Private Parking Tickets - General discussion points

[crem]

I have always paid my fines (not that I have had many) but this time I thought I'd do some investigation before I pay and now I'm at 60% willingness to pay however the more I think of it the more I want to say stuff em! From some of the post I have noticed that Court summons were sent, however no one really has posted if they went to court and what the result was... - still got a few days before the £60 turns to £100...

 

any advice would be greatly appreciated...

 

It's not a fine, it's an invoice!!

 

Disabled and Parent/Child bays on private car parks have no legal basis to enforce parking, although courtesy would suggest you should avoid them if you can.

 

As advised, read the stickies about these charges, then;

 

Do not write to them

DO not telephone them

Do not reply to their letters

Do not pay them.

 

I hope your 60% has dropped the 6 now, and I don't mean dropped 6 to 54% but dropped the "6" to make it 0%!

Edited May 5, 2009 by crem

[letshelp]

As Lamma has stated just ignore it really is a mail based [problem].

regards

[crem]

sorry about this, but what are the stickies?

 

The threads on the main Parking Page above the thick blue line are the stickies (meaning they "stick" at the top of the page and never drop off) denoted by the grafic of the drawing pin in the left margin.

also has anyone gone to court with ukcps?

 

Very very few as far as I know and even less, if any, to actually lose.

 

what tmplate letter is to be used if you admitted to be the driver...?

 

None! Do not write anything at all to them. The less info they have the better. Best if they don't even know you exist.

 

.

.

[Unhapppy Daddy]

.

.

Too late for that, as I called them to find out why my ticket had not been put onto their system...

Well it has now and I can say that the details on their system has an error on it, however the parking ticket shows details as should.

 

The question I have is - if this is a [problem] why have these companies not cottoned on to the existing loophole and closed it?

 

One more... inregards to now ignoring them - if they do end up sending court summons how do I build up a defence to something I have done... This is the reason I would not want to state that I was not the driver as I do not like to lie at all -

[letshelp]

The question I have is - if this is a [problem] why have these companies not cottoned on to the existing loophole and closed it?

 

Because the 'loopholes' as you call them are the consumer protection laws, the law of contract and the simple fact that a private company cannot issue fines/penalties. The business model of these companies relies upon, bluff, bluster and threats to frighten the recipient into paying, which all to sadly works.

 

One more... inregards to now ignoring them - if they do end up sending court summons how do I build up a defence to something I have done... This is the reason I would not want to state that I was not the driver as I do not like to lie at all -

 

If you should be the 1 in 10,000,000 they actually try to take to court, it is not like the Council or the Police, who have the law behind them, the PPC would actually be taking you to court for breach of contract for damages. To suggest that their loss for your overstay or whatever in a free car park is in the region of, £50 is ridiculous and is clearly a fine/penalty, which as I have said they cannot issue. Also there are some excellent people on this site who would help you with all aspects of any case brought against you. So relax, and get on with your life.

regards

Edited May 6, 2009 by letshelp
no sugar in my tea

[Unhapppy Daddy]

regards

 

Ok then, this will be a new venture for me... I will sit and wait for the nasty letters (should they ever arrive as the details they have put on their online payment area are wrong... so hopefully they have not noticed the error and when it comes to contacting the DVLA they will get the wrong details - if any at all...)

 

Should this go down the court path then I'll be in touch. At least I now know that the shopping center has a different area for parental parking, so I wont be using the disabled bays like we have been doing for the past 3 years.

 

SO if I now get it I should just sit tight and ignore (but keep) all their correspondence - at what time should I reply to their mail - never?

[juliusceasor]

One more... inregards to now ignoring them - if they do end up sending court summons how do I build up a defence to something I have done... This is the reason I would not want to state that I was not the driver as I do not like to lie at all -

 

 

Think of it this way.

 

They think they know who you are but they have to prove it. You are under no obligation to help them. Consider it your (American) 5 th amendment or in the UK you can refuse to give evidence. Now you don't have to incriminate yourself and you don't have to lie. If you are asked whether you are the driver you don't have to answer. If you wish to say anything just ask them to prove you were the driver. They can't. They can only prove you were the registered keeper. End of.

 

You haven't lied you just haven't incriminated yourself.

[letshelp]

Should this go down the court path then I'll be in touch.

 

That's what we are here for..

 

At least I now know that the shopping center has a different area for parental parking, so I wont be using the disabled bays like we have been doing for the past 3 years.

