WJ Parking Fines

[kjaye]

Hey guys, this is my first post and just want to be sure I'm doing the right thing here. I've read through the advice and think I'm ok but some personal reassurance would be great.

 

I recently rejoined a chess club where I used to play several years ago.

 

Back then I always parked in an empty business park down the road from the club for 3 years without problems.

 

In September though when I parked there as usual I came back and discovered I had a £100 fine reducable to £70 on behalf of WJ Parking for parking without a permit. I hadn't seen the signs or even considered looking to be honest as its where I always parked.

 

After speaking with the guys in the chess club they advised me to park in the public library carpark round the back in future.

 

So the following week I parked there, again an almost empty carpark.

 

However when I returned I had got another ticket and £100 from WJ Parking as I had parked in the wrong bay. It seems only 5 of the spaces were for the library and the rest, (around 30) were private permit holders only and completely empty of cars.

 

So in 7 days I had two £100 fines. After coming on here I was pursuaded that they had no legal powers to enforce and decided to fight them, well actually ignore them.

 

£100 is just ridiculous for parking at night in an empty carpark for a couple hours so I'm not going to pay them without a fight, that's for sure.

 

Yesterday I got my first letter from them demanding payment. I just want to know if I should respond to this letter or ignore it completely?

 

Also what would my defense be if this came to court? Do I just do nothing and let them send out letters or should I reply with one of the templates already?

 

Thanks in advance for your help guys, hope you are all having a very merry Christmas!

[phantom76]

Merry Christmas. Just Ignore them do not answer anything. Don't send any letters or call. Just wait it out. I am following that advice now. Lots of good advice on this site. Do not give them any info, and don't say too much about your location on here either, ps welcome to the site..

[lamma]

WJP - ignore. festively !

[flyingdoc]

what phantom says is correct bin the tickets and ignore any threatening letters.

[kjaye]

Ok thanks guys, will they eventually go away then?

 

If they were taken me to court what would happen then? Would I get a warning and time to react or would I just get a summons?

[nero12]

what phantom says is correct bin the tickets and ignore any threatening letters.

Dont bin them, put them in a drawer and if by some miracle they launch proceedings (99.999999999999999% sure they wont) then you can post back for a cast iron case against these idiots.

[flyingdoc]

they wont take you to court as they have no case

 

They are relying on contract law which says that you agree that by parking in their place that you will pay any fees incurred.

 

1 you didnt see any signs so there can be no contract.

2 they cannot prove who the driver was (it has to be the driver as the RK can be entered into a contract by anyone other then themselves

3 Even if they prove you saw the sign and that you were the driver they would still fall foul of the RUCCT as an unfair term.

 

They will not take you to court.

 

However do not bait them by parking there repeatedly

[nero12]

they wont take you to court as they have no case

 

They are relying on contract law which says that you agree that by parking in their place that you will pay any fees incurred.

 

1 you didnt see any signs so there can be no contract.

2 they cannot prove who the driver was (it has to be the driver as the RK can be entered into a contract by anyone other then themselves

3 Even if they prove you saw the sign and that you were the driver they would still fall foul of the RUCCT as an unfair term.

 

They will not take you to court.

 

However do not bait them by parking there repeatedly

BTW . Happy xmas everyone !!

[kjaye]

Hi guys, I got a second letter today this time from CCS Collect.

 

It says the following;

 

TAKE NOTICE if settlement of above sum is not received in this office by 12 NOON on Tue 13th Jan 2009, we are authorised to prepare legal documents for the issue of County Court proceedings against you. We have no doubt that legal fees, costs and interest will be added to the debt increasing substantionally the amount you must pay.

 

ONLY payment in full will dissuade our clients from taking further action.

 

 

 

So do I just continue to ignore them completely? Are they just bluffing?

 

Out of interests if they ever contacted me by phone and I just told them to go **** themselves would that jeopordise my case? Their threatening letters really **** me off to be honest.

[flyingdoc]

They are bluffing

 

firstly on a small claim the only costs that can be added are the issuing costs - so them saying that legal fees will be added is pure bs (interest may be charged at 8%.

 

Secondly they would have to prove that

1 you were the one who parked there (not just someone else in your car)

2 that you saw the signs and therefore entered into the contract.

 

Thirdly they would have the RUTCC to contend with.

 

They know that if they take this to court they will lose so file it and forget it.

 

Always be polite when speaking to people on the telephone, however be firm -- refuse to discuss the matter and ask them to put any communication in writing. Advise them that you are recording the conversation (even if you are not) and that the recordings may be used as evidence in any complaints or procedings that you may decide to embark upon.

[p.s.]

you may find some comfort in my post (includes CCS colect)

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/166267-my-experience-euro-car.html

[kjaye]

Cheers, so do I need to respond to them at all or just ignore the letter completely?

[kjaye]

you may find some comfort in my post (includes CCS colect)

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/166267-my-experience-euro-car.html

 

 

haha that is indeed comforting, I see you also got the exact same letter from CCS as me with warning about cash being delivered before high noon like they are some band of cowboys holding me to ransom.

 

Did you just ignore every single letter and not make contact with them once?

