Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
    • Please provide advice on the following situation: I rented out my property to four students for 16 months until March 2024. Initially, the property was in very good condition, but now it needs extensive renovation. This includes redoing the bathroom, replacing the kitchen, removing wallpaper, and redecorating due to significant mould growth. The tenants also left their furniture on the grass, which is owned by the local authority. As a landlord, I've met all legal requirements. It seems the damage was caused by poor ventilation—windows were always closed, and heating wasn't used. There was also a bathroom leak fixed by reapplying silicone. I tried to claim insurance, but it was denied, citing tenant behaviour as the cause by looking at the photos, which isn't covered. The deposit barely covers the repair costs, or else I'll have to pursue money claims, which I've never done before and am unsure about its legal complications or costs. Any thoughts on this?
  • 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
      • 160 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

Euro Car Parks - Illegal tickets??


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4875 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

I would be most grateful if anyone could advise me of the validity of a "Parking Charge Notice" issued.

 

I am led to believe that within the Decriminalised Parking Enforcement system i.e. the Road Traffic Act 1991 that a PCN must now follow a strict format for it to be enforceable i.e.

  1. The top of the ticket must have the words "Date of Issue.
  2. The ticket must have the correct term on it i.e. "contravention".

The said ticket was issued by Euro Car Parks and is headed:

"Parking Charge Notce"

ON .................FROM............

D) OTHER ......NOT IN A MARKED BAY

I would be most grateful for any advice as to the legality of this supposed PCN.

Regards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 190
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Just where did you get this ticket?

 

Does it state that it is a Penalty Charge Notice and does it refer specifically to the Road Traffic Act 1991?

 

Euro Car Parks tend to issue private tickets on private land at that is a whole different ball game. (and the dates issue would be totally irrelevant in such a case)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The ticket, issued EURO CAR PARKS says PARKING CHARGE NOTICE UNAUTHORISED REMOVAL OR INTERFERENCE IS PROHIBITED No mention of Road Traffic Act on it.

It was issued on the roof car park above the Park Farm Shopping Centre in Allestree, Derbyshire. I assume this is Private Property as such. But am so ticked off about it - if they are so desperate for revenue, why don't they charge people to park there. Iwas parked in an unmarked area with NO markings on it i.e. no yellow lines round the edge or across it - the roadway was next to it so I was NOT causing an obstruction. Ticket says D) OTHER......NOT IN A MARKED BAY. Any comments much appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

The ticket, issued EURO CAR PARKS says PARKING CHARGE NOTICE UNAUTHORISED REMOVAL OR INTERFERENCE IS PROHIBITED No mention of Road Traffic Act on it.

It was issued on the roof car park above the Park Farm Shopping Centre in Allestree, Derbyshire. I assume this is Private Property as such. But am so ticked off about it - if they are so desperate for revenue, why don't they charge people to park there. Iwas parked in an unmarked area with NO markings on it i.e. no yellow lines round the edge or across it - the roadway was next to it so I was NOT causing an obstruction. Ticket says D) OTHER......NOT IN A MARKED BAY. Any comments much appreciated

 

Markings, etc. are irrelevant. This is a private ticket and unenforcable in law. The basis of their charge is that the driver agreed to an 'implied contract' by parking there. The matter is bound by contract law and is a civil matter. However, contracts may not imposes 'penalties' in such cases, only losses and they would have to prove to a County Court judge the following:

 

  • You were the driver (and the RK has no obligation whatsoever to name the driver)
  • That the signage relating to the use of the car park is clear and unambigous
  • That the vehicle was parked at the date/time alleged
  • That the y have suffered losses to the extent claimed

If you ignore it, then they will eventually write to the registered keeper. You merely assert that you were not the driver and are are no obligation to name the driver, and any further pursuit by them against you will be regarded as harassment and reported to the relevant authorities

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

my friend recieved a Euro Car Parks ticket on Sunday, 7pm!

she checked the pay and display in front of her (about 6metre away) and it said you pay mon-fri, there were a lot of bays infront of her, but she was in the car park opposite, in manchester. turns out, she read the wrong pay and display metre, she should have read the one behind her, and that says you pay weekends, only £2. of course if she knew she had to pay she would of parked opposite for free, but no, instead, she got charged this pathetic fine of £70, thats unheard of for outside of London!

