Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Miss_J

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Clearly you are well versed on this topic and I am trying to keep up but it seems each time you hit me with more info I was uanware of lol. Let's break this down to help me out.... If the driver is the one who is sued and not the RK then why do so many companies threaten the RK by citing law that says they will be responsible if they don't name the driver? In this case with CP Parking, they keep talking about the driver only. How are CP Plus's letters not POFA compliant and does this nullify any claim they try to make in the two instances they're hassling me over? Obviously t
  2. Why would a judge award the £100 if there's a lack of contractual liability? If they can end up getting the £100 anyway then why has the advice in this and other threads been to ignore or reply back by laughing in their face (especially when not POFA compliant and so they have negated their entire claim(?
  3. The threats were from the parking company themselves - not a DCA - and they looked very similar to the original letters that I uploaded: pictures of my car entering and leaving, close ups of my licence plate, times and dates of the offences etc. The difference is that they were titled 'legal action pending' and said as I had failed to respond to the original letter the deadline has passed to settle for their original charge of £100 and bumped the fee to £140 - saying that to avoid the matter being passed to their legal team (LOL!) and further charges that I must pay within 14 days
  4. PCN PCN.pdf Good to see I can upload now. Here are the 2 original charge notices. Identical except for different times and charge notices. I've also received a legal threat letter for both incidents now.
  5. I get: " You have used all of the attachment space you are allowed. Manage Attachments to free up space and when I click to manage it says: 'You have used 2.58 MB of your 500 kB attachment limit'. I am trying to upload is 443kb (a reduction from 4.95mb).
  6. I've used up my data allowance for this thread so I see no paperclip or 'choose files' option and nor do I see a way to delete what I've previously uploaded. I only have the option to insert an image from a URL or an existing, uploaded attachment.
  7. Not sure what is going on but I don't have the option anymore to upload an attachment (pdf) for you to see the original NTKs.
  8. Hi guys, Sorry for the delay. For both I've received a charge notice and reminder and for one of them, a 'legal action pending' letter. I've also received no help from Tesco. Notices: In: 10:27 - 16/01/2019 Out: 15:59 - 16/01/2019 In: 20:01 - 19/01/2019 Out: 10:32 - 20/01/2019 The legal action pending letter is claiming an extra £40 and threatening damage to my credit file but if I understand correctly, this is toothess smoke and mirrors: that they cannot add extra costs to a parking charge and the threat of credit rating damage is misrepresentation - im
  9. Correction to my earlier message, their letters DO state I was the RK at the time but even so, they are still only chasing the driver whereas others companies say that unless the driver is named, they have a legal right to chase the RK for the debt. I edited times and dates because I didn't want to be identified if CP Plus snoop these forums.
  10. additional text re inserted ..dx They didn't use the word 'fines' I did. . PCN.pdf
  11. Howdy, I have two charges from a company called CP Plus for stays I made at a Tesco car park that was previously monitored by Parking Eye. On both occasions they are trying to do me for double dipping - a 5 hour stay and a 14 hour stay when on both occasions I was there for 15 mins max. Curiously, neither letter mentions POFA, nor states I am the RK, nor compel me under law to name the RK or driver yet both do state they don't know who is the RK, that only the driver is required to pay the fines ans this is weird because past fines from Parking Eye and Euro Car Parks say that the RK is
  12. Thank for the heads-up re one ticket per thread. This is the 'standard' CAG response that I was told to send whenever I get a NTK: 'As RK I am not liable for this charge. Cancel this charge or alternatively issue a valid code for POPLA. At POPLA I shall be demanding a full breakdown of the genuine pre estimate of loss that this charge must represent. I am under no obligation to name the driver of the vehicle at the time of the event. No further correspondence will be entered into.' What is a PAP? How do I fight on the basis that their ANPR is crap without them
  13. Date of the infringement 16.09.2018 2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] I don't know as I don't have the NTK anymore 3 Date received I don't know when I got the NTK but the Letter Before County Claim was dated 02.01.2019 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [y/n?] I don't know 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? I don't know 6 Have you appealed? {y/n?] post up your appeal]Yes. I posted the standard CAG appeal via the online appeal
  14. Apologies for the delay but I've been trying to find all previous correspondence but I don't have any so the history is as follows: 1) they sent me an NTK 2) I appealed on their website 3) they rejected my appeal 4) they eventually wrote to me to say the debt is still outstanding 5) I ignored the letter 6) they eventually sent this letter before county court action I now attach the 10 page letter I got.
  • Create New...