Private Parking Tickets - General discussion points

[Guest shandyhaggis]

Many Thanks for that. I appreciate the heads up. Ive taken the precaution of changing the PC details to protect the innocent

[Steven_A]

This forum is great, thank you for such a positive force!

 

I just need a bit of hand-holding here, I received a 'fine' in the post for being 17mins over in a car park in Lancaster, owned by Civil Enforcement Ltd it seems. Now I ignored the first one and indeed the second request and have now received a 'Total Outstanding' of over £200 from a 'newlyn' of Northampton, who have been instructed to recover the Parking Charge.

 

I'm getting a little worried as this is a lot of money and I'm told that I could face further action at considerable cost and not to ignore the letter.

 

Is it time to fire off a template letter to them? And to who, this 'newlyn' or Civil Enforcement Ltd?

 

Sorry if this is covered a million times, I just need a little assurance...

 

Thank you in advance.

Edited October 29, 2009 by Steven_A

[letshelp]

I just need a bit of hand-holding here, I received a 'fine'

 

It's not a fine, it is an invoice, i.e. begging letter for your money.

 

in the post for being 17mins over in a car park in Lancaster, owned by Civil Enforcement Ltd it seems. Now I ignored the first one and indeed the second request

 

That's the way to deal with these cowboys.

and have now received a 'Total Outstanding' of over £200 from a 'newlyn' of Northampton, who have been instructed to recover the Parking Charge.

 

And how are they going to do that? By sending you even more threatening letters

 

I'm getting a little worried as this is a lot of money and I'm told that I could face further action at considerable cost and not to ignore the letter.

 

Could, may, possibly anything but definately, why do you think that is? I will tell you, because these clowns will go nowhere near a court and despite what the say in their letter, you really should ignore it.

Is it time to fire off a template letter to them?

 

No

 

And to who, this 'newlyn' or Civil Enforcement Ltd?

 

Just clowns with no powers whatsoever.

 

Sorry if this is covered a million times, I just need a little assurance...

 

Thank you in advance.

regards

[Steven_A]

So, they have no power to collect this money and no way of taking this further? I really don't fancy some CCJ's against me for 17 mins of parking. At what point do I send a letter then... I mean what sort of communications from them should I expect?

 

Thanks for the response, starting to feel a tad more confident.

[Baldy Man]

Dont send anything! Sit it out! They are burglars with absolutely no justification for their illegal "charges" and threats. They will subject you to even more harrassment if you reply - because they will think theyve got you worried and you are going to crack! Dont - just like the rest who have posted good sense on this site before you.

[his_nibs]

Steven_A,

 

You and I are apparently in the same boat. I have been cited with a "parking contravention" by said cretins, which could even be at the same car park in L***aster, since CEL only monitor 2 in the city. My case involves the K****way site. I have no intention to pay a single penny to them, let alone the ridiculous demand for £150.

 

The so-called "28 day period" (I have the same invoices as you) is coming to an end and I am waiting to see what they intend to do. I am defending this case irrespective of how they approach it as they simply have no way of proving either existence of contract or, in the improbably slight likelihood that they can, of my liability towards them. That said, if you could be more precise about what exactly they are saying that would appreciated as I could prepare a defence in advance.

 

Be confident, however you decide to proceed, as the odds are stacked in your favour. I have fought these types off before with success and will do so again. The advice you have received is perfectly valid (that is, to ignore) but I appreciate that you may be having a few panics about this.

 

It hasn't been explained to you how this advice is reasonable, so I shall give you my take on it; namely, that non-communication cannot be taken as an implicit admission of liability in the eyes of the law and in spite of what this company claims, is a position that you can take that in no way affects your legal rights to mount a defence at a later date should the need arise. Because you are under no obligation to converse with them out of court (they are not a legal authority, after all), it cannot be considered as being unreasonable and don't let them tell you otherwise. They want you to respond because they know that there is a good chance of you, not being a legal professional, inadvertently admitting liability to them in writing - which you must of course avoid.

 

It is the prerogative of the plaintiff under the law to prove "in the balance of probabilities" that you are liable to them. They have what is termed "burden of proof" - they must prove you are liable to them. To do this, sufficient evidence must be presented to a magistrate. I can make an educated guess that the company will only be able to prove that you are the registered keeper and that the vehicle was parked on their clients' property. That will only be sufficient evidence to prove a case for liability when hell freezes over (you may not believe this, but it is true), so they are attempting to goad you into giving it to them. Again ... don't!

