Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi welcome to the Forum.  If a PCN is sent out late ie after the 12th day of the alleged offence, the charge cannot then be transferred from the driver to the keeper.T he PCN is deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch so in your case, unless you can prove that Nexus sent the PCN several days after they claim you have very little chance of winning that argument. All is not lost since the majority of PCNs sent out are very poorly worded so that yet again the keeper is not liable to pay the charge, only the driver is now liable. If you post up the PCN, front and back we will be able to confirm whether it is compliant or not. Even if it is ok, there are lots of other reasons why it is not necessary to pay those rogues. 
    • Hi I received a Parking Charge letter to keeper on Monday 15/04/24, the 17th day after the alleged incident. My understanding is that this is outside the window for notifying. The issue date was 08/04/2024 which should have been in good time for it to have arrived within the notice period but in fact it actually arrived at lunchtime on the 15th. Do I have to prove when it arrived  (and if so how can I do that?) or is the onus on them to prove it was delivered in time? All I can find is that delivery is assumed to be on the second working day after issue which would have been Weds 10//04/24 but it was actually delivered 5 days later than that (thank you Royal Mail!). My husband was present when it arrived - is a family member witness considered sufficient proof? 1 Date of the infringement  arr 28/03/24 21:00, dep 29/03/24 01.27 2 Date on the NTK  08/04/2024 (Date of Issue) 3 Date received Monday 15/04/24 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012?  Yes 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No    Have you had a response?  n/a 7 Who is the parking company? GroupNexus 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Petrol Station Roadchef Tibshelf South DE55 5T 'operating in accordance with the BPA's Code of Practice'  
    • lookinforinfo - many thanks for your reply. It would be very interesting to get the letter of discontinuance. The court receptionist said that the county court was in Gloucester 'today' so that makes me think that some days it is in Gloucester and some days its in Cheltenham, it was maybe changed by the courts and i was never informed, who knows if DCBL were or not. My costs were a gallon of petrol and £3.40 for parking. I certainly don't want to end up in court again that's for sure but never say never lol. Its utterly disgusting the way these crooks can legally treat motorists but that's the uk for you. I'm originally from Scotland so it's good that they are not enforceable there but they certainly still try to get money out of you. I have to admit i have lost count of the pcn's i have received in the last 2 yr and 4 months since coming to England for work, most of them stop bothering you on their own eventually, it was just this one that they took it all the way. Like i mentioned in my WS the the likes of Aldi and other companies can get them cancelled but Mcdonalds refused to help me despite me being a very good customer.   brassednecked - many thanks   honeybee - many thanks   nicky boy - many thanks    
    • Huh? This is nothing about paying just for what I use - I currently prefer the averaged monthly payment - else i wouldn't be in credit month after month - which I am comfortable with - else I wold simply request a part refund - which I  would have done if they hadn't reduced my monthly dd after the complaint I raised (handled slowly and rather badly) highlighted the errors in their systems (one of which they do seem to have fixed) Are you not aware DD is always potentially variable? ah well, look it up - but my deal is a supposed to average the payments over a year, and i dont expect them to change payments (up or down) without my informed agreement ESPECIALLY when I'm in credit over winter.   You are happy with your smart meter - jolly for you I dont want one, dont have to have one  - so wont   I have a box that tells me my electricity usage - was free donkeys years ago and shows me everything I need to know just like a smart meter but doesnt need a smart meter,  and i can manually set my charges - so as a side effect - would show me if the charges from the supplier were mismatched. Doesn't tell me if the meters actually calibrated correctly - but neither does your smart meter. That all relies on a label and the competence of the testers - and the competence of any remote fiddling with the settings. You seem happy with that - thats fine. I'm not.    
    • Evening all,   So today, I was sent an updated offer that includes the £12.60 I spent on letters, but they have declined to add the interest at £7.40. They have stating 'We acknowledge your request to claim interest to date, however, this would be at the discretion of a trial judge if the claim did proceed to a trial hearing.' I think I am content with this outcome, and pushing this to a trial for a total interest of £15.30 throughout the claim does not make sense to me.   What are people's thoughts? I am sure our courts have better things to concentrate on?
  • 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

ES Parking Manchester Spinningfields Court Claim - Help Required Please


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2727 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 there,

I (like many others) am in the same situation as Ginger

- handed a PCN from ES for parking /stopping in the Spinningfields area.

