NCP - Railway Car Park PCCN's

[Welsh_Wonder]

Hi All

 

I have been sent two letters for two seperate PCCN events, The letters are below:

 

Dear xxxxxx

 

Re: Unpaid Parking Charge

PCN Number: LL02279***

Total Amount Due: £85.00

Vehicle Registration No. xx 52 XXX

Location: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Issue Date & Time: 18-01-08 at (blank)

 

A Parking Contravention Charge Notice (PCCN) was attached to the above mentioned vehicle and the driver should have paid; however, we have not yet received payment.

 

I have been advised by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, that you were the registered keeper of the vehicle at the relevant date and time. If you were the driver, you must pay the total amount due as stated above within 7 days from teh date of the letter.

 

In line with the Terms and Condistions of parking at the above site, you have incurred late payment chages which are included in the Total Amount now Due. Please send payment to the the address above and cheques shoudl be made payable to NCP Parking Services.

 

If you were not the driver at the time, please tell us who was driving by completing the details below.

 

Yours Sincerely,

 

Ellen Morris

Administration Supervisor

NCP Parking Services

 

======================================================

IMPORTANT NOTICE TO REGISTERED KEEPER

 

Under the Terms and Conditions associated with this excess parking charge it is important to note that every person who enters into a contract with the company for the parking of a vehicle at the Car Park, whether by purchasing a ticket or otherwise, does so on behalf of himself and all other persons having any proprietary possessory or other financial material interest in the vehicle and its contents.

 

please note that as a result of this, it is our intention to pursue the registered keeper/owner of the vehicle in the absence of driver details

=======================================================

 

Please advise as to what course of action I should take as I guess as previous posts have stated that Railway car parks are covered by By-Laws.

 

p.s

 

 

Many thanks

Edited July 31, 2008 by Welsh_Wonder

[lamma]

Do NOT write back and dot NOT ever identify the driver to a PPC (or on the board). You are under NO obligation whatsoever to do so.

The new consumer regs means the PPCs have to/should ask for the driver ID

before plying their trade. Also they should not be asking for payment.

And as we all know third parties can not be held liable to a contract despite the "does so on behalf of himself and all other persons having any proprietary possessory or other financial material interest in the vehicle and its contents." rubbish.

It looks like this is a straightforward PPC ticket and not under railway bylaws as they have not quoted them.

 

You can expect more and more PPCs to be sending first letters that look like this one- the bigger PPCs anyway, the flight by night operations won't give two hoots about the new consumer regs.

[Welsh_Wonder]

lamma

 

Thanks very much for the advise, so basically ignore it?

 

Again thanks

 

- A bit nervous and double checking as the letters can be intimidating

[Barnsley Boy]

Welsh Wonder,

 

Relax, Lamma is right. Ignoring the requests to identify the driver really is the best way to deal with these invoices. It is not for you to do the PPC's work for them. If they cannot identify the driver on their own - their tough luck - not your problem.

[lamma]

yep - ignore. just double check its not railway by laws. if its not on the ticket then it probably isn't but check the signs ie car park and then if they state railway by laws make sure it is the railway that owns the car park. it has been known for these sign to be put up 'in error'.

 

and write to the DVLA and get ALL the information from the V888/2 request that was made against the vehicle reg - that can be very interesting....

[Welsh_Wonder]

Thanks all, I will check the sign tonight and let you know.

 

Many thanks

 

Checked a fellow commuters PCCN and they do not quote Railway By-Laws on the PCCN's

Edited July 31, 2008 by Welsh_Wonder
Update

[Welsh_Wonder]

All

 

Just recieved the following letter - Should I now respond with the template letter - Which one should I use now?

 

You were recently sent a Notice to Registered Keeper to which we have not received payment or satisfactory grounds for appeal

 

Please note that in the absence of payment or any valid appeal, we will puruse this matter to a conclusion

 

In a further effort to resolve the outstanding Penalty Contravention Charge Notice (PCCN) that was issued against your vehicle, please find listed below the relevant details:

 

Vehicle: xx xx xxx

Registration No xxxxxxxxx

Offence Date: xxxxxxxxx

Location: xxxxxxxxxxxx

Excess Parking Charge No. xxxxxxxxxxxx

 

It is in your own best interests to get in touch with us so we can resolve this debt without recourse to further action. If we do not hear from you within 7 days we will pass the matter to our solicitors, Graham XXXX, who will review your case for potential legal action

 

Your Sincerely,

 

XXXXXX

Debt Recovery Manager

Roxburghe (UK) Limited

 

 

=============================================

 

The help this site has provided is invaluable without you guys/gals so far I would have paid this without knowing there is a way to deal with these so called companies

 

Thank you

[lamma]

XXXX will be "White " then " let them.

If/when you get a letter from G.White solicitors please post back here.

Or just phone the SRA the same day and query this firm/name... (clue)

 

their wording is so bad I can't believe this is really NCP.

Ignore them and keep all their letters in the drawer.

 

Not railway bylaws then - which are a different kettle of fish entirely and cannot be just ignored.