 

They need more information than they can prove without your co-operation. For example, they would have to prove existence of contract (dubious - hard to prove your identity, difficult to prove consent to be bound) and that damages were incurred (they weren't - it is a free car-park). They have not a hope of doing this without your admissions to those effects.

Bear in mind also that the owner of the park may be obliged under another contractual agreement to provide car-parking. I refer, of course, to planning regulations. In this case, I am fairly confident as a resident of the area that L***aster CC made such a stipulation in the case of both the K****way development and the Currys/Comet/Halfords site off North Road. You may want to have a look at this more thoroughly.

 

Look at it like this, though - if they had a case, you'd already have a CCJ because they wouldn't have bothered to write as by now they'd have simply been able to take it straight to court. You don't have a CCJ or even court papers. QED

 

I prefer to argue my case in writing, but in your case I'd advise not to say anything to them unless you are certain of what you are doing. If you do, then state your position and your defence, don't tell them anything that they don't know, don't answer their questions and demand that they prove their assumptions (and there will be many) by citing evidence. Avoid admitting to or denying anything that gives them information that they haven't already proven that they possess. This requires a bit of thought, and in most cases for most people I think it is better to ignore them totally.

 

Be confident though. Look around you at the examples you see - these charlatans can never win unless you let them.

 

his_nibs

Edited October 30, 2009 by his_nibs
Improper formatting

[Steven_A]

Thank you for that, yes, you assumptions about where and who are correct. I'll wait it out. On careful reading of the communications it does seem there is little official backing to their claims. By the way, your £140 will comfortably double with the next communication by the 'collectors'.

[lamma]

Steven_A,

 

You and I are apparently in the same boat. I have been cited with a "parking contravention" by said cretins, which could even be at the same car park in L***aster, since CEL only monitor 2 in the city. My case involves the K****way site. I have no intention to pay a single penny to them, let alone the ridiculous demand for £150.

 

The so-called "28 day period" (I have the same invoices as you) is coming to an end and I am waiting to see what they intend to do. I am defending this case irrespective of how they approach it as they simply have no way of proving either existence of contract or, in the improbably slight likelihood that they can, of my liability towards them. That said, if you could be more precise about what exactly they are saying that would appreciated as I could prepare a defence in advance.

 

Be confident, however you decide to proceed, as the odds are stacked in your favour. I have fought these types off before with success and will do so again. The advice you have received is perfectly valid (that is, to ignore) but I appreciate that you may be having a few panics about this.

 

It hasn't been explained to you how this advice is reasonable, so I shall give you my take on it; namely, that non-communication cannot be taken as an implicit admission of liability in the eyes of the law and in spite of what this company claims, is a position that you can take that in no way affects your legal rights to mount a defence at a later date should the need arise. Because you are under no obligation to converse with them out of court (they are not a legal authority, after all), it cannot be considered as being unreasonable and don't let them tell you otherwise. They want you to respond because they know that there is a good chance of you, not being a legal professional, inadvertently admitting liability to them in writing - which you must of course avoid.

 

It is the prerogative of the plaintiff under the law to prove "in the balance of probabilities" that you are liable to them. They have what is termed "burden of proof" - they must prove you are liable to them. To do this, sufficient evidence must be presented to a magistrate. I can make an educated guess that the company will only be able to prove that you are the registered keeper and that the vehicle was parked on their clients' property. That will only be sufficient evidence to prove a case for liability when hell freezes over (you may not believe this, but it is true), so they are attempting to goad you into giving it to them. Again ... don't!

 

They need more information than they can prove without your co-operation. For example, they would have to prove existence of contract (dubious - hard to prove your identity, difficult to prove consent to be bound) and that damages were incurred (they weren't - it is a free car-park). They have not a hope of doing this without your admissions to those effects.

 

Bear in mind also that the owner of the park may be obliged under another contractual agreement to provide car-parking. I refer, of course, to planning regulations. In this case, I am fairly confident as a resident of the area that L***aster CC made such a stipulation in the case of both the K****way development and the Currys/Comet/Halfords site off North Road. You may want to have a look at this more thoroughly.

