you couldn't.
    • You can use a family's address.   The only caveat is for the final hearing you'd need to be there in person   HOWEVER i'd expect them to pay if its only £200 because costs of attending will be higher than that
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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 5861 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...