Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks for posting the CPR contents. i do wish you hadn't blanked out the dates and times since at times they can be relevant . Can you please repost including times and dates. They say that they sent a copy of  the original  PCN that they sent to the Hirer  along with your hire agreement documents. Did you receive them and if so can you please upload the original PCN without erasing dates and times. If they did include  all the paperwork they said, then that PCN is pretty near compliant except for their error with the discount time. In the Act it isn't actually specified but to offer a discount for 14 days from the OFFENCE is a joke. the offence occurred probably a couple of months prior to you receiving your Notice to Hirer.  Also the words in parentheses n the Act have been missed off. Section 14 [5][c] (c)warn the hirer that if, after the period of 21 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to hirer is given, the amount of unpaid parking charges referred to in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(f) or 9(2)(f) (as the case may be) has not been paid in full, the creditor will (if any applicable requirements are met) have the right to recover from the hirer so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Though it states "if any applicable ...." as opposed to "if all applicable......" in Section 8 or 9. Maybe the Site could explain what the difference between the two terms mean if there is a difference. Also on your claim form they keeper referring to you as the driver or the keeper.  You are the Hirer and only the Hirer is responsible for the charge EVEN IF THEY WEREN'T THE DRIVER. So they cannot pursue the driver and nowhere in the Hirer section of the Act is the hirer ever named as the keeper so NPC are pursuing the wrong person.  
    • This is simply a scam site.  It's been shown to be a scam in the national press and on national TV. Please fill in the the forum sticky and upload the invoice you've received. In fact what you have is an invoice, not a fine, a private company doesn't have the power to issue fines.  
    • Moved to the Private Parking forum.
    • Good afternoon, I am writing because I am very frustrated. I received a parking fine from MET Parking Services Ltd , ( Southgate park Stansted CM24 1PY) . We stopped for a quick meal in Mcdonalds and were there fir around 30 mins. We always do this after flights and never received a parking fine before.  Reason: The vehicle left in Southgate car park without payment made for parking and the occupants southgate premises. they took some pictures of us leaving the car. i did not try and appeal it yet as I came across many forums that this is a scam and I should leave it. But I keep getting threatening letters.  Incident happened : 23/10/2023 I did contact Mcdonalds and they said this:  Joylyn (McDonald’s Customer Services) 5 Apr 2024, 12:05 BST Dear Laura, Thank you for contacting McDonald’s Customer Services. I’m sorry to hear that you have received a Parking Charge Notice following your visit to our Stansted restaurant.   We've introduced parking restrictions at some of our restaurants to make sure there are always parking spaces available for customers.   We appreciate that some visits such as birthday parties or large group visits might take longer and the parking restrictions aren't intended to stop this. If you think your stay will exceed the stated maximum parking time then please speak to a manager in advance.   Your number plate is scanned by our Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) system when you enter our car park, and then again when you leave. If you have overstayed the maximum time allowed, you will not be notified straight away- a Parking Charge Notice will be sent to you via the post.   If you feel that a Parking Charge Notice has been issued in error, please contact our approved contractors who issued the charge in order to appeal the charge. Unfortunately McDonald's are unable to revoke parking tickets- the outcome of the appeal is final and cannot be overturned by McDonald’s.   Many thanks for taking the time to contact McDonald’s Customer Services.   Can someone please help me out and suggest what I should do next?  Thank you 
  • 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

Westminster PCN: Can they do this?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5763 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 wonder if anyone can tell me if City of Westminster are in breach of any regulations:

 

I have just received a Charge Certificate Notice, but no previous correspondence (including a PCN).

It claimed that:

Parked in a Restricted Street etc

In London Street (no postcoded so I have no idea where that is!)

'Observed by: civil enforcement officer ...' ... on 24/05/2008.

 

At the top it says Penalty Charge Notice Issue Date 02/06/2008

 

It claims that 'A Notice to Owner (which experession includes a Penalty Charge Notice served by post) 02/06/2008'

 

I have a number of questions:

 

Are they allowed to issue a PCN and NTO at the same time?

As I understand it, postal PCN's must allow 21 days at the discounted rate. Surely there must be a further period at the full rate before issuing a charge certificate?

Can Westminster really issue a charge certificate with an additional £60 on 8th July ... just over one month after issuing the PCN.

 

Suffice to say that I will be making a Stat Dec as I didn't get the NTO and making an appeal.

 

Any information would be much appreciated.

 

thanks

 

Mark

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply. But what does that mean in terms of my rights? Can they issue a charge certificate so quickly?

 

thanks

 

mark

it seems you may have had a ticket via cctv. These double up as pcn's/nto's AFAIK. you have 21 days to appeal to keep tha 50% reduction.

Or 28 days to pay the full amount.

 

If you havent had the pcn the write a to the la and complain

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for the info.

 

The PCN was apparently issued by CEO no. XXXX, so it clearly wasn't a CCTV PCN.

The CEO wasn't actually visible to me, so I find the whole thing rather sneaky (and presumably the PCN is invalid). As I understand it they have to have either attempted to hand it to me, or at least started to issue the PCN. I was actually dropping off a passenger (on a single yellow line) so I was in my vehicle for the whole period of around 1 minute.