 

Parental parking and disabled bays on a private car park have no legal status whatsoever.

 

SO if I now get it I should just sit tight and ignore (but keep) all their correspondence

 

Correct

 

- at what time should I reply to their mail - never?

 

Correct again, never

 

regards

[barney_gumble]

Hi there,

 

First of all, I'd like to say thanks to the great posters on here, who encouraged me to not give in and pay up to Euro Car parks.

 

My story so far is I have sent my first reply "I was not driving the car that day ... please take it up with the driver concerned...".

 

I have received a second letter that's a little bit tricky and was wondering if anyone could offer some advice. Here's the relevant chunk of the letter:

 

 

The car park in question is on private land and upon entering such land vehicles are subject to the Rules and Regulation of parking as shown on the signage. The signage quite clearly states that if your vehicle is in contravention of the rules and regulations of the car park then a Parking Charge Notice will be issued.

 

When entering a pay and display car park it is the responsibility of the driver to obtain and clearly display a valid ticket and therefore the notice was issued correctly.

 

Under section 143 (1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 - the keeper should know at all times who is driving a vehicle and to ensure they are insured (*if a keeper allows a vehicle to be driven without insurance they are guilty of a criminal offence)

 

By stating many people have access to a vehicle and as a result the defendant cannot state who had it at any one given date/time then they are confirming that they did not know who was driving and therefore cannot be certain the vehicle was insured.

 

Please provide details of the driver of the car on this date within 10 days of this letter and confirm whether the car was being driven with your authority. If the car had been stolen or driven without your authority, please provide details of your report of this to the police.

 

Please make a payment of £70 ... etc

 

Any suggestions... ? Thanks!

[MalMonroe]

Hi, barney_gumble -

All I can say, after having been through a really traumatic time with another private company, Excel parking in Sheffield last year is -

1. Don't panic

2. Don't give in

3. The notice is a PARKING Charge Notice and not a PENALTY CN, which to me now means 'not worth the paper it's written on'.

After months of wrangling, my 'fine' was reduced to £10, which I also refused to pay - more out of stubborness than anything else!

I received two debt collectors letters for sums of £130 (plucked out of the air since their original claim was for £60) which I sent back to the debt collectors telling them to contact their client (Excel) since I owed them nothing and was prepared to go to court to prove it.

 

They are NOT the law and they are NOT entitled to any more information from you. It's up to them to prove the point/who was driving, etc. Don't let them scare you with talk of going to court or lack of insurance, etc. because they don't have any proof of that either - basically don't give in!

Good luck!

[barney_gumble]

Hi Mal Monroe, thanks. I certainly won't be giving in, just hoping someone could give any pointers to countering their spiky letter.

 

I was thinking of something along the lines of:

 

"The vehicle may have been driven by any one of a number of insured drivers, and I do not keep records of who was driving and when.

I deny that this means the vehicle may have been driven by an uninsured driver, not that this is of any concern to you."

Edited May 16, 2009 by barney_gumble

[juliusceasor]

Hi Mal Monroe, thanks. I certainly won't be giving in, just hoping someone could give any pointers to countering their spiky letter.

"

 

Therein lies the problem, entering into a conversation with them is what draws you in. I would try to extract yourself without committing to further correspondence.

Perhaps along the following lines..

 

I have indicated to you I am the keeper of the vehicle not the driver. It is for you to establish who was driving at the time as they are responsible for dealing with your invoice. As you are unable to furnish me with this information I am unable to enter into further correspondence with you.

[MalMonroe]

Hi barney gumble

 

If it were me, I wouldn't respond at all - keeping correspondence going just makes them think that you are worried, in my opinion. You may very well be worried but they don't need to know. I know that others on this site would say the less you say the better, as that was their advice to me and - it worked! The onus is on THEM to prove exactly who was driving - they obviously don't have a clue, so you are in a strong position. I'm also intrigued that they ask you for driver's details and then go on to advise about paying the fine it does seem like a lot of bluff and bluster on their part, to me.

 

I hope this is helpful, does anyone else on this thread have any thoughts?

crem, lamma, letshelp??

[Unhapppy Daddy]

Well UKCPS have started their paper chase....

 

I am now just hoping that all ends well... I do at times think to myself though - What if all the advise on this site is just them making us believe that we can get away with it to get the fee higher... Then again perhaps I'm thinking too much into it...

