Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder

esmerobbo

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    1,124
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

133 Excellent

1 Follower

About esmerobbo

  • Rank
    Classic Account Holder
  1. Usual MO for CEL is they issue at their local court Barnet and claim comes from CCMCC Salford, not Northampton. Check with the issuing court that it is genuine, don't assume its a scare tactic.
  2. As ericsbrother says looks like they are going down the PPC route, so the money is theirs! Seem to have changed tack from the letter I have seen previously.
  3. The only other one I have seen are these letters, person involved never came back to say how it ended.
  4. Did you miss this? Its not POFA its landowner, and its a byelaws one. So criminal [or could possibly be] looking at POFA compliance and NTK's ain't going to help. "Standard Scale Level 2 - Maximum Fine £500"
  5. Be careful with this one, they are landowners so don't need to be BPA or IPC approved operators to gain details. Don't know if they would but they could go the Byelaw route. They don't use POFA so no POPLA. If you cant agree with them then the place it would be sorted is a magistrates court. [possibly] Parking eye were booted out of their car parks and they went in house using Byelaws. https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lakedistrict.gov.uk%2F__data%2Fassets%2Fpdf_file%2F0009%2F169902%2Fbyelaws_car_parking.pdf Don't understand the passing to a third party bit!
  6. VCS do sometimes take longer then the 35 days to respond. They know the rules but like to bend them. Or they have realised they are on a loser and saved a stamp.
  7. Having had in the past a few conversations with PE employees (before POFA) basically to wind them up, I think I can say talking to them is a waste of time. They have only one aim to get you to pay. I once owned a fleet of lorries and vans so regularly got tickets for overnight stays, never as the driver just the keeper. Once had a conversation with a manager wont mention names but he is still there, who after I told him, and he agreed I had no legal obligation to furnish the drivers details, tried to tell me however I had a moral obligation to tell them! I asked if he was in the right job if he wished to be moral! I did also once or twice as their business was a commercial concern and not a legal or statutory body offer to furnish the drivers details for the same fee they wanted from the driver. They never obliged! Talk to the dog, and wait for them to reply.
  8. It is strange how they still claim GPEOL is not a valid appeal yet 100% of POPLA appeals on this point have been successful, so much so when PE see the appeal docs from POPLA they don't even bother sending their side.
  9. Forgot to add you are probably 99.99999% safe to carry on ignoring these clowns. £150 is a unusual amount for for these charges.
  10. That is DRP+ They are only listed as debt collectors on the BPA, and usually that's all they do chase debts for others. On the NTK does it identify the creditor? Debt Recovery Plus Ltd also t/as Parking Collection Services http://www.drpl.co.uk
  11. Does the letter received answer any queries or do you think some numpty has sent the wrong template letter?
  12. The problem you have is double dipping is easy to explain, ANPR as they call it is nothing of the sort, its CCTV with image capture. There are many reasons that the first exit can be missed by the camera. So it would cover their backside against an accusation of purposely using double dipping. I am actually following a case with PE of double dipping two entrances on the car park person went twice in one day, they have supplied two photos 4 hours apart with the car going into the car park. They must believe the defendant reversed out. rather then their system is faulty.
  13. Who was the original company who issued the NTK?
  14. Going by what Gladstones are asking for I would guess they know they are on a sticky wicket for any claim against the keeper under POFA. If they did decide to have a punt against the keeper, and ask a Judge to decide if in all probabilities the keeper was the driver, then they could have a chance. If it was one PCN it would be different but multiples are a different case, even though it could be multiple drivers. However this is a side issue as ericsbrother says above they have to prove the points ericsbrother has made, these should be the basis of your defence.
  15. The POPLA code will be generated from the date of any rejection letter, or should be. It should reach you within 2 working days of that date. They should if they comply respond within 35 days.
×
×
  • Create New...