Hi everyone,

I received this in the post today.

I noticed that the dates suggest that it has taken its time getting to me, so I think I need to move quickly on this one.

I have parked in this car-park on many occasions and I've never noticed any the parking signs there - I'll be going back this afternoon to check on this.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

21st April 2017.

PCN Scan2.pdf

Also, dont worry about their silly timelines.

Can you say where you did your shopping? As the retail area is on both sides of the road, it helps us identify any signs.

What I did notice was at the Tesco store from an image taken in June last year, the parking was for three hours. Further up the road is a Lidl but I can't see the signs.

Any chance of some photos from where you parked?

You are correct.

I parked in the non-Tesco side where there are a small number of other retail shops.

I usually park directly opposite the entrance from the road (snippet attached from Google Street Maps).

As mentioned above, I have never seen any signs giving any indication of parking restrictions...and I still can't see any signs on the attached views.

I will be shopping there again this afternoon, so I will take some proper photos.

Entrance photos - google street map.pdf

Looking at this view... https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.5357122,-1.3733124,3a,15y,257.94h,86.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7dpkkCIaqCWJQF6emXSajA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 there is some sort of yellow sign on the lamp post on the right, I can just about make out that it's something to do with parking (could say "2 hours free parking") at the top, but if you can get a good clear image of that, it would be helpful.

If that's what they're passing off as an "Entrance Sign" they could be on a bit of a sticky wicket. It's on the wrong side of the road to be easily visible to a driver and the lettering is probably way too small to be read from a moving vehicle anyway.

we need to see the postmark on the envelope as they are probably using their old tricks of telling out and out lies to get money.

That will apply to the signage as well,

they send a photoshop mock up rather than any images of the signs in situ.

reason for needing postmark on envelope?

you got the NTK too late for keeper liability

but they are claiming they snet it out in good time.

the postmark will prove otherwise.

the next step would be asking the DVLA who accessed your keeper details and when.

that will probably be after they supposedly wrote to you .

Not sure is Ashley Cohen is telepathic, pathetic and maybe psycopathic but they are not a replacement for the law.

I must have passed that sign because that is on the right, after turning tight at the mini-island, which is where I parked.

It does look like it might be a parking information sign, but why would someone be looking over there for parking information?

It seems an odd place to location a potentially expensive bit of information.

I'll get some better photos later.

but why would someone be looking over there for parking information? It seems an odd place to location a potentially expensive bit of information.

Ta-Daaaaaaaaaa

They'll swear that black is white that there is "clear entrance signage". That may be the case, there is an entrance sign, and it looks (from the GSM image) to be fairly clear. However, if they put it in a place where no driver is likely to be looking for signage about parking and use nice small letters so that it can't be read from a moving vehicle then it's not really so "clear" after all.

PPC's use all the dirty tricks they can think of to part the unsuspecting from their money.

we need to see the postmark on the envelope as they are probably using their old tricks of telling out and out lies to get money. That will apply to the signage as well, they send a photoshop mock up rather than any images of the signs in situ.

reason for needing postmark on envelope? you got the NTK too late for keeper liability but they are claiming they snet it out in good time. the postmark will prove otherwise. the next step would be asking the DVLA who accessed your keeper details and when. that will probably be after they supposedly wrote to you . Not sure is Ashley Cohen is telepathic, pathetic and maybe psycopathic but they are not a replacement for the law.

That could be a problem...the envelope went in the recycle bin. I'll have a look for it when I get home later (I'm still at work).

thread tidied and retitled

find it and you have proof that they are timed out to claim a bean from you.

If you dont have a postmark then they will argue as stated, their crooked living depends on it.

Sorry for not being back sooner,

I've had family problems that are far more important than a parking issue.

I have attached some photos of the signage (and a couple of screen-grabs from Google).

I was intrigued to notice that if I'd turned left instead of right,

there are signs stating that there is only 2 hours parking, not the 3 hours.

