Very Urgent Help Req PLEASE! - County Parking PCN Rec'vd.

[accord-mk]

I received a PCN on my vehicle whilst someone borrowed it to visit a family member in hospital last week. I have scanned images if they are of any use? but I am a little worried that I may not be able to dispute it, as the car was parked in a car park of an NHS Hospital, but was still given the PCN by County Parking Enforcement Agency Ltd, a PPC.

 

The vehicle was left for 20 mins, as the machine did not take notes, and it took 10-15 mins to waste money in their shop in order to obtain change, when the driver returned to the car, there was a "Parking Notice Enclosed" wallet, with a Parking Charge Number advertised on the top.

 

Would I be in my rights, or would it be adviseable to ignore this, then dispute it, as suggested on many many forums?

 

Any help would be gratefully appreciated, and if I could post images, I have them scanned in and uploaded to photobucket.

 

Thanks in Advance,

 

Ann Ony-Mous

[Conniff]

Check first of all if it is a proper PCN issued by the council.

 

Just had a look at their site and they are a private company.

 

If it is not, and it will have the address on it, then it is not enforceable.

 

Why not put your scan here for checking - remove any identifying words first though.

Edited July 7, 2008 by Conniff
added information

[accord-mk]

Hi Conniff, thanks for the quick response.

 

It does not allow images to be attached unless I have made 5 posts or more.... however... Images are located at photobucket .com/albums/a132/mylupo/parking/

 

The address on the PCN is a Po Box in Northampton, and the ticket machine (when paid for) gives out tickets in the name of MK General Hospital.

 

Thanks for the assistance.

[lamma]

a [problem].

a fraud (fraud act 2006 section 2) and in violation of

The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 No.

 

don't even bother with them

[accord-mk]

Great, I dont suppose you can advise, is it because they are threatening further action through a county court or a debt collector? And because they threat to take actions which cannot legally be taken? Or is it under other provisions of the mentioned laws?

 

Thanks very much for your assistance, I will certainly be donating to keep this site alive.

[Conniff]

deleted as not required.

Edited July 7, 2008 by Conniff
Correction

[lamma]

it is faking an official ticket - and that yellow cover envelope is a big no no as well.

you need to know the proper parking regs and the laws they are breaking.

Just keep all the letters they will send you safe - you may get a chance to use them against them !

[Conniff]

The threat of debt collectors is a give away. The police or council take it through the court and then send in bailiffs.

[correction999]

a [problem].

a fraud (fraud act 2006 section 2) and in violation of

The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 No.

 

don't even bother with them

 

Where under section (2) are they comiting an offence ? - This parking ticket/invoice has been taken off by the driver and the (presume) RK has now found, so the person who parked and accepted the contract (OK OK .. if the terms were clear ... blah, blah, blah)

 

And under which section (EXACTLY) are they breaching the unfair trading regulations act ??

 

I am NOT saying you are wrong, but just reading the ticket, to which the DRIVER has taken off ... just want to know your angle ??

 

We can all post whole acts / legilsation .. but people need to know in their specific case what is relevant to them ...

 

YOU may be right, I am not guiding to an argument but just ACTUAL clarification in this 1 case of the acts you have qutoed the PPC have broken.

 

The RK should just say who was driving and get on with his life, he borrowed the vehicle to someone in good faith, why should he deal with this ??? let the person who parked deal with it ... I am sure the RK has something better to do with his life....

 

If I borrowed my car to someone (GENUINE) and he/she got a ticket of any description (1) I would be MAD (2) I would expect them to deal with it and not give me any hastle and I CERTAINLY would not take any blame/hastle for it....

Edited July 7, 2008 by correction999

[accord-mk]

I see your point too. I would like to know under which acts or laws they are breaching, as it could become a legal battle, but at the same time, the driver did breach the terms of parking too by not purchasing a , so no fraud was commited to a degree, however, they did take the p*** by not giving the driver of the car time to get some change to use the machine.

 

I dont want to pay the fine, granted, but who would? It's sick to think that the car was parked right next to A & E of a hospital, facing away from the signs, and that someone out there is targeting people who may be mourning, or may be attending an emergency, or a dead person etc etc.

 

These people need putting in their place, and such sites like this are perfect to help Joe Public from being targets of money-grabbing parking companies like this.

 

Thanks for information so far peeps, all this because the person who borrowed the car did not have £2 on them to buy a ticket!!

[lamma]

correction999,

you can find out in court next time you take a parker there. Let me know one of your car parks and we can do it face to face it court if you like.

Or consult your in-house legal team maybe. or just read the Acts - as a PPC yourself you need to be familiar with them, plus a few others.

 

accord-mk,

you are under NO obligation to name the driver nor can the PPC force you to do so. Even though one or two have have some off the wall ideas about this.

Crrectionn99 is 'pro PPC' as you ca see.

penalties unenforceable, only loss can be claimed (if any) and then it is due to the landowner. Almost invariably the contract the PPC has with the landowner does not confer rights. if you owned a massive car park would you give landowner rights to a shady company that makes its money by tricking people and has a business model with no basis in law. Me neither.

happy to oblige via PM if the ACTs are troublesome. Before stepping into the ACTs suggest you read the PPC stickies to get a good grounding then you will easily be able to identify the failings of this PPC (and all the others). Then get familiar with real council issued tickets so you can see the differences. the transgressions against the two acts mentioned should jump off the page at you then. but it does probably take a couple of hours of study. more fun than the telly as afterwards you can advise all your friends and they in turn can pass it on to their friends.

