Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Djokovic is back in the news - the BBC has cast doubts on the date of his covid test prior to arriving in Australia. They've done some clever research with serial numbers and QR codes but the Serbian public health authority isn't giving information.   And Nadal is a step closer to his 21st Grand Slam title, which would make him the first male player to reach that. He won't be able to compete in the French Open under France's current rules which require all sportspeople to be vaxxed.   Novak Djokovic: Doubts over timing of Covid test WWW.BBC.COM The BBC has uncovered fresh evidence questioning the timing of Novak Djokovic’s positive Covid test used to enter Australia.  
    • Hi   I could be wrong here so could @namedisplay please clarify if I am correct or completely wrong?   In your post#1 you mention that due to your health issues and your mental state at the time you rang the Training Room and was told it would cost and initial £200 and then £15 per month until you finished the course.   Then further in post#1 The Training Room told you you were not eligible for an extension because you hadn't completed enough of the course.   With the above I now refer Post#12 which mentions your circumstances are covered by 13 in the TTR Terms and Conditions.   What is mentioned above seems conflicting from TTR for the following:   1. IMO that money of £200 and then £15 per month (on top of original Course Fees) was them at that time agreeing to an extension as per 13 in TTR Terms and Conditions   2. Them stating you can't extend Course as not completed enough of Course is not in TTR Terms and Conditions (that I and others can see) (Note they could be referring to 15 in TTR Terms and Conditions)   Can you clarify the above and were you informed those extra costs were due to an extension of your Course.   Again I will ask did you provide the Training Room with Medical Evidence when you asked the above?   We also still need to see the Letter from Training Room Threatening Legal Action (fully redacted) which you still haven't posted?   You need to send The Training Room a Subject Access Request (SAR) asking for 'ALL DATA' that simple phrase means whatever format they hold that data in whether it be written, email, recorded phone calls etc.   They then have 30 Calendar Days to respond to your SAR Request and that Time Limit only starts once they have acknowledged your SAR Request. They can extend that Time Limit if they need to prove identity before actioning the SAR Request so be aware of that.   A SAR Request is now FREE and make sure you get Free Proof of Posting from the Post Office     Your right of access ICO.ORG.UK   Can you please make sure you answer the questions asked of Caggers to assist you    
    • I've been trying to resolve a issue with 8 PCN issued by Tyne Tunnel 2 (tt2.co.uk). Tyne Tunnel 2 is a gated toll charged tunnel to cross the River Tyne in Newcastle. We moved in recently so all a bit new to us. My dad had been using the tunnel about twice a week and he had been paying cash for the toll fee at the booths. At some point in November 2021 they had done some constructions where the gates had been closed and payments had transitioned to online methods. My dad had been oblivious to this and been on his merry way multiple times thinking that he doesn't need to pay. So he received the first PCN some where end of November which had been issue on the 26th after which point I went on alert and sorted out the online accounts and such. However the current total of fines has amounted to £255.20 and I have appealed explaining that soon as the letters were received we have resolved the issue but they insist on us paying 8 PCN. I feel it's unfair that the fine is for the same offence which we couldn't have rectified or known until we received the first PCN letter and after the first PCN we have rectified it so feel they are being bit draconic. Any advice on this matter? 
    • No need to apologise! I am extremely grateful for both your help   Gosh very good attention to detail going on here   Great thank you, i will put them back as below   Good evening to you   DEFENCE   1.     The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.     2.     Paragraph 1 is noted. It is accepted I have in the past had agreements with Lloyds TSB. I do not recall the precise details or agreement nor the claimant either, having failed to provide an agreement/account number within its particulars of claim and have therefore sought verification from the claimant.   3.     Paragraph 2 is noted but until such time the claimant can clarify the agreement account number any breach has yet to be proven.      4.     I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served by either the Claimant or Lloyds TSB pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.   5. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any Notice of default served.   6.     It is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant. The Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of the Agreement/Assignment/Default notice or Termination requested by CPR 31. 14.    Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement ; and b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and c) Show or evidence a Default Notice /Notice of Sums in Arrears, d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   7.     As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   8.     On the 5th of January 2022 I requested to The Claimants Solicitors, Mortimer Clarke by way of a CPR 31.14 copies of the documents referred to within the Claimants particulars to establish what the claim is for. Mortimer Clarke have failed to fulfil my CPR 31:14 request.   9.     On the 5th of January 2022 I made a section 78 legal request to the claimant for a copy of the Consumer Credit Agreement. The claimant has as of 27/01/22 failed to comply.   10.  By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

National Parking Control


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4112 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

HELP!!! I ve recieved a Parking Charge, on the letter it says civil enforcment Notice, Notice to Owner. It is from National Parking Control, On the letter it states that they are a member of British Parking Association, BPA, which after looking on the internet is a self ticketing service....Im a bit reluctant to hand over money as there is no mention of any council and the ticket was given to me in a private car park with a barrier and key code entry. The money is to be sent to a PO BOX number....any ideas of who they are? Or what I should do?

 

Thanks!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a PPC [problem]. As Crem states-ignore whatever is sent to you. It isnt a Council PCN but it is made to look so to get people to pay up.

Be prepared for some threatening letters from NPC and thier DCA however.

They will disappear after approx 6 letters or so :D

Edited by DDWales
spelling

If you believe that this post has helped in any way please click on the star to the left

 

DDWales Vs Barclaycard-*Won* http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclaycard/174860-ddwales-barclaycard.html

DDWales Vs Natwest-*Won*

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-successes/210090-ddwales-natwest.html

 

-Reclaim the Right-

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should do nothing.

 

Do not write to them

Do not telephone them

Do not reply to any of their letters

Above all

Do not pay them!