[Barnsley Boy]

If we do not hear from you within 7 days we will pass the matter to our solicitors, Graham XXXX, who will review your case for potential legal action

 

If this Graham White were a proper solicitor, rather than a Roxburghe mythical figure, the answer should be:

 

"I've reviewed this - the answer is course it is not suitable for potential legal action for exactly the same reasons that the previous 999 you referred to me were not suitable , you silly a*se."

[lamma]

The SRA have removed this G.White from the register. If they send that letter claiming to be from G.White solicitor then complain loudly to the SRA.

there are strict rules about claiming to be a solicitor when you are not.

[Welsh_Wonder]

All

 

Just recieved this from Grahm White Solicitors - Also I checked the SRA Website and they are listed.

 

So I guess now I need advice as to what step to take next:

 

The letter reads:

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Re: NCP SERVICES LIMITED

Total Amount Due: £85.00

Account Number: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

NOTICE OF INTENDED LEGAL ACTION

 

You were written to by NCP SERVICES LIMITED and their agent Roxburghe requesting the settlement of a Parking Contravention Charge Notice. Due to the absence of payment, or a valid appeal, our client has instructed us to proceed to legal action to recover the amount due.

 

Therefor, it is a legal requirement to send a notice of INTENDED LITIGATION before legal proceedings are issued in the County Court. This letter fulfils this requirement.

 

Take note;

 

Claim Issue Fee: 30.00

Solicitors Cots for Issuing Claim: 50.00

Judging Costs: 25.00

Warrant Issue fee: 35.00

Solicitors Costs for Issuing Warrant: 2.25

Total Additional Costs 142.25

 

Any Judgement registered against you could seriously affect your chances of obtaining credit in the future, as this information can be made available to any interested parties via the Register of Judgements, Orders & Fines, and remains there for 6 years.

 

In the event of a Judgement Order not being adhered to, we may instruct Bailiffs to attend your address who are authorised to seize goods for sale at public auction in the amount claimed plus all Staturoty Interest.

 

Please contact us with your proposal for settlement within 7 days to avoid possibility of this action

 

Your Sincerely

 

Michael Sobell

 

Solicitor

[lamma]

There is another G White who is validly listed (and very hacked off by the Roxburghe [problem] by all accounts). are you sure you didn't find him ?

 

and see if you can find Michael Sobell

 

their bill of charges is preposterous and unclaimable - no surprise

[Al27]

All

 

Just recieved this from Grahm White Solicitors - Also I checked the SRA Website and they are listed.

 

So I guess now I need advice as to what step to take next:

 

The letter reads:

 

We've seen that letter a hundred times. Completely ignore.

 

You might get another one, but they give up soon after.

[Welsh_Wonder]

There is another G White who is validly listed (and very hacked off by the Roxburghe [problem] by all accounts). are you sure you didn't find him ?

 

and see if you can find Michael Sobell

 

their bill of charges is preposterous and unclaimable - no surprise

 

 

Lamma - You and the rest of the posters here have been very very helpful. Thank you all

 

I was unable to post a link to the page where I found the Graham White Solicitors, The postcode they are using is also the same as the Graham Whilte listed here:

The Law Society - Find a solicitor

 

Does this mean I should definitely ignore it then, even if the solicitors are now registered?

 

Thank You

[Barnsley Boy]

Definately still continue to ignore. Those names G. White & Michael Sobell [London borough of Hackney no less] continue to turn up. Save the letter writing for complaints to SRA & London Borough of Hackney.

[lamma]

I agree.

[Welsh_Wonder]

Definately still continue to ignore. Those names G. White & Michael Sobell [London borough of Hackney no less] continue to turn up. Save the letter writing for complaints to SRA & London Borough of Hackney.

 

 

I am not sure I understand, The Graham White that I searched for - Is listed in the link in my previous post. Would I still complain ?

 

Hackney Borough, Who would I complain to there? - Slightly lost at this point

[lamma]

Micheal Sobell works for Hackney - look using the same site linked above.

G White is a trading name registered by Sobell and used by Roxburghe (for a fee you can bet)

there are also 'genuine' solicitors who real name is/are Graham White.

You have to distinguish the fake G White (Sobell) from the real ones.

[Welsh_Wonder]

Micheal Sobell works for Hackney - look using the same site linked above.

G White is a trading name registered by Sobell and used by Roxburghe (for a fee you can bet)

there are also 'genuine' solicitors who real name is/are Graham White.

You have to distinguish the fake G White (Sobell) from the real ones.

 

Lamma

 

The Graham White that is listed as a registered solicitors, (I checked the address on the letter against the address in the solicitors db) The postcode listed is the same of for the postcode on the letter. So should I complain?

 

The Michael Sobell thing I did not search for, but should I be complaining to Hackney that he is moonlighting? As I am not sure what I should be complaining about here apart from the fact that he is listed as the solicitor for Graham White?

 

I Really appreciate your efforts!!!

[lamma]

Good - you distinguished them and have now conformed you ere looking at the right one., By all means send a letter off the Lambeth. don't expect much in response but the more that put this issue on their files the better.

By all means write to the SRA ! We have seen the transcribed text but not the originals so cannot really help you pin down the various legislative snafus they are making that should be part of the complaint.

[knife]

Welsh wonder, what happened in the end? did they give up and go away?

 

Cheers

H