 

Look at it like this, though - if they had a case, you'd already have a CCJ because they wouldn't have bothered to write as by now they'd have simply been able to take it straight to court. You don't have a CCJ or even court papers. QED

 

I prefer to argue my case in writing, but in your case I'd advise not to say anything to them unless you are certain of what you are doing. If you do, then state your position and your defence, don't tell them anything that they don't know, don't answer their questions and demand that they prove their assumptions (and there will be many) by citing evidence. Avoid admitting to or denying anything that gives them information that they haven't already proven that they possess. This requires a bit of thought, and in most cases for most people I think it is better to ignore them totally.

 

Be confident though. Look around you at the examples you see - these charlatans can never win unless you let them.

 

his_nibs

 

great post. and it explains the reason why PPCs always want you to 'appeal' in writing'. please stick around.

[theduffer]

Hi, just to tell you all that on the advice of a few regulars way back at the beginning of the year, I completly ignored all corespondence from the nice guys who gave me a ticket at Asda. A few letters arrived but after a while nothing came through the post. I quess they spend their time on those who are wary (as I was) to take the scumbags on.

 

Thanks for the advice.

[theduffer]

Lamma, Hi It was you that suggested not to reply and it worked, thanks for the advice.

[heinzbeanz47]

Hello i haven't been on for a while just thought i'd update. Basicially i'm getting scared.!!. I have had the letter that follows the £70 charge, and one after that , that stated court action , then one 2 days later!! Asking for prompt payment within 7 days or court will proceed and cost amounting to £175.... So Having spoken to my solicitor who didn't really know much about these scenarios ( parking [problem] companies) I am none the wiser as to what to do i am to scared to contact them and state my mitigating factors, because then i have corresponded and i don't want that! lol. Anyway i hope someone helps me out it's hard to sit tight when no one supports your actions. I feel like writing to them and saying that i will pay the initial £40 pound fine now! boo hoo help x:???:

[letshelp]

Hello i haven't been on for a while just thought i'd update. Basicially i'm getting scared.!!. I have had the letter that follows the £70 charge, and one after that , that stated court action , then one 2 days later!! Asking for prompt payment within 7 days or court will proceed and cost amounting to £175....

 

The purpose of the threatening letters is to scare you. If court was such a sure thing for these [problematic] do you honestly believe they would send you letter after letter threatening it?

Of course not it is designed to wear you down which sadly looks like it is working.

 

So Having spoken to my solicitor who didn't really know much about these scenarios ( parking [problem] companies)

 

Forget solicitors at this or indeed any stage, there is better advice on here from people who have actually been through what you are going through.

 

I am none the wiser as to what to do i am to scared to contact them and state my mitigating factors, because then i have corresponded and i don't want that! lol.

 

The adviced on this forum is crystal clear ignore all their correspondence, it is all bluff and bluster that will go away.

 

Anyway i hope someone helps me out it's hard to sit tight when no one supports your actions.

 

Everyone of this forum is supporting you and your policy of ignoring these clowns, you do reralise this is a [problem] don't you with no m ore credibility than the Nigerian emails?

 

I feel like writing to them and saying that i will pay the initial £40 pound fine now! boo hoo help x

 

So if I send you some threatening letters, even using some nice scary red ink demanding £1,000 for the advice I have given you, will you Pay?

If you want to give money away surely there is a charity more deserving of your money that the PPC [problematic].

 

Hold your nerve you will laugh about this in the future.

regards

[his_nibs]

heinzbeanz47, in response to your recent post:

 

Exercise caution if you choose to go down that particular route. Mitigation is a means of negotiating the extent of your liability but this will probably involve you having to make an admission of it in first instance. I would therefore suggest that you should avoid doing so unless it can be proven by the party in question that you are indeed liable. In the case of PPC's, they will normally find doing so very difficult, although the exact circumstances of your case aren't especially clear as yet.

 

I'd repeat advice issued previously and say that you need not feel under any pressure to communicate with the issuer of the ticket as they have no status as a legal authority. It is too easy to say the wrong thing and give them a case, which is the outcome that they are seeking. Non-communication is an effective defence in the greater majority of cases. If you feel the need to write to them at a later date, your right to do so is absolutely unaffected.

 

I would like to give you an example of the dangers of trying to mitigate a case, one which a close friend experienced - the chap in question was issued with a PPC for overstaying a time limit on a private car park, which served a retail complex. He was in a position to be able to prove by reciepts that not only had he remained on the complex at all times, but also that he had spent over three times the amount of money on site that the issuer was claiming in damages. So he chose to cite these facts in writing, believing that the claim would be dropped. He was spectacularly wrong.