Edited July 7, 2008 by lamma

[Conniff]

mk, it is 'not' a fine, only courts can fine, this is a penalty charge and should be refered as such.

 

Did he in fact breach the terms of parking, does it say that you are not allowed to leave to get change.

 

In one of the very very rare occasions one of these have gone to court, the judge asked if it said anything under the 'you will be liable to a charge' of how much that charge will be. He then went on to say 'as it does not, then no charge can be levied'.

 

You will receive letters increasing the charge with each letter, but they are not enforceable in the courts. I have posted the following on a few occasions, this seems like a good time to repeat it.

 

But the far more important issue was that the judge found there was no justification for the £100 fine. He said it was a penalty charge and therefore unenforceable by the court.

[correction999]

correction999,

you can find out in court next time you take a parker there. Let me know one of your car parks and we can do it face to face it court if you like.

Or consult your in-house legal team maybe. or just read the Acts - as a PPC yourself you need to be familiar with them, plus a few others.

 

As normal, if you dont know the answer just avoid answering the question.

 

If you say something breaks a law, then you should give the OP the reasons why (not just posting a link to the whole act) - This way the OP can easily understand.

 

(btw, true I work for a PPC, but we dont take people to court as we clamp and theres no need to)

[battyboomboom]

Fraud Act 2006 (c. 35)

 

Just incase you CBA to read it, here it is:

2 Fraud by false representation

 

(1) A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and CHECK

(b) intends, by making the representation—

(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or CHECK

(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2) A representation is false if—

(a) it is untrue or misleading, and CHECK

(b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading. CHECK

(3) “Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of—

(a) the person making the representation, or

(b) any other person.

(4) A representation may be express or implied. CHECK

(5) For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).

 

Therefore, as a result of making the representation that "you are required to pay" and "(2)(a) it is untrue or misleading, which it is as the PCN is designed to mimic a Council PCN, and it addresses the RK as being responsible for the alleged invoice, and (b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading." clearly an offence under said act has been committed. Plus the yellow cover is further false representation.

 

 

In addition, the Administration of Justice Act 1970 would cover this as well.

[Conniff]

PPCs also rely on the fact that by driving into the carpark, they have agreed a 'contract'. That is not so - The mere fact of agreement alone does not make a contract. Both parties to the contract must provide consideration if they wish to sue on the contract.

 

This is the reason that private tickets alway fail in the courts when defended.

[lamma]

yes.

but would add just one of several reasons all of them fatal to the PPC's case.

[accord-mk]

Hi, just a quick update on this one. I ignored the PPC. I got a letter today asking me to supply them with the driver details if it was not me, and failure to settle the amount within 7 days "may" result in further action being taken through a debt collector or the county court incurring further costs and interest.

 

Could anyone suggest whether or not I should respond and advise them that they should raise this with the driver of the vehicle at the time?

 

I dont want to write to them, but if I dont, surely I cannot justify telling a debt collector that it is in dispute at present?

 

They are also asking for £80 now instead of the original £40.

 

Apparently according to the letter, the offence commited is "Parked in a private car park without clearly displaying a valid permit."

 

Any information would be gratefully appreciated.

[lamma]

just ignore them. you are under NO OBLIGATION WHATSOEVER to give them any information.

 

and there is no 'debt'.

 

County Parking's paperwork means they have even less chance than the 'normal' PPC. i.e. sub zero.

[accord-mk]

Is this because of the way they have dealt with it, or is it because of the threatening wording, or just all of the above mentioned law breaches etc?

 

Thanks.

[lamma]

all of the above.

plus its an unenforceable [problem] in the first place.

 

ignore them, they will go away.

[accord-mk]

Cool. Thanks lamma, you and others on this forum really are a great help!

 

Since using this site, I have disputed another ppc given to my grandfather and got it removed in 1 letter.

[lamma]

Brilliant !

Put the text of your letter up here. It may make it to the hallowed ground of the templates !

[jimmylesaint]

hmmm

[jimmylesaint]

Glad the message is going out about these lecherous scummers.!I find it particularly despicable that they cruise the hospital car parks! Also that the NHS lets them, considering we the tax payer probably paid for the car park to be built.! As for "clampers" Correction9999 my day in court is approaching, and so is my money back, plus interest and cost:) However, next time i'm clamped the clamper will end up with a criminal record:)

[accord-mk]

Got another reply again today, just as you predicted, advising that I have 7 days to pay or it will be passed on to their debt collection agency?

 

Do I need to write to them at this point, as I believe that you advise to tell them that it is "in dispute" so they are unable to take any of my possessions. However, it is not in dispute in reality as the PPC are not aware that I am not paying it are they?

 

Any advice on this point guys? They are also threatening a second £10 admin charge if I dont pay, can they do this?

 

Ideally I was going to write them a letter, advising of the law's/acts they are in breach of, also telling them to get lost (Harassment act) then tell them that any further letters received from them will result in me charging them £10 for each letter I have to reply with. Would anyone advise against this?