Can anybody help us out, shes recently been layed off at work and cannot afford this!

also we have read that fines get halfed if paid within the 14days, nowhere on the ticket does it mention this, is it still the case with euro car parks?

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a fine, it's an unenforceable invoice from a private company.

 

• do not pay

• do not contact them

ignore any letters you receive, no matter how threatening

• they will give up and go away

 

It's a [problem]. Legally they're entitled to actual losses ie. £2. But since they're asking for £70 and it's a con, just let them swivel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

my friend recieved a Euro Car Parks ticket on Sunday, 7pm!

she checked the pay and display in front of her (about 6metre away) and it said you pay mon-fri, there were a lot of bays infront of her, but she was in the car park opposite, in manchester. turns out, she read the wrong pay and display metre, she should have read the one behind her, and that says you pay weekends, only £2. of course if she knew she had to pay she would of parked opposite for free, but no, instead, she got charged this pathetic fine of £70, thats unheard of for outside of London!

Can anybody help us out, shes recently been layed off at work and cannot afford this!

also we have read that fines get halfed if paid within the 14days, nowhere on the ticket does it mention this, is it still the case with euro car parks?

 

Thanks.

 

Please heed the above advice and ignore. What you have is an invoice and not a fine-its just another PPC [problem] so dont worry. Tell your friend the following will now happen-

She'll recieve another letter from Euro Parks in about 7/14 days (although it varies) which will up the invoice amount owed. From here they usually pass it on to thier DCA- Control Account who will send you approx 2-3 letters which again will up the amount 'owed'. Tell your friend not to worry regardless of what is in the letters. Any problems just keep us posted:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

This is an email sent to Euro Car Parks from me.

 

I will post any reply I recieve (if any) and also the outcome.

 

Parking Ticket No: R *******

 

This ticket is not valid and will not be paid as it was issued in error by your employee.

 

I and several other people were issued with parking tickets at the Princess Grace Hospital in Farnborough, Kent yesterday.

I took the details of another driver and have advised her that she should not pay the ticket and she agreed.

 

I will accept £10 for the trouble your company has caused me.

 

I have just telephoned a Mrs Burke who deals with the parking issues at this hospital but she is on leave so I will be speaking to to her counterpart

a lady called Sara tomorrow to tell her about the trouble and the phone calls that arose from the stupid ticket you issued and to point them to the internet

forums about your cowboy company. I invite you to take me to court, in fact I dare you and will look forward to it, I doubt wether you have the guts.

 

I will also be pointing out your companis short comings as regards to the company they are using to patrol the car park.

These tickets are not worth the paper they are written on as you cannot enforce payment. The more people that learn that your tickets are a [problem] the more money

you lose and I hope you lose all your contracts. When you issued a ticket on my vehicle you picked on the wrong person as I love taking people to court

 

I will also point out that you do not put a phone number on the parking tickets. And I tell Sara that

I have offered to be taken to court on this matter.

 

If I do not get the money refunded for my phone calls and inconvenience then I will issue an N1 form in the Croydon County Court against the hospital

that employs you and I will bother to do it as I can issue a summons without incuring any costs to myself but it will incur costs to the hospital.

I wonder if the hospital will take kindly to the fact that they will be taken to the small claims court.

 

UP YOURS COWBOYS !

 

Go on take me to court.

I will be placing a copy of this email on the euro car parks forum which is here

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/44410-euro-car-parks-illegal.html

 

Refund the money for my phone calls and trouble or else !