Letters of complaint / information requests have been ignored,

 

Gladstones involved and the case referred to County Curt Business Centre.

I'm pretty anxious and have never dealt with anything like this before.

I am seeking some urgent advice as I returned from holiday to find the county court claim and now only have 2 days to respond...

 

I obviously want to appeal and thinking along the lines of (pls forgive the lack of legal terms etc) :

 

 

I am disputing this claim for the following reasons :

 

1) I have written to ES Parking and their legal representatives (Gladstones) several times to ask for more information and complain about their imposed fines. No acknowledgement or response has been received.

 

2) No evidence of wrongdoing / an offence being committed has been provided. They have sent me a photo of the front of a car - it is not evidence that an offence is being committed as you can only see the front half of a front end of a car in the photo (not the location or that the car is stopped). In the photo you can clearly see the two hands of the driver at the steering wheel, which suggests that the car was being driven at the time of taking the photo (i.e. not parked).

 

3) The charge they have applied is excessive, disproportionate and not commercially justifiable. Was £100, then £150, now £227. The original £100 is excessive and the subsequent increases and escalation to court whist ignoring my requests for more information and letters of complaint is wholly wrong.

 

I suggested to ES parking that the original £100 charge was excessive and outweighs any cost to the landowner

- I have asked for a breakdown of actual costs and subsequent increases.

(No acknowledgment or response received).

 

4) The photo evidence provided is time-stamped with a different time to that of the alleged offence (the photo was taken at a different time to that of the alleged offence).

 

 

Moreover as per point 2 - the photo is not evidence of any offence being committed.

Their letter states that "the 'period of parking' to which the charge relates is the period immediately preceding the incident time" (the photo evidence is taken after the incident time). (the incident time is 12:00, photo is time stamped at 12:03)

 

5) There was no/insufficient signage on site at the time of the alleged offence.

I have asked ES parking to confirm that there was signage on date of alleged offence - no response received.

 

 

There is now signage onsite (months later) however this signage is inadequate as it's too small (roughly A4 size with lot's of very small text written on it), it is difficult to read from any distance and certainly cannot be read from a car, let alone a moving vehicle.

 

There are no signs or anything to suggest that you are leaving a public road and onto a private one

(the site of alleged offence is Manchester City Centre)

- this is very confusing, perhaps deliberately so.

 

 

It is not clear that the signs are referring to the road

- it looks like they are referring to the adjacent pedestrian areas in front of some flats / offices, not that they are referring to the road - which you would assume was a public highway.

 

6) There were no road markings at the time of the offence to suggest that parking was prohibited (can evidence via google maps).

 

7) I have a 24/7 365 day a year parking space in my office underground car park at the site of alleged offence (so I have no reason to park outside, when I have a space inside).

This can be evidenced if required.

Does the fact that both drivers hands are at on the wheel in the photo provided suggest that the car was being driven into work car park ? (if indeed the photo was even taken at the site of alleged offence).

 

8) I have asked ES Parking and their solicitors (Gladstones) for more information to confirm who is the legal landowner and that ES Parking has their authority in this matter and also to confirm that the road where the alleged offence took place is in fact a private road. I have also asked for full details of the alleged offence and how long the car was parked for. No response or acknowledgment received.

 

It is just not credible or fair that ES Parking can send members of the public a picture of half of the front end a car, showing only that the drivers hands are at the wheel and not the location where the photo was taken or that the car is illegally parked (or even parked at all) and demand payment of £100.