 

When the final letter came through and the amount had, of course, accrued extra costs taking it to £200, we discussed the matter for the first time. I saw that in the manner in which he had worded his letter, he had made an acceptance of liability by proving that he was (as claimed by the PPC) present at the time, the driver of the vehicle, in full knowledge of the terms of contract and that he was in breach of those terms. I also pointed out that the amount spent was an irrelevence giving that the PPC was a sub-contractor of the retail park and that they would not care one iota about customer relations. My friend saw this and after much cursing chose to settle. I feel that he probably had no option.

 

I should point out that my friend had, some 10 years previously, attended a series of courses in (criminal) law as a professional requirement. The point is this; if you write, be careful. Anybody can make mistakes. He did - and he, in case you wonder, is a Police Officer.

 

Regards, his_nibs

[lamma]

Thank you, his_nibs. Cogent, clear and a perfect example. Hopefully more people will now realise why these companies always 'insist' on written appeals.

[letshelp]

I should point out that my friend had, some 10 years previously, attended a series of courses in (criminal) law as a professional requirement. The point is this; if you write, be careful. Anybody can make mistakes. He did - and he, in case you wonder, is a Police Officer.

 

Regards, his_nibs

I take it your friend did not consider the simple fact that a private company cannot issue fines or penalties.

So his courses in law and the fact he was/is a police officer did not stop him being taken in by these [problematic].

I take it he is wiser now?

regards

[Guest shandyhaggis]

Hi heinzbeanz47

 

I had the same problem a few weeks ago with a PCN from a parking compay. I sent a letter stating I wasnt the driver and that the car park company had to find the driver and pursue them instead. I also stated that I'd be happy to see them in court to settle the matter.

 

I got a letter a couple of days later to say that the car park company would drop the matter as a guesture of good will.

 

Not sure why the good will I certainly didnt ask for any.

 

Not sure if repling to them is a good idea or not, but I did and they backed off very quickly, I suspect it depends on the letter. I'm no legal expert all I can say is that I kept it simple, admitted nothing and called their bluff.

 

Regards

[his_nibs]

I take it your friend did not consider the simple fact that a private company cannot issue fines or penalties.

So his courses in law and the fact he was/is a police officer did not stop him being taken in by these [problematic].

I take it he is wiser now?

regards

 

He was certainly aware of the situation with regards the legal status (or lack thereof) of the ticket. However being a reasonable and fair-minded individual himself, I recall that he mistakenly believed that such organisations could be reasoned with "on appeal" and didn't expect the obvious trap which ultimately provided proof for breach of contract.

 

It was, of course, a surprisingly naive belief. It's a cruel world and we know these organisations to be far from reasonable. That said, today's understanding as to the nature of parking "[problematic]" is more advanced than it was in 2003, which I think was the year that this happened.

 

As an aside, PO's are naturally disinclined to become embroiled in legal disputes owing to pressures from within and are therefore demonstrably prone to seeking early resolution - this, by extension, only serves to highlight how easy it is for the ticketers to apply pressure upon the general public. Also, PO's are (by their own admission) not lawyers and are just as likely to make silly slip-ups as anyone else, at least so far as contractual law is concened.

 

I think that little episodes like this can be helpful to everyone and I have used my friend's experience to my own benefit when considering my response to such tickets. Oh, and for everybodies benefit, "my friend" is not an alter-ego of my own, hahaha! So please, read my remarks and judge for yourselves but please don't think that this constitutes "official" legal advice from an officer of the law.

[heinzbeanz47]

thanks letshelp, hisnibs, and shandy, I appreciate your comments, it is always reassuring to read time after time that i am doing the right thing and am not alone!. Will keep you updated on the site. I am still ignoring these wally's . Fingers crossed nothing much will become of it. x:roll:

[heinzbeanz47]

hi everyone me again as i wrote the last post i received a lettr again from UKPC. It reads

 

Further to our "Notice of Intended Litigation"

 

We have referred your case to our Client and proposed issuing County Court proceedings against you.

 

If the case reaches court and judgement is obtained costs may increse the debt as follows.....

 

Current balance....£70

Solicitors fees for issue of claim.....£50

Court fee issue of claim form......£30

Solicitors cost for getting judgement (by default)

Total .... £175

 

HOWEVER in order to avoid this, our CLIENT is prepared to accept a one off REDUCED payment of £56, providing this amount is paid within the next 7 days.

 

It goes on to say then about how to pay it and that i can view a selection of ccj's of people who have ignored our correspondence on this website drpl.co.uk

 

So Any feedback would be welcome!!!