More photos.pdf

Well the PCN and the sign you posted contradict each other for starters. I assume that sign is there today and your camera has a date function.

The PCN states 2 hours free yet the sign says 3 hours. There is also the BPA requirement to give motorists a 10 minute grace period.

Is it worth appealing? As they are members of the BPA, the appeals process is slightly better than the IPC. No doubt CEL will reject you, even with your evidence so far but they should give you a code to go to POPLA for an 'independant' review. I would say yes. Even if you lost the appeal, CEL will have to take court action to get the pocket money. Going to court is not a slam dunk for them. A judge will base his/her decision on the facts. The sign and the PCN contradict each other, the PCN itself 'may be' out of time by one day and if you do some research, you may find that the original planning permission stipulated 3 hours parking and that hasn't been changed officially.

Your decision of course but that is the route I would go. Others will say otherwise.

where is the envelope?

where is the envelope?

Long gone...recycled.

you were asked for it on the day you said you received it.

CEL now have the force of law on the service of documents on their side all because you didnt take this seriously enough. However, as they are wrong in so many other ways they are likely to lose any claim but they can invoke keeper liability, which they couldnt have doen if you had kept that envelope as it is datestamped and would ahve killed any claim at the word go.

For anyone following this thread, NEVER THROW THE LETTERS OR ENVELOPES AWAY, THEY ARE BOTH CRUCIAL EVIDENCE

if you read the other CEL thread currently active you will see that they applied for the keeper details too late so were breaking the law. You need to ask the DVLA when CEL accessed your data and make a complaint if it was after the date on the letter they sent you.

They are not telepathic so that will prove they deliberately use false instruments to make a financial gain and you just might get the police interested (probably not but always worth a try). You can also sue them for the unlawful processing of your data (worth doing).

Hi Everyone...I'm back.

I haven't made much progress with this because I had an accident in May and ended up in hospital a couple of times and have only recently started back at work.

As a result,

the POPLA number expired when I got round to registering my dispute.

I went back to CEL for a replacement who refused to provide another one.

It was then that I got stuck.

I received one-or-two further love letters from CEL, which I ignored (but kept) because I don't know how to further contest this.

I have now received a letter from their solicitors, QDP.

This leaves me to ask, what do I do next?

I kinda expected them to go away after they sent the previous letters, alas, I was wrong.

QDR letter.pdf

ignore

next bloke next desk

diff coloured skirt

same printer

just never ignore a letter before claim

or

a claimform from northants bulk court

Hello there.

The parking guys should be along later to advise. But this looks like a threatogram to me. If the clients are ZZPS, I don't think they can take court action, it would have to be the parking company.

Please wait for the others to get here.

HB

As it stands, that letter is a threat-o-gram.

There is no way they will be able to claim that much anyway.

Just for info. A little checking into QDR Solicitors reveal that they are 100% owned by Wright Hassall. Wrught Hassall did some work with the BPA in regard to appeals against Parking Eye. I suspect QDR are of the same ilk and don't really know what they are doing.

I think that the only way to go is to wait for court papers then defend it there. What you have already will help with that and no doubt they will send a template court letter

same 2 people run all three

Thank you all yet again! Consider this ignored with aplomb

P.

read it carefully, they are instructed by ZZPS. That means someone who has no interest and cannot instruct anyone is doing the running.

Can you imagine you are selling your house and someone views it but doesnt make an offer. Your estate agent then gets a solicitor to write to them to tell them that as they viewed it they must buy it or pay a fine to the estate agents . Do you think that the viewer has an obligation to anyone in this chain? Sma applies here.

Stop begging CEL to screw you, once it is too late it is too late and depending on how you worded the letter you may ahve well severly damaged your position as keeper. You have had 6 months to read up a bit more but you then go and do this without asking whether it is a sound idea. Ultimately it wont change their signage for them but you should understand why they are after you and what they need to do to actually have a legal claim. It is not about parking, it is about contract law.

The plot thickens...

I've now had this.