Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. 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. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   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. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
  • 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

UKCPS PCN - Out of marked bay - Centertainment Sheffield


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2160 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

1. The date of infringement? 20th March, 2018 at 20:04:43

2. Have you yet appealed to the parking company yet? No

2.1. Have you received a Notice To Keeper? Not yet

2.2. What date is on it? Not recieved letter yet, just a ATTENTION slip

2.3. Did the NTK provide photographic evidence? Yes

 

3. Did the NTK mention Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) Not one the webpage with all the information and photographs

 

4. If you appealed after receiving the NTK, did the parking company give you any information regarding the further appeals process? Not appealed

 

5. Who is the parking company? UKCPS

 

6. Where exactly [Carpark name and town] did you park? Centertainment Sheffield

 

Hi there,

me and my girlfriend went to the cinema last night in Sheffield.

As we got into Sheffield we noticed there were really bad traffic around the centertainment area.

We managed to get into the car park for Cineworld and it was absolutly jam packed.

 

There was an event going off somewhere nearby and people were using the centertainment car park (as its free) and leaving the area.

The cinema was dead so the majority of cars there were infringing the rules by not staying within the area.

We drove around for half an hour and was late for our movie trying to find a parking bay.

 

We found a little area, safe section unused by the walking public and unmarked as all parking bays were taken up.

We didnt obstruct anyone or cause any danger to anyone or cost anyone any money.

I was outraged at the fact that everyone was using the parking bays and not even going to the cinema.

 

 

They want £100 for some reason, £60 if I pay up within 2 weeks.

Edited by dx100uk
formatting
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'd like to win the lottery. That's probably not going to happen either :lol:

 

OK. First things first, do absolutely nothing as regards an appeal until you get a Notice to Keeper through the post. Sit on your hands if you need to! This is important as the last thing that you want to do is identify the driver of the vehicle at the time.

 

 

If you're local to the site, some pictures of the signage in and around the car park would be useful as they PPC's usually stuff that up in some way. Also pictures of any signs as you come off the road and enter the site.

 

Finally, scan in, remove the registration number of the vehicle, any PCN, bar or QR codes from the windscreen ticket and then upload it as a PDF file to this thread. They sometimes stuff those up as well.

 

 

The main thing to remember though is Don't Panic! There are perfectly legal ways to fight these bandits and the best way it to wait for them to shoot themselves in the foot, which they all do regularly :lol:

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

UKCPS always mess up on one of two things. Signage or NTK is out of time. SIt tight and wait for their next move.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou DragonFly1967 and renegadeimp for your replys. I have attached photographs of the documents left on the car. I can also view details of the recorded contravention on the website stated. On there are photographs of my car and much more information.

 

What do you meen by Signage or NTK out of time? I have noticed the time is slightly different from the document left on the vehicle v the details left on the website. Its only by a couple minutes. Document = 20:02:32 vs Online = 20:04:43.

IMG_20180321_153202.jpg

IMG_20180321_154146.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have absolutely no idea what those (images) are supposed to be! :!: They're laughable. My dog could design something better than that! :lol:

 

 

Where I'm referring to times, the PPC have strict time limits that they must adhere to. These are set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Schedule 4.

 

As that most certainly is not a windscreen ticket (NtD) a ticket through the post (NtK) MUST land on your doormat within 15 days (14 days from the day after the parking event). Outside of that, they've already shot themselves in the foot as no keeper liability has been created under the terms set out in the POFA 2012.

 

If they want to claim that that is a NtD, then a NtK must land on your doormat no earlier than 29 days (or 28 from the day after the parking event) and no later than 57 days (or 56 days after the parking event). But I'm at a complete loss as to how they're going to claim that that's a valid NtD based on those images, especially as they say that it isn't.

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But I'm at a complete loss as to how they're going to claim that that's a valid NtD based on those images, especially as they say that it isn't.