 

 

Think i'll still ignore this matter x

[letshelp]

Further to our "Notice of Intended Litigation"

 

Worthless threat

 

We have referred your case to our Client and proposed issuing County Court proceedings against you.

 

 

If the case reaches court and judgement is obtained costs may increse the debt as follows.....

 

:lol:

 

Current balance....£70

Solicitors fees for issue of claim.....£50

Court fee issue of claim form......£30

Solicitors cost for getting judgement (by default)

Total .... £175

 

:lol::lol:

 

HOWEVER in order to avoid this, our CLIENT is prepared to accept a one off REDUCED payment of £56, providing this amount is paid within the next 7 days.

 

How kind, just like they would if they thought they had a cat in hells chance of a court victory.

 

It goes on to say then about how to pay it and that i can view a selection of ccj's of people who have ignored our correspondence on this website drpl.co.uk

 

Does it not mention, www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk for a list of all those who have ignored them and NOT got a ccj? surprising that!

So Any feedback would be welcome!!!

 

See above

 

 

Think i'll still ignore this matter x

 

The way to deal with these clowns is just that.

 

regards

[DMA]

hi everyone me again as i wrote the last post i received a lettr again from UKPC. It reads

 

Further to our "Notice of Intended Litigation"

 

We have referred your case to our Client and proposed issuing County Court proceedings against you.

 

It goes on to say then about how to pay it and that i can view a selection of ccj's of people who have ignored our correspondence on this website drpl.co.uk

 

Think i'll still ignore this matter x

 

Have faith HB47, this is the next best thing to a joke.

First, if they were serious, the solicitor wouldn't have to refer back to his client - if you didn't respond, they would have proceeded directly to court.

 

Second, you only get a CCJ if you don't pay a court ordered fine within a certain time. Even if you lost in court, which won't happen, you can avoid the problems of a CCJ.

 

Finally, if the list of CCJ's were examples of parking problems, the PPC's would be all over these forums and we'd have to shut up because they would be right!

 

I didn't even open the last letter from the solicitor to me. Aren't I brave

DMA

[mustang28]

Just thought I would post my experiences to date with UKPC.

 

One fine last year, clearly trying it on saying I was parked out of a bay. However I live a alone, panicked and paid it!

 

Second in early part of this year, I politely replied to all their letters declining to pay etc - not heard anything past the last threats from the debt collections firm in about July.

 

Third about a month after the second, i never bothered with replies. Just watched the exact same letters roll through the door and get added to the pile. I wasn't going to waste the stamps this time. Again heard nothing since August.

 

It's a complete joke, they scared me once but I've learnt my lesson. In all three occasions I was parked correctly and their evidence fails to show anything to the contary. But I more than welcome the chance to explain it in court if needs be!!

 

This site has been fantastic in the early days where I was still a little worried but I'm a big girl now (ok only 5.2 hehe) and I'm not scared of bullies LOL.

 

Thank you everyone!

[heinzbeanz47]

hello fellow short person (mustang28) lol. Thanks for the post, a girl after my own heart!. I'm so hoping this will go away before christmas but never mind if it doesn't. I know i won't be paying, and if i had planned to i would have very early on .....

 

I am very cross about this incident and i know the disabled bay disabled badge rules so it infuriated me even more that they actually wrote to me to tell me the rules of owning and parking in a disabled bay !! . ( my badge had blown off the dashboard onto floor in the wind when i shut my car door).

 

Anyway i refused to be bullied like you all on here also being only 5 feet tall ha.

 

I am on my first crusade and havent and won't give in xx;-)

[Princess_Cutie_pie]

Hi Guys

New to all this. Just wondered if someone could help, point me in the right direction pleae. My other half is going through this at the mo with a private parking comapny. Has ignored all correspondance to date. Now they have filed a court case through MCOL Northamptonshire. He needs to submit a defence claim ASAP. Any templates on here to help write up the defence so that it is convincing??

Many many thanks

[letshelp]

Hi Guys

New to all this. Just wondered if someone could help, point me in the right direction pleae. My other half is going through this at the mo with a private parking comapny. Has ignored all correspondance to date. Now they have filed a court case through MCOL Northamptonshire. He needs to submit a defence claim ASAP. Any templates on here to help write up the defence so that it is convincing??

Many many thanks

I thgink AL27 has one, send him a pm with a link to this thread.

regards