Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • further polished WS using above suggestions and also included couple of more modifications highlighted in orange are those ok to include?   Background   1.1  The Defendant received the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the 06th of January 2020 following the vehicle being parked at Arla Old Dairy, South Ruislip on the 05th of December 2019.   Unfair PCN   2.1  On 19th December 2023 the Defendant sent the Claimant's solicitors a CPR request.  As shown in Exhibit 1 (pages 7-13) sent by the solicitors the signage displayed in their evidence clearly shows a £60.00 parking charge notice (which will be reduced to £30 if paid within 14 days of issue).  2.2  Yet the PCN sent by the Claimant is for a £100.00 parking charge notice (reduced to £60 if paid within 30 days of issue).   2.3        The Claimant relies on signage to create a contract.  It is unlawful for the Claimant to write that the charge is £60 on their signs and then send demands for £100.    2.4        The unlawful £100 charge is also the basis for the Claimant's Particulars of Claim.  No Locus Standi  3.1  I do not believe a contract with the landowner, that is provided following the defendant’s CPR request, gives MET Parking Services a right to bring claims in their own name. Definition of “Relevant contract” from the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4,  2 [1] means a contract Including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land between the driver and a person who is-   (a) the owner or occupier of the land; or   (b) Authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land. According to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44   For a contract to be valid, it requires a director from each company to sign and then two independent witnesses must confirm those signatures.   3.2  The Defendant requested to see such a contract in the CPR request.  The fact that no contract has been produced with the witness signatures present means the contract has not been validly executed. Therefore, there can be no contract established between MET Parking Services and the motorist. Even if “Parking in Electric Bay” could form a contract (which it cannot), it is immaterial. There is no valid contract.  Illegal Conduct – No Contract Formed   4.1 At the time of writing, the Claimant has failed to provide the following, in response to the CPR request from myself.   4.2        The legal contract between the Claimant and the landowner (which in this case is Standard Life Investments UK) to provide evidence that there is an agreement in place with landowner with the necessary authority to issue parking charge notices and to pursue payment by means of litigation.   4.3 Proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and country Planning Act 1990. Lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under this Act and no contract can be formed where criminality is involved.   4.4        I also do not believe the claimant possesses these documents.   No Keeper Liability   5.1        The defendant was not the driver at the time and date mentioned in the PCN and the claimant has not established keeper liability under schedule 4 of the PoFA 2012. In this matter, the defendant puts it to the claimant to produce strict proof as to who was driving at the time.   5.2 The claimant in their Notice To Keeper also failed to comply with PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 section 9[2][f] while mentioning “the right to recover from the keeper so much of that parking charge as remains unpaid” where they did not include statement “(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)”.     5.3         The claimant did not mention parking period, times on the photographs are separate from the PCN and in any case are that arrival and departure times not the parking period since their times include driving to and from the parking space as a minimum and can include extra time to allow pedestrians and other vehicles to pass in front.    Protection of Freedoms Act 2012   The notice must -   (a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;  22. In the persuasive judgement K4GF167G - Premier Park Ltd v Mr Mathur - Horsham County Court – 5 January 2024 it was on this very point that the judge dismissed this claim.  5.4  A the PCN does not comply with the Act the Defendant as keeper is not liable.  No Breach of Contract   6.1       No breach of contract occurred because the PCN and contract provided as part of the defendant’s CPR request shows different post code, PCN shows HA4 0EY while contract shows HA4 0FY. According to PCN defendant parked on HA4 0EY which does not appear to be subject to the postcode covered by the contract.  6.2         The entrance sign does not mention anything about there being other terms inside the car park so does not offer a contract which makes it only an offer to treat,  Interest  7.1  It is unreasonable for the Claimant to delay litigation for  Double Recovery   7.2  The claim is littered with made-up charges.  7.3  As noted above, the Claimant's signs state a £60 charge yet their PCN is for £100.  7.4  As well as the £100 parking charge, the Claimant seeks recovery of an additional £70.  This is simply a poor attempt to circumvent the legal costs cap at small claims.  7.5 Since 2019, many County Courts have considered claims in excess of £100 to be an abuse of process leading to them being struck out ab initio. An example, in the Caernarfon Court in VCS v Davies, case No. FTQZ4W28 on 4th September 2019, District Judge Jones-Evans stated “Upon it being recorded that District Judge Jones- Evans has over a very significant period of time warned advocates (...) in many cases of this nature before this court that their claim for £60 is unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process and is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme Court v Beavis which inter alia decided that a figure of £160 as a global sum claimed in this case would be a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore unenforceable in law and if the practice continued, he would treat all cases as a claim for £160 and therefore a penalty and unenforceable in law it is hereby declared (…) the claim is struck out and declared to be wholly without merit and an abuse of process.”  7.6 In Claim Nos. F0DP806M and F0DP201T, District Judge Taylor echoed earlier General Judgment or Orders of District Judge Grand, stating ''It is ordered that the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverabl15e under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in Parking Eye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4)) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998...''  7.7 In the persuasive case of G4QZ465V - Excel Parking Services Ltd v Wilkinson – Bradford County Court -2 July 2020 (Exhibit 4) the judge had decided that Excel had won. However, due to Excel adding on the £60 the Judge dismissed the case.  7.8        The addition of costs not previously specified on signage are also in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, specifically paras 6, 10 and 14.   7.9        It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant in this case has knowingly submitted inflated costs and thus the entire claim should be similarly struck out in accordance with Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4).   In Conclusion   8.1        I invite the court to dismiss the claim.  Statement of Truth  I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.   
    • Well the difference is that in all our other cases It was Kev who was trying to entrap the motorist so sticking two fingers up to him and daring him to try court was from a position of strength. In your case, sorry, you made a mistake so you're not in the position of strength.  I've looked on Google Maps and the signs are few & far between as per Kev's MO, but there is an entrance sign saying "Pay & Display" (and you've admitted in writing that you knew you had to pay) and the signs by the payment machines do say "Sea View Car Park" (and you've admitted in writing you paid the wrong car park ... and maybe outed yourself as the driver). Something I missed in my previous post is that the LoC is only for one ticket, not two. Sorry, but it's impossible to definitively advise what to so. Personally I'd probably gamble on Kev being a serial bottler of court and reply with a snotty letter ridiculing the signage (given you mentioned the signage in your appeal) - but it is a gamble.  
    • No! What has happened is that your pix were up-to-date: 5 hours' maximum stay and £100 PCN. The lazy solicitors have sent ancient pictures: 4 hours' maximum stay and £60 PCN. Don't let on!  Let them be hoisted by their own lazy petard in the court hearing (if they don't bottle before).
    • Thanks for all the suggestions so far I will amend original WS and send again for review.  While looking at my post at very beginning when I submitted photos of signs around the car park I noticed that it says 5 hours maximum stay while the signage sent by solicitor shows 4 hours maximum stay but mine is related to electric bay abuse not sure if this can be of any use in WS.
    • Not sure what to make of that or what it means for me, I was just about to head to my kip and it's a bit too late for legalise. When is the "expenditure occured"?  When they start spending money to write to me?  Or is this a bad thing (as "harsh" would imply)? When all is said and done, I do not have two beans to rub together, we rent our home and EVERYTHING of value has been purchased by and is in my wife's name and we are not financially linked in any way.  So at least if I can't escape my fate I can at least know that they will get sweet FA from me anyway   edit:  ah.. Sophia Harrison: Time bar decision tough on claimants WWW.SCOTTISHLEGAL.COM Time bar is a very complex area of law in Scotland relating to the period in which a claim for breach of duty can be pursued. The Scottish government...   This explains it like I am 5.  So, a good thing then because creditors clearly know they have suffered a loss the minute I stop paying them, this is why it is "harsh" (for them, not me)? Am I understanding this correctly?  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
        • Thanks
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5622 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi there.