 

Very good advice here.

 

You are quite correct, they have nothing to do with the council or the Police and you have been issued with an invoice for breaching the terms and conditions of use for the car park in question. You should know that they have no legal powers; however, this will not stop them from making an untold number of threats to you ranging from balliffs to county court judgements. The good news is that this is all hot air. Expect to receive approximately 3 - 6 letters escalating in threat levels - 1 or 2 will be from the private parking company themselves, you will then get 2 from a debt collection agency (usually just another desk in the PPC's offices. You will then likely get a further 2 from their solicitors threatening court action - after this all communication will cease.

 

I will add, those who contact them tend to be the ones that get taken to court as they are seen to be the weakest.

 

A couple of facts that will ease your mind; you will only get a county court judgement if the PPC take you to court, win and then you do not pay within 28days. Likewise, a balliff can only be appointed after a court judgement. This is a very very rare occurence.

 

One more thing, they might threaten to send someone to visit you - this is more hot air. They have no legal right to visit your home and can be reported to the Police if they refuse to leave when asked. That said they never do visit because the costs are very high in comparison to the amount they want to collect.

 

Having told you all of this information there should be no reason for you to pay or contact this company. If you do feel nervous at any point, jump straight back on here and one of us will be more than happy to assist you.

 

All the best,

 

TFT

 

I have dealt with these companies myself - I speak from experience.

09/07/09 :)Business Studies BA(Hons) 2:1:)

 

eCar Insurance overpayment - £325

Settled in full - 15/09/08

NatWest Student A/C bank charges - £260

Settled under hardship scheme - 08/06/09

Natwest Business A/C bank charges - £60

Settled in full as GOGW - 20/04/09

Santander Consumer Finance late payment fees - £60

Part settled for £48 - 01/03/08

Peugeot Finance late payment fees - £50

Settled in full before county court hearing - 01/09/09

Peugeot Finance overpayment of £247

Settled in full - 01/12/08

Valley Leisure - complaint about collections agent

£160 part refund of gym membership in compensation - 01/02/09

HFC Bank - complaint about payment deducted from my account on wrong date

GOGW £10 - 01/05/09

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much, that has put my mind at ease a hell of alot!!!!! I'll keep you updated on the letters to come then....:D

 

Excellent! :D

If you believe that this post has helped in any way please click on the star to the left

 

DDWales Vs Barclaycard-*Won* http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclaycard/174860-ddwales-barclaycard.html

DDWales Vs Natwest-*Won*

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-successes/210090-ddwales-natwest.html

 

-Reclaim the Right-

Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad I read this thread, I've just received a PARKING CHARGE letter from National Parking Control (based in Manchester) for a ticket. I had typed up and printed off my 1st response letter (using the templates given on here) but it looks like I should simply ignore it now, is that correct?

 

Thanks very much, feels strange but good to be back on this website again!!

** I AM NOT A LAWYER, PLEASE CONSULT A QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL IF YOU ARE IN ANY DOUBT **

 

I have successfully claimed against: "MBNA, Capital One, Bank of Scotland & Clydesdale Bank"

 

The Consumer Action Group is a Self-Help website, Moderators & Site Helpers offer advice on a voluntary basis. Please spend time reading the FAQ's, and other cases relating to your bank before starting your own claim

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes ignore them But keep all their letters. they have put themselves right in the cross hairs to get nailed due to multiple breaches of several statutes. want to get them ? ?

 

Damn right I do!! Let me at them!!!

** I AM NOT A LAWYER, PLEASE CONSULT A QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL IF YOU ARE IN ANY DOUBT **

 

I have successfully claimed against: "MBNA, Capital One, Bank of Scotland & Clydesdale Bank"

 

The Consumer Action Group is a Self-Help website, Moderators & Site Helpers offer advice on a voluntary basis. Please spend time reading the FAQ's, and other cases relating to your bank before starting your own claim

Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn right I do!! Let me at them!!!

 

:)

If you believe that this post has helped in any way please click on the star to the left

 

DDWales Vs Barclaycard-*Won* http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclaycard/174860-ddwales-barclaycard.html

DDWales Vs Natwest-*Won*

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-successes/210090-ddwales-natwest.html

 

-Reclaim the Right-

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Yes, just ignore. Of course they turned down your appeal. It's not an independent process and it's in the company's interest to turn down all such "appeals. This is one persons take on the whole "appeal"process (from Pepipoo):-

 

The only other possibility is that they keep a monkey at their office, who has been trained to open letters and, although it cannot actually read them, to immediately press a designated character on a keyboard (perhaps marked with a banana symbol) which then produces a letter of reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much, that has put my mind at ease a hell of alot!!!!! I'll keep you updated on the letters to come then....:D

 

If anyone feels the need to contact them ie: cant take the pressure from the threats, then please add in your letter a reference of law to get them to back off as they have NO legal standing to collect this scammed money....

The Administration of Justice Act 1970.

Section 40 of the act provides that a person commits an offence if, with the object of coercing another person to pay money claimed from the other as a debt due under contract, he or she:

A) harasses the other with demands for payment which by their frequency, or the manner or occasion of their making, or any accompanying threat or publicity are calculated to subject him or his family or household to alarm, distress or humiliation:

B) Falsely represent, in relation to the money claimed, that criminal proceedings lie for failure to pay it:

C) falsely represent themselves to be authorised in some official capacity to claim or enforce payment:

D) utters a document falsley represented by him to have some official character or purporting to have some official character which he knows it has not:

 

That gets them to leave you alone........ but if you collect the 6 letters from them sell um on e-bay for a fortune ... full set and it cost you nothing, stand firm they cant do a thing and wont. Happy parking :) for free

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...