 

Cheque made payable to ***********************

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry to bump an old thread again, but seemed pointless to open a new one.. I received a parking ticket from ECP.. and I wrote back to fight it, the ticket was issued at 2am, outside my place of work, and i know for a fact the tickets are issued by the security who patrol the shopping centre, not employees of ECP. so they wrote back to me and said that the charge was issued correctly, and i still have to pay £70.. no option to pay the reduced amount.. where do i stand??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't even waste your breath with these jokers - it is a [problem]. You have been issued with a private invoice from a private company. They could only ever enforce it by taking you to court (County Court) which is a long and arduous process - not to mention costly. There is a lot of law that can bolster your defence and weaken their claim. Let them chase you. In reality, they will write a few letters to you full of lies and fraudulent claims and then they will go away.

 

Ignore them and you'll be fine (no pun intended)

 

TFT

09/07/09 :)Business Studies BA(Hons) 2:1:)

 

eCar Insurance overpayment - £325

Settled in full - 15/09/08

NatWest Student A/C bank charges - £260

Settled under hardship scheme - 08/06/09

Natwest Business A/C bank charges - £60

Settled in full as GOGW - 20/04/09

Santander Consumer Finance late payment fees - £60

Part settled for £48 - 01/03/08

Peugeot Finance late payment fees - £50

Settled in full before county court hearing - 01/09/09

Peugeot Finance overpayment of £247

Settled in full - 01/12/08

Valley Leisure - complaint about collections agent

£160 part refund of gym membership in compensation - 01/02/09

HFC Bank - complaint about payment deducted from my account on wrong date

GOGW £10 - 01/05/09

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some advice please:

 

Issued a lovely Parking Charge Notice on Sunday in a Sainsburys car park.

 

(Pay and display)

 

Forgot to get a 1/2 hour free ticket.

 

First time we ever saw parking attendant, and first time we ever got a ticket.

 

VERY difficult to read (written in and VERY faint).

 

Questioned the ticket with parking attendant and was told that since we were in Sainsbury's, we could send in our receipt and the ticket would be cancelled.

 

Now reading this thread I think it's just a ploy to get us to contact them and they would never cancel the ticket.

 

Any suggestions?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now reading this thread I think it's just a ploy to get us to contact them and they would never cancel the ticket.

 

I can tell you what the letter would say right here right now:

 

"Whilst we appreciate you did shop at Sainsbury's, our terms and conditions clearly state a pay and display voucher must be displayed at all times and so we are unfortunately unable to cancel the PCN".

 

Ignore everything as has been said. Euro are toothless [problematic], don't do court but do like to send letters from their very own debt collection company.

 

Shows you how much in bed these two 'industries' are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi i've just received a ticket, which i was really outraged about as it was put on my windscreen as i unlocked and got in my car, less than a minute late....

I am a student and cannot afford to pay this to be honest...

Any help??

Oh yeah... and on the back it says my details will be referred to the dvla if i don't pay :\

Edited by Miss Psychotic
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone can get details from the DVLA for £2.50. It doesn't mean anything.

 

It's a [problem] - don't pay. Search the forum for Euro.

 

Expect threatening letters from Euro, Brinx and Credit Control. Ignore the lot and they will give up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

have read this thread with great interest, i received a ticket from ecp whilst parked in toys r us car park in norwich, the ticket stated not in marked bay, it was on sunday 2nd of january 2010 there was an inch of snow on the ground it was busy and as a car pulled away from the end of a row i moved and parked in the space he left, i spoke to the store manager stating how was i meant to 'see the bay' when it was covered with snow, but was told it was not his concern.

initially i was going to appeal but having read your suggestions i am inclined to ignore it completely, would my appeal on the grounds you couldnt see the markings be upheld

Link to post
Share on other sites

would my appeal on the grounds you couldnt see the markings be upheld

 

No. "We have considered your appeal and the scamvoice stands"

 

having read your suggestions i am inclined to ignore it completely,

This is the correct action so why did you then go on to write the "appeal" line quoted above?

 

Do not appeal

Do not telephone them

Do not reply to their letters

Do not pay them

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4875 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...