 

I had an unpaid speeding fine of £60 which was passed onto Philips collection services for payment. they added on another £120 for their fees - fair enough i thought, so i paid £60 by switch and arranged to pay the remaining £120 on line a month later.

 

 

This i did (or thought i had!) however about a month later i get letter from philips saying that the debt had increased to £196 as a bailif had been sent twice to my address to collect the unpaid fine! No Bailif has ever been anywhere near my place as i work from home and there is a concierge on reception at all times.

 

 

I checked my bank account and the 2nd payment had not been made. When i checked the letter from philips they had my name spelt incorrectly - i am assuming that this is why the on line payment had not gone through.

 

I rang up immediately but the most arrogant unhelpful person on the phone refused to listen to my story and just kept insisting that "payment must be made in full".

 

I said i was willing to pay £120 - £100 there and then and another £20 at the following month. She took my payment and then still insisted that there was another £60 to pay!

 

I asked to speak with a supervisor and this was refused. I was told to write - but in the meantime a bailiff would be sent out and i would be charged another £50. I asked her to suspend the account until i had written in but she refused! So i emailed them with the details but got no reply.

 

I then started to get 2 to 3 text messages every day asking me to pay the debt in full.

 

I rang again today to pay the final £20 to be told that i had to pay in full and this had now risen again by another £50 (now back up to £110) as a bailiff had visited. Again no bailiff has been anywhere near!!!

 

I cannot speak to anyone other than the rude collection agent to get this resolved, they refuse to put me through or even to discuss payment in part! I have been told that a bailiff will be calling again tomorrow and the debt will be increased to £170! so that's £320 from a £60 fine!

 

I am at my whits end with this and don't know where to turn?

 

So a few questions:

 

 

1 my surname is spelt incorrectly on all of their correspondence - is this a loophole i can exploit?

 

2 No bailiff has visited - yet they keep adding £50 to my account

 

3 I have tried to make payment in full, but their on line systems seems to have had a teddy with my surname -

 

4 I am refusing to pay anything other than an additional £20 but they keep adding bailif fees - can they do this?

 

HELP !!!!!!!

Edited by regmcm
Link to post
Share on other sites

You can make a formal compliant. Each area of the country have their own HMCS Contract Manager . If you let me know the area of the country yu ar in I will post details on here. By area I mean: London, south west, north east, north west etc.

