Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by esmerobbo

  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.
  16. If you haven't yet quote: Parking Eye V Mrs X case No 3JD08399 Altrincham county court 17/03/2014 were DJ Hayes found driving around looking for a place to park is not parking. Even 31 minutes. http://nebula.wsimg.com/c289944f81b4afb375a97d05d5a80df6?AccessKeyId=4CB8F2392A09CF228A46&disposition=0&alloworigin=1
  17. DRP/Zenith cant take you to court, UKPC or a solicitor acting for them could, but they never have. (Except as a defendant at a criminal court) All these companies lose money if they issue a claim, they do it for one purpose, propaganda UKPC seem to follow the route of intimidating letters from them, if nothing is paid they pass it too DRP/Zenith, which in some cases scares people into making a payment as they overestimate what a debt collector can do. The real situation is if DRP/Zenith get nothing all they can do is pass it back to UKPC to what they wish with, and seeing Rupert is earning enough to pay for his Aston Martin and the petrol to run it. from people who pay up, they don't up to now bother going any further, even though DRP/Zenith claim they do!
  18. Their legal department is Betty the tea lady and part time filing clerk!
  19. Gladstones are on a fishing trip, you have no need to tell them who was driving, or the status of your insurance or the insurance of anyone else who may have driven your vehicle. However saying that if its your address and the van is registered to that address a judge may in all likelihood find on the balance of probabilities that you were the driver. Unfortunately at county court level that's all that is needed. Not being the driver is only a cast iron defence if you can 100% prove it wasn't you. There are much stronger arguments to use in your defence. On the other hand it would be interesting to know what Gladstones would do if you named a driver, as they are not using POFA they would have no action against you. As ericsbrother has said the contract is the starting point, they always either fail to produce one, supply a witness statement saying one exists or produce one that has been so redacted that its senseless. Have you had anyone look over your defence?
  20. Have you checked the code is valid? http://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/popla-code-checker/ ANPR Ltd have a habit of issuing late codes.
  21. Love to know what "The motoring operation" is they are funding?
  22. This will be allocated to your local court, and depending on how busy that court is you will have some time to work on your defence. Your defence needs to be built around points of law, any mitigation unless really strong will only play a small part. If you are lost building a defence, then obtaining parking pranksters guide to defending against PE would really help you. Have a read through the transcripts on this site. http://www.parking-prankster.com/case-law.html see what others have argued and what judges have said. PE will send you half a forest of paperwork trying to intimidate you, however it's all pap about how successful they are in court, however they never mention their losses.
  23. County court is certainly a lottery, in Chuck1es case it seems the judge thought PE were able to form a contract with the motorist, other judges have disagreed. Chuck1es judge decided it was a penalty not a recovery of losses, some judges have disagreed. Hence why it's so important to go armed with as many defence points as possible. However its simple maths to work out that any loss before an incident is nil, any cost or loss is arrived at after an incident. The law of the land says the person should be returned to the position they were in before the incident, and any costs involved in achieving that. This judge has decided that the initial £100 was arrived at by what means?
  24. Enjoy! http://www.parking-prankster.com/case-law.html
  25. Well done glad you saw it through! Glad to see their attempt to intimidate you by issuing reams of their success stories didn't work. After your celebrations can you give us the case number and at what court this was held at, so it can be added to the other cases on this and forums listing PE's lost cases..
  • Create New...