 

They have not provided any details or evidence :

- Of any offence being committed.

- Details of the offence and how long the car was parked for.

- That the vehicle was on site at the time of offence.

- That they have authority from the landowner to pursue costs.

- That actual costs to the landowner have occurred.

- That the site of alleged offence is not a public highway.

- In addition the time of offence is not the time the photo was taken.

 

With the above points in mind,

you write back to ES Parking to ask for more information and to contest their parking charge,

they ignore you and ramp the costs up to £125,

a further letter from you is ignored and then costs ramped up again to £150,

you write again, which they ignore and then escalate the matter to a court.

 

 

I believe that this demonstrates that ES Parking are operating in an aggressive, predatory and disproportionate manner which is designed to bully and intimidate innocent members of the public in order for them to obtain money.

 

Are points 2 and 4 valid ?

I'm (very obviously) a lay person

but I'm hoping these are important from a legal perspective.

Would really appreciate any help and guidance you can offer

- thanks so much Roo

Edited by honeybee13
no spaces in text
Link to post
Share on other sites

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks dx - here you go :

 

Name of the Claimant :

ES Parking Enforcement Limited

 

Date of issue :

12th Sept 16

 

Key dates :

Acknowledgment required by the 1st Oct (I have acknowledged claim today - 27th Sept), defence required by the 15th Oct.

 

What is the claim for / verbatim particulars of claim :

Total due : £150

AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

The claimant claims the sum of £152 for parking charges and indemnity costs if applicable including interest of £2.07 interest pursuant to S.69 of the County Court Act 1984 Rate 8.00% from dates above to 05/09/16 Same rate to Judgement or (sooner) payment Daily rate to Judgement £0.03 Total debt and interest £152.07

What is the value of the claim?

Claim : £152.07

Court fee :£25

Legal representation costs : £50

Total amount : £227.07

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim ?

Original creditor (ES Parking is claimant)

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment?

N/A

Edited by Roobear
Link to post
Share on other sites

ok great thanks

so no rush..why did you say only had 2 days to respond??

 

 

just be mindful that your defence date was one day out

33 days in total, whereby claimform date is ONE in the count.

 

 

now I know you've entered into lots if letter tennis by the looks of things..

but

have you actually sent a CPR 31:14 to the sols yet?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

At first I didn't realise I could acknowlede first and propose a defence at a later stage - little bit of panic set in !

 

Ah ok, thanks - I had counted claim date as day zero, not day one.

 

Yeah - there's been letter tennis

but they've never responded or acknowledged any of mine.

 

 

I havn't done the CRP 31:14 as only found out today that I had a court claim against me

- having read a couple of Threads around ES

- is there any point in sending this as they will decline the request or completely ignore (as per my other letters) ?

Guess it won't do any harm though - what do you think ?

 

Thanks

 

PS - do you think points 2 and 4 of my defence are valid arguements ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes send it to gladdy's

 

 

but CHAGNE THE NAMES IN THIS

 

 

[Your address]

.

[Their address]

.

[Date]

.

Dear Sir or Madam,

.

Re: (Claimant's name) v (Your name) Case No:

.

CPR 31.14 Request

.

On (date) I received the claim formlink3.gif in this case issued by you out of the (Name) county courtlink3.gif.

.

I confirm having returned my acknowledgement of service to the court in which I indicate my intention to contest and counter claim all of your claim.

.

Please treat this letter as my request made under CPR 31.14 for the disclosure and the production of a verified and legible copy of [each of the following / the] document(s) mentioned in your Particulars of Claim:

.

1. proof of assignment from the landlord to create contracts and make claims in their own name.

.

2.proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007

 

 

3. the contract between VCS and the landowner that assigns the right to enter into contracts with the public and make claims in their own name,

 

4.copies of

 

 

a.the notice to driver,

 

b.notice to keeper and any other correspondence from VCS or Gladstones to the defendant.