 

The problem, however, is that they have now issued a Charge Certificate. Am I correct in thinking that my only option is to make a Satutory Declaration then appeal it from there?

 

thanks

 

Mark

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for the info.

 

The PCN was apparently issued by CEO no. XXXX, so it clearly wasn't a CCTV PCN.

The CEO wasn't actually visible to me, so I find the whole thing rather sneaky (and presumably the PCN is invalid). As I understand it they have to have either attempted to hand it to me, or at least started to issue the PCN. I was actually dropping off a passenger (on a single yellow line) so I was in my vehicle for the whole period of around 1 minute.

 

The problem, however, is that they have now issued a Charge Certificate. Am I correct in thinking that my only option is to make a Satutory Declaration then appeal it from there?

 

thanks

 

Mark

Unfortunately they don't have to hand it to you these days. The days of drive offs are gone. Of course if the PCN dates before 31 March 2008 then that is a different kettle of fish as that was when the law changed.

 

You need to get a Stat Dec done as quickly as possible, on the basis you didn't receive the PCN or NTO, as the next step is getting the bailiffs involved.

 

BTW get the Stat Dec sworn at your local county court and it won't cost you anything.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

On a more general issue, I think this represents a real problem for motorists. Bascially I wasn't parked (contrary to what the PCN states), however because the CEO 'observed' parking they saw fit to issue a PCN in my absence, no matter how spurious. In this case I was simply dropping off a passenger and was clearly NOT parking.

I am, however, put in a position where I have to question the honesty of the CEO involved.

This is now the third time in less than a year that a Westminster PA/CEO has basically lied about what happened - on the previous two occasions they claimed that they handed me the PCN (pre March 2008). On one occasion I had a witness and none on the other. In spite of making a formal complaint,

Westminster saw in favour of the PA, even though one of the PCNs was cancelled on appeal.

What's more, Westminster appear to have a policy of issuing NTO's and charge certificates as rapidly as possible, thus making as difficult as possible for motorists to dispute PCN's.

 

So my question is this: how are we going to deal with dishonest CEOs combined with an over-zealous authority who seem to support these CEOs?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's more, Westminster appear to have a policy of issuing NTO's and charge certificates as rapidly as possible, thus making as difficult as possible for motorists to dispute PCN's.

 

 

The time frame for issuing documents is set down in law if they are sent too early or too late they are invalid. You can appeal an NTO (that is one of the primary reasons for issuing it) so getting one promptly does not prejudice your right to appeal.

Your original post does not make sense in respect of the times and the wording can you post a photo or scan of the documents you have received.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've attached a scan of the Charge Certificate (blurred a few bits to project the innocent!)

 

I spoke to Westminster today and they said that they would consider my appeal, which is fair of them, at least.

 

I have downloaded the video from the Westminster website, and observes my vehicle for just over 1 minute, where I was stopped on a yellow line with my indicator on.

I was dropping someone off, so my engine was running and I didn't leave the car. As the contravention is for parking, then I presume the PCN is invalid. To have parked there would have meant turning off the engine and leaving the vehicle, for which there is no evidence.

Is that a reasonable basis for an appeal?

 

thanks

 

Mark

 

scan0002.jpgscan0002.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

The time frame for issuing documents is set down in law if they are sent too early or too late they are invalid. You can appeal an NTO (that is one of the primary reasons for issuing it) so getting one promptly does not prejudice your right to appeal.

 

Is it possible to send an NTO too early? Westminster seems to have sent mine within a week of the contravention. Is this allowed?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible to send an NTO too early? Westminster seems to have sent mine within a week of the contravention. Is this allowed?

 

Looking at the paper work it seems you got sent a combined NTO/PCN which would mean it was a CCTV observed contravention (which is why you didn't see the CEO). The options are now to either pay up or send in a statutary declaration stating you didn't get the NTO and then if it is accepted you can appeal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact is that I was dropping someone off. However the video is too short to show someone exitting the car. There is less than a minute where the video is on my vehicle. That was not enough time to gather her bags and leave.

Surely the fact that my car was observed for such a short period of time means that there is insufficient evidence?

I would be happy, for example to provide two witness statements from my passengers to say that I was dropping off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

for ordinary yellow lines you are allowed to stop for passengers to alight.

Ask for the rest of the video.

 

Westminster - there are 41 million stories in the naked (greed) city, this is one of them...

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is accepted. upon filing a stat dec with the TEC the TEC then contacts the LA and tells it to cease (current) enforcement. How can the LA refuse the stat dec ?

 

If it is not completed properly or for the wrong reason it will not be accepted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"wrong reason" ?

 

You have not received the notice to owner or enforcement notice;

 

You made representations to the Local Authority but you did not receive a rejection notice; and

 

You made an appeal to the Parking/Traffic Adjudicator (following the rejection, by the Local Authority, of your representation) and you received no response.

 

are the only grounds to file a declaration, if you for example file saying you got a NTO but forgot to deal with it your application will be refused.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In this case I didn't get the PCN/NTO so my grounds are quite reasonable.

At this stage I don't need to get a Stat Dec as Westminster have said they will consider my appeal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...