Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About jackospades

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. It will certainly be used - strictly speaking the signs should be removed until they are legalised,but like a lot of things it seems to be just brushed off as a minor transgression. if it wasn't important why would it be statute rather than just a council planning decision ? I'm sure the minor transgression of being 5 minutes overstay in a car park wouldn't be treated as a minor transgression. We're fighting against a rigged system, that's the problem. Nevertheless ,I'm compiling a fair list which together will hopefully paint a picture for the Judge. The reason I keep 'wittering' on abo
  2. I think it's in the BPA CoP what size signs should be, and that's bigger than 0.3m2 stated in the legislation, but yes absolutely if needed I will have copies of everything ..thank you. It is a breach of the CoP not to comply will rules and regs from other bodies. ..and added to many other breaches you would think based on the BPA points system that LCP would be near suspension. ..but of course it's all secret. .the BPA represents the operators and not the drivers (although they will take complaints) The BPA is just another useless self serving set up which hopefully will so
  3. The lack of advertising consent and planning for the cameras is worth a mention, but I don't think it is in itself enough, based on cases I've read elsewhere..depends on the Judge I guess. POPLA eventually provided me a copy sent by LCP of the land registry property register which shows LCP as the leaseholder, although the prohibitions and restrictions are not detailed. It simply states "There are excepted from the effect of registration all estates, rights, interests, powers and remedies arising upon, or by reason of, any dealings made in breach of the prohibition or restriction ag
  4. I'm no expert on land owners, but the PPC has a lease so effectively owns the land for the duration of the lease - at the end of the lease the land reverts back to the original owner. LCP describe themselves as owner/occupier/operator and told me their was no 'contract' with the landowner because of this - they say they have Locus Standi.
  5. In the NTK LCP 'deducted' 11 minutes grace period even though no payment was made. the claim was for a 5 minute overstay, and even that only allowed 1 minute for 'entry' and reading signs etc.. to me it looks an absolute no win for them,but you never know. LCP have quoted many other appeals for 15/16 minute overstays which were dismissed by POPLA, no surprise there... LCP are claiming breach of contract, but as far as I am concerned the procedures needed for acceptance of the contract were not met, so it's likely trespass , if that makes any difference in the scheme of thin
  6. Since received letters from DCA and Solicitors,adding costs which are above the BPA guidelines last day to pay up was 11 Feb 2018 ...not heard anything yet, but... Driver entered car park, dropped off friend then went to read the signs about parking - took over 8 minutes. ..then friend returned. ..driver and friend faffed about as they were heading straight to Portsmouth for ferry, so luggage to sort out first after shop . ..then got in car and eventually left. Time clocked on ANPR 16 minutes in total. Subsequent info - Signs have no advertising consent,
  7. 1 Date of the infringement - 8 june 2017 2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] - 16 June 2017 and 20 July 2017 3 Date received 3 August 2017 (on holiday) 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [y/n?] - Yes 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? -Yes 6 Have you appealed? {y/n?] post up your appeal] yes to POPLA Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up Yes 7 Who is the parking company? LCP Parking Services Ltd 8. Where exactly [carpark nam
  8. I'm pleased to see someone talking sense.. It's total nonsense for BPA to suggest that the time taken from you make entry thru' ANPR, to the time you actually drive around, find a space, get out, go and read 1,000 word T&C's, read the camera sign and then go to the machine and see how much it would cost...whether you then pay, or not... does not form part of a grace period. It must apply to everyone who enters the car park. No contract acceptance has been made until you pay, because you can't read the signs unless you park up (unless you drive slowly backwards and forwards).
  9. 13.1 states time must be allowed for a driver to read the signs before any contract is formed...(however long it takes to read the relevant sign/s..?) 13.4 says you must be allowed a minimum 10 minutes to leave the car park after parking. I cannot see how being allowed time to read the signs is part of the same 10 minutes allowed to leave the car park after parking, surely it must be both are allowed ?
  10. What is the consensus on the grace periods the BPA have in their CoP ? The latest BPA CoP from january 2018 says this - 13.1 If a driver is parking without your permission, or at locations where parking is not normally permitted they must have the chance to read the terms and conditions before they enter into the ‘parking contract’ with you. If, having had that opportunity, they decide not to park but choose to leave the car park, you must provide them with a reasonable grace period to leave, as they will not be bound by your parking contract. 13.2 If the parking location is one
  11. well done .. Thank goodness for sites like this one where people can go to for help and advice.
  12. Thank you for the clarification. From personal experience I did ask for the agreement within a SAR request because the one they sent via a CCA was illegible. I wanted to be sure of my ground that a legible one wouldn't emerge later, should the dispute get out of hand. The bank (not natwest) spent ages backwards and forwards attempting to send my a legible agreement, as I dug my heels in. So while it may not be a requirement, in this case they either didn't know that or were just being conscientious ?? The ultimate outcome was this bank gave up in the end, and while they did not actually s
  13. for clarification, the CCA request can be satisfied with reconstituted documents, but a SAR must include the originals (copied) if they exist ? Thus if a SAR does not include an all singing and dancing agreement it's fair to assume that there wasn't one at the outset..is that a fair conclusion. Say it is, then is there any point in asking for a CCA request..why not just go for the SAR..? (I know you have to pay £10 for the latter)..
  • Create New...