 

You should ensure compliance with your CPR 31 duties and ensure that the document(s) I have requested are disclosed at your earliest convenience..

.

Your CPR 31 duties extend to making a reasonable and proportionate search for the originals of the documents I have requested, the better for you to be able to verify the document's authenticity and to provide me with a legible copy.

.

Further, where I have requested a copy of a document, the original of which is now in the possession of another person, you will have a right to possession of that document if you have mentioned it in your case. You must take immediate steps to recover and preserve it for the purpose of this case.

.

Where I have mentioned a document and there is in your possession more than one version of that same document owing to a modification, obliteration or other marking or feature, each version will be a separate document and you must provide a copy of each version of it to me. Your obligations extend to making a reasonable and proportionate search for any version(s) to include an obligation to recover and preserve such version(s) which are now in the possession of a third party.

.

In accordance with CPR 31.15© I undertake to be responsible for your reasonable copying costs incurred in complying with this CPR 31.14 request.

.

If you are unable to comply with this request and believe that you will never be able to comply with this request please confirm in your response.

.

Yours faithfully

.

TYPE YOUR NAME do not signlink3.gif IT

 

 

....................

don't worry about your defence yet.

 

 

if they don't reply

then we'll deal

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should I change VCS to ES Parking ? (Or does VCS refer to something else?)

 

Also, if we assume that they do send me all this stuff

(and invoice me / increase claim cost)

 

 

what will I do with all that information ?

 

 

Or is this just a tactic to show the court that they've not provided relevant info for me to make an informed decision ?

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

no as I said you need to change it to your players!!

 

 

how can they invoice you for anything???

where are you getting all these wild ideas from??

 

 

if they cant or wont prove their claim that they

own the land

so thus can issue Parking tickets

then their whole claim fails.

 

 

I notice too you've called it a fine

its not a fine its a speculative invoice

and thus a speculative claim

hoping for a default undefended judgement..

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

doesn't happen just a std text

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The initial defence I submitted Roobear was a skeleton defence,

just bullet points

(especially as I managed to lock myself out of my MCOL account, and had to fill in the hard copy they sent me!).

I wouldn't worry about putting too much in this defence,

 

 

just the main points.

Mine was

1. When initial PCN received the defendant immediately replied and sought clarification of key points pertaining to the charge, including clarifying their contract with the landholder that demonstrated that they had authority to both issue parking charges and litigate. The Claimant ignored this letter, and instead said it had rejected an appeal which had not been started.

 

2. The charge issued was not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

 

3. Setting down does not constitute parking.

 

4. Any purported contract would be with the landowner, not ES Parking.

 

5. Inconsistent road markings, and poor signage mean no contract was entered into.

 

6. No signs displayed at the entrance to Gartside Street warning of private parking being in operation on the road.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

might be prudent to post that defence on your thread too ginger....:lol:

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ginger, fortget point 2- Beavis made it irrelevant in most cases. Point 4 relies on lack of authority and Landowner can grant this, however you can use this if parking co have failed to provide evidence such a contract exists by way of CPR 31.14 request.

Es cannot answer some of your points though, and as for planning permission- hope you have got the response from council or can copy someone else's verbatim and give time and date of that response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi guys, brief update...

 

Same experience as NW IT and Ginger so far, ESP & Gladdys requested for hearing to be on paper - I've returned all my forms to the court and objected to the on paper hearing - only sent last week so haven't heard anything back yet.

 

One thing that did make me chuckle though, Gladdys responded via email to my online MCOL defence at 9:02am (was submitted at 3pm day before) stating that their client intends to proceed and attaching copies of their Directions Questionnaire, just shows how much "careful consideration" went into that decision !

Link to post
Share on other sites

ES got stuffed at a hearing last week so keep an eye on the parking pranksters blog and learn what you can fromit. You can contact the court and ask for the details of the hearing- ie ES v XX claim no !"£$Y%^Q and then say that your is the same place so you wish for the claim to be taken as a specimen claim for yours and others

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...