 

If I hadn't seen them with my own eyes, I'd never have believed it myself....... they are hilarious :lol:

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are not Notice to Drivers in any sense that the rest of the world who has read the POFA would ever understand. It doesnt sat who issued it, why, where, how much for or any of the basic info needed in law. However, this isnt important at the moment as you arent going to challenge this or pay up, you are going to WAIT until they send a NTK through the post when the driver fails to pay up or appeal.

 

Thereis anoth thing they may try and that is issue a NTD and claim it is done under para 9 of the POFA which applies to ANPR capture and then say that no it wasnt a NTD so para 5 and 8 dont apply. This is dishonest and they know it but rely on you not knowing so when you get a letter through the post please tell us when it arrived and show us what it says. i hope that your keeper detils are up to date or you will cause yourself no end of bother over this

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well the NTK is invalid for a start. Have a good look and tell me whats missing from it.

 

And a big LOL to their parting part of the form " statement of truth"

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would you ever think youd ever have to pay them?

 

Have a read of other similar threads, and wait for the regulars to reply. It is extremely easy to bat this one away, although you will get desperate begging letters from UKCPS and a DCA. But thats all they are. Begging letters.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let us consider their NTK,

it says that the driver hasnt paid,

well why would they as they didnt receive a NTD.

 

This is typical of a buch of shysters like UKPCS.

They try and use this starnge letter on the car as a method of starting the discount period clock

but then dont issue the NTK in the correct time

so then claim it isnt a NTD.

 

In short they are trying to diddel you out of the discount period and also circumvent the law for the timetable for issuing notices.

 

Argue against one of the letters and they will say the other applies.

argue the other way round and they will say that the first one was real,

hoping you get cionfused and just pay up the higher amount.

 

What to do?

Sit on your hands for another month in case they try a third letter uinder para 8 of the POFA claiming the first one was a real NTD.

 

In the meanwhile photographs of the signage at the site would be very helpful as I bet that is rubbish as well.

 

Images of the entrance to the land from the public highway are a must, even if there are no signs there.

That is another stick to beat them with.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

so now they are trying to say that the NTD WAS issued and thet the NTK was a figment of everyones imagination.

 

Clearly they have no idea about the law they are now quoting and hope that you dotn either.

 

What to do? Ignore them a bit more.

The next step will be letters from dca's which have no more credence than the writing on the back of a crisp packet.

 

However,let us know when they write again and who it is who sent the letter.

 

Eventually you will be replying but they will think you are wavering if you respond now regardless of the content of your letter.

 

Only write when they have got to their last threat before they either have to start a court claim or drop it altogether.

 

Then your letter will hopefully persuade them that the latter is the best option for them. Until that point they have pound signs in their eyes and wont see reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just had to subscribe to this thread as I will enjoy UKCPS trying this on in court. Initially they are saying that the NTD was ignored so they are going after the keeper however, the car was parked on the 20th yet the letter was dated 22nd. The NTD allows the driver 28 days to pay and then UKCPS can then go to the DVLA to get the keeper details which should arrive between 29 and 56 days after the event.

 

In my (humble) opinion, they are in breach of the KADOE agreement with the DVLA and should be reported to the DVLA.

 

Do I hear the faint noise of spurs?:-)

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Ignore. They know they wont go anywhere near court with this, and if they tried, they would be annihilated.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interestingly all the references quoted on their Reminder notice apply to the driver not the keeper. So far as I am aware UKPC have yet to establish whether the keeper is also the driver. I know the idiots at IPC seem to think they are. Judges are a lot wiser and proof will be required in Court should that ever UKPC try it on..

Link to post
Share on other sites

so if they wish to rely on the POFA then they shoudl explain how the chage has leapt to £130 whenthe POFA specifically limits the amount that can be claimed to the amount specified in the NTK?

 

The parking co's rarely have to address this point in court because they lose on more straightforward matters but it has been known that they get awarded the original sum and not the unicorn food tax.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

usual garbage, no explanationas to why it is £160 but I will tell you. If thye made it £200 people would challenge the amunt and the game of deceit would be up for the dca's and parking co's so they set it at an amount where people worry it might increase but low enough to get them to pay up without challenge.

Of course we know that it is all a fiction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...