 

All three companies with HMCS work would not want any complaints because all of their contracts are currently up for renewal!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest that you pay what ever they areasking you pay. Borrow it from somewhere. Then send them a Subject Access Request. Once this is done issue a small claim once they have responded to the sar. You will get your money back.

 

 

Sounds good in theory but i am not willing to part with any more cash and then have to wait weeks or months for a refund! These people are basically extorting cash with menaces! Also how can they charge for a Bailiff visit that does not actually happen?

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest that you pay what ever they areasking you pay.

 

Why on earth would you pay somebody money that you do not owe them. Especially to a company that are obviously adding underhand charges at will. As you have a concierge, do visitors have to go through him to gain access or can they just buzz a bell outside for you to let them in ? do you also have CCTV ? I know it seems a bit over the top but it would put them in their place if you did and you could get the dates and times of alleged visits.

 

Pete.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again

 

i sent Philips the template letter below:

 

DATE

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Re: [YOUR NAME + REF]: Opportunity to refund and compensate for fee error

 

I write following visits by your bailiff, however there appears to be an irregularity with your fees and I ask you to provide the following within fourteen (14) days:

 

a) The name of the certificating court and certificate number for the bailiff in charge

 

b) Written confirmation of your fees and charges

 

c) Truthfully confirm in writing they are lawful according to prescribed legislation

 

d) The name and address of the person or body you act for

They have written back with the following:

 

With ref to your recent communication regarding your outstanding arrears due to West Yorkshire Magistrates Court, i write to inform you that due to strict guidelines by our client we are unable to withhold any further action.

 

the balance on your account is £95 an i would be grateful if you could forward payment within the next 7 days to avoid any further action.

 

Should payment not be received at this office within this timescale further costs may be incurred

 

Could somebody please answer a few questions?

 

1 No bailiff has ever visited my premises, yet they continue to charge me £50 for every "visit" Can they do this? What can i do to get these charges dropped?

 

2 I have paid in full the original Debt of £60 plus philips fees of £120. They are now chasing me for an additional £95 for 2 Alleged bailif visits. As the original debt to west yorks magistrates has been paid, do Philips still have the right to enter my home to reclaim their fees?

 

3 They are continuing to spell my surname incorrectly - My name ends in EN they have it spelt AN. IF the Bailiffs do call and ask if i am Mr .......AN do i have the right to tell them that its not me?

 

4 what is the subject to access ?

 

Any help would be appreciated

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

i'v got this problem of invisibl bailiffs as well. furthermore i've also got invisible letters.. also are they [marston group ltd] allowed to charge £250 EACH [ther were 2 of them] for a doorstep call>?

 

Siorry if i intruded in your thread, but it's related and helpful for me too :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Get yourself an out of time statuary declartion in place now, and this holds all enforcement on the debt for parking

 

 

Hi Sorry if im i little ignorant here but i have no idea what this is or how to go about getting one?

 

Any help would be appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

THis debt is for an unpaid Magistrates Court FINE and Philips are allowed to charge a letter fee of £50 followed by a visit fee of £175 !! They cannot charge any more than this unless they were to remove a vehicle.

 

However, they cannot visit without first sending a letter. Did you receive a letter?

 

You say that you are in Leeds. Is this North East, North West etc ?

 

For unpaid Magistrates Court Fines you may only file a Statutory Declaration if you did not know about this fine or it had gone to a previous address.

 

The part about your surname will not be sufficient I am afraid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tom

 

SO far they have charged me:

 

£100 "registration fee"

£50 x 2 for 2 Bailiff visits which did not take place

 

I have so far paid the Original fine plus the £100 fee. I am refusing to pay

the Bailiff fees as:

 

1 there was a problem with their on line systems and my original payment did not go through.

 

2 No Bailiff has visited my Apartment - there is a 24 hour concierge who logs every visit.

 

Leeds is Norther East

 

Yes i did receive a letter - as soon as i received it i rang up to complain - which is when i found out that my original payment had not been processed. I offered to pay in full then but i was told it was too late as a bailiff had already been appointed and an additional £50 added to my bill.

 

How can they charge for bailiff visits that do not happen?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a tried and trusted method. You must keep proof of any payments you have mde etc and then Subject Access Request them. You will get your money back with interest. It depends if you want the aggro before paying or give them aggro after paying ?

 

 

Hi mate - after getting absolutely nowhere i have now paid the deebt and all charges in full.

 

What steps do i need to take to claim this back? how do i subject access request them?

 

regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

It's a Subject Access Request.

 

You are asking for any information they hold about the transaction you are asking about, ie your fine and the collection of it.

 

You are entitled to the information, but it will take time to get it.

 

I would do as has been suggested, if you were unlawfully charged fees, get the evidence from the subject access request and then using that evidence claim it back what you are owed (including reasonable interest and costs) using the small claims court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are template letters on site and on the net that you can use, you may have to modify them slightly for your purpose.

 

You may find that if they know that you are prepared to go that far, that they will return your dough to you - cos if you are 150% sure of your ground, it will most likely cost them more to defend the action than to pay you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...