[Al27]

TAKE NOTICE if settlement of above sum is not received in this office by 12 NOON on Tue 13th Jan 2009, we are authorised to prepare legal documents for the issue of County Court proceedings against you.

 

Well that's a lie for a start. WJ can only commence legal proceeding, not the debt collectors. And why would they even bother with debt collectors in the first place if they were going to take it to court?

 

Of course, the literal way of reading it is that they will 'prepare legal documents'. Quite what that actually means is anyone's guess, since it's nothing to do with CSS.

 

'Legal documents' means absolutely nothing either! Hilarious.

[p.s.]

 

Did you just ignore every single letter and not make contact with them once?

 

Ignored EVERYTHING !

[Spunkymonkey]

Well that's a lie for a start. WJ can only commence legal proceeding, not the debt collectors. And why would they even bother with debt collectors in the first place if they were going to take it to court?

 

Of course, the literal way of reading it is that they will 'prepare legal documents'. Quite what that actually means is anyone's guess, since it's nothing to do with CSS.

 

'Legal documents' means absolutely nothing either! Hilarious.

 

 

However, for anyone who found themselves really annoyed by these letters, that letter almost certainly falls fould of the Fraud Act 2006. It's clearly intended to convince you to pay up (thereby causeing you "loss") and S2 of the Act says this:

 

Fraud by false representation

 

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

(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and

(b) intends, by making the representation—

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

(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

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

 

 

(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.

 

 

(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).

Now, if they were to say outright that they could take you to court - or even issue a summons against you, considering you're only confirmed as the keeper - that would be a clear case of misrepresentation.

 

 

They get round this by not actually saying that, but I'd suggest it's clearly what they're implying in that letter. And that's still an offence. Would be an interesting one to see them in court over. If they were found guilty it would really screw their game cos all they could effectively do from then on would be to send letters saying "Please pay us if it's not too much trouble for you"

 

 

 

Unfortunately, that would mean convincing the CPS to prosecute as it's a criminal matter. Nothing to stop a complaint being registered with the police though... maybe if enough people made complaints about the same company.....

[p.s.]

 

Now, if they were to say outright that they could take you to court - or even issue a summons against you, considering you're only confirmed as the keeper - that would be a clear case of misrepresentation.

 

 

 

Well G4 are coming close to this, as seen on one of the documents they sent me.

 

As the registered keeper/owner/hirer/driver of the vehicle at the time of the above contravention you are responsible for the payment of the Parking Charge Notice

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Clearly Fraud by false representation ??

[Spunkymonkey]

Yes, it is. And you're free to make a complaint.

 

I suspect, though, that to get any action taken against them it would need a concerted camapign of complaints - preferably targetted at the same company to "help" the CPS decide to act. It's almost tempting to go out trying to pick up tickets deliberately

[lamma]

"As the registered keeper/owner/hirer/driver of the vehicle" this wording is used by a LOT of PPCs. If it was me I would send it back to them telling them they have not chosen which of those different entities they are basing their claim on. To make the alleged responsibility claim they have to choose the driver of course - and they don't know who that is. If they choose RK they are stuffed. Contacting them would only be done to allow them to bury themselves deeper into trouble and I would pick the PPC carefully based on circumstances, signs and the extent of unlawfulness of their paperwork. WJ would seem to fit the bill. For the average victim I would recommend ignoring the PPC and using stamps to send complaints. Don't contact a PPC unless you know what you are doing.

[andy-gingster]

If you receive a parking notice from WJ parking Ltd then the issuing officer has committed a criminal offence.

 

A search at companies house reveals WJ parking Ltd" is in receivership.

 

Companies Act S 222. —(1) Where a receiver or manager of the property of a corporation has been appointed, every invoice order for goods or business letter issued by or on behalf of the corporation or the receiver or manager or the liquidator of the corporation, being a document on or in which the name of the corporation appears, shall contain a statement immediately following the name of the corporation that a receiver or manager has been appointed.

(2) If default is made in complying with this section, the corporation and every officer and every liquidator of the corporation and every receiver or manager who knowingly and wilfully authorises or permits the default shall be guilty of an offence.

 

The issue of a notice by them in their current format makes THEM GUILTY OF A CRIMINAL OFFENCE

[kjaye]

Just a quick update, This morning I have received another letter this time from Charles Howard and Partners giving me 72 hours notice of a home visit.

 

The letter reads ' We are now making arrangements for one of our collectors to visit you at home.

 

The purpose of this visit is to:

 

Secure payment from you

Investigate your home situation prior to Court Action.'

 

 

Then the usual, you can avoid our collector visiting by sending payment in full blah blah.

 

Do I simply ignore this one, will they actually send someone over?

 

In relation to the post above regarding WJ Parking being in administration, is what they are doing illegal? Can I call the police or better yet just phone Charles Howard and tell them to get ****ed?

[lamma]

they won't visit. Its a mail [problem]. why would they waste time and fuel when they know they have no powers at all. Also they also know its a mail based [problem]. See Companies House about trading when in administration and not declaring it on their paperwork (thai already covered on the forum). ignore them. its a mail based [problem].