I am going to take the advice of ignoring letters but keeping them, however, if they do get debt collectors involved should I not then get responding - not that they end up on my doorstep with some heavies....

[lamma]

Just ignore them from now on. you have done enough. Plus their 'interpretation' of the RTA is complete and utter twaddle (am being very polite with 'twaddle'). It is Perky twaddle as well. Misleading, inaccurate and rubbish. Every time they send another letter have a smile at the money they are wasting. Or better yet stick it back the post with a return to sender and specify Simon Renshaw-Smith's home address with a note suggesting he employ qualified legal staff that can read statutes and help Excel abide by them. Ignore these comedians from now on.

[MalMonroe]

I agree with lamma - no contact at all. They aren't the law - threats of debt collectors are just that - threats. Even if the debt collector writes to you, you just write back and say the dispute has not yet been resolved and refer them back to their client. This works, I know, I did it!

[juliusceasor]

Well UKCPS have started their paper chase....

 

I am now just hoping that all ends well... I do at times think to myself though - What if all the advise on this site is just them making us believe that we can get away with it to get the fee higher... Then again perhaps I'm thinking too much into it...

I am going to take the advice of ignoring letters but keeping them, however, if they do get debt collectors involved should I not then get responding - not that they end up on my doorstep with some heavies....

 

No because as has been stated the debt collectors can not collect a debt that is not established only a court can do that (establish a debt is owed). secondly the case is in dispute they should refer back to the issuing party. that's all you have to say.

 

Don't worry nobody is trying to con you on here.

[MalMonroe]

Also agree with Julius Ceasor - and definitely, nobody is trying to con anyone, no. I can assure you that I have been through this myself and come out of it without having to pay anyone a penny ha'penny. I must admit to getting very annoyed on occasion but stuck to my guns - and kept referring to this forum - people are very helpful and supportive. (Also see previous posts on here, there are nineteen pages now but just dip into some of the others - similar problems, same advice. It's all reassuring.

Hope I have helped in some small way, too.

[Unhapppy Daddy]

Ok then... here we go... whats the worst that can happen...

 

I have not responded to this letter and wont. I will just keep a file and keep all the bumpf they send and think of the poor trees that have suffered for no reason.

 

Will keep the forum updated with whatever UKCPS sends...

 

Would be good though if it would be possible to split the forum by Parking companies, just to compare what one is going through... and perhaps see a pattern evolve.

[barney_gumble]

I was thinking of a simple one liner:

 

"I am under no obligation to provide any more information to you."

 

But I might leave it altogether, to be honest.

 

 

 

It's funny you mention threats of Debt Co llectors - my first letter had one, but the second never!

Edited May 16, 2009 by barney_gumble

[crem]

I was thinking of a simple one liner:

 

"I am under no obligation to provide any more information to you."

 

But I might leave it altogether, to be honest.

 

 

Please go with your line 3.

 

You have sent one letter too many already (I think you said you have only sent one which is one too many)

 

Don't have any further contact with them at all. As lamma says, they are attempting to confound you by mixing RTA info regarding insurance etc with a simple PPC invoice.

 

My car has a fully open insurance policy for any driver (rare nowadays I know but as a driving instructor it''s a bit difficult to name the possible drivers isn't it ) so although I can be fully confident it is correctly insured at all times, why should I bother myself to make a note of who is driving it at any particular time.

[MalMonroe]

Dear Barney

 

I'm with crem, 100%!

There's that old saying, "least said, soonest mended."

You don't want to aggravate them, best to leave well enough alone.

(oh, sorry, there with the sayings again!)

 

Anyone else can also drive my car with my permission, as long as they have fully comprehensive insurance - and I can drive theirs, again with their permission - but in both cases the insurance is reduced to third party. They are just talking rubbish.

[barney_gumble]

Cheers Guys!

 

I'm so glad I found this place!

[letshelp]

I am going to take the advice of ignoring letters but keeping them,

 

Good...

 

however, if they do get debt collectors involved should I not then get responding - not that they end up on my doorstep with some heavies....

 

No-one is going to turn up at your door.....But if by some miracle it did happen, what would you say to a total stranger who stopped you in the street and told you that you owe them £100? Debt collectors have no powers whatsoever.

regards

[lamma]

Just read the RTA. Their stance so far wide of the real statute that its laughable, really really laughable.