Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Intrum passing account on to resolvecall and arranging home visit   Any advice 
    • On the second claim – for the front patio and in respect of which you haven't so far issue the claim, as far as we can make out – once again with the kind assistance of my site team colleague @FTMDave, we think that the correct claim should be     This would leave you with a patio which had cost you £7888 – and which is the price that you originally contracted for .   You agreed to pay £7888 for the front patio. If you claimed the £14,000 or so that you are proposing, you would be in a position where you would be getting a front patio almost free of charge   So we think that your claim should properly be for £6439.60 p However in the circumstances, I should certainly wait until we figure out what to do about the first claim that you put in. I've already suggested that you contact the sheriffs – and maybe you would come back here and let us know that you have done that and what they said.   incidentally, these are our figures – you need to do your own calculations and confirm them independently or come up with a different calculation – independently. Same for the first claim.
    • I got a letter saying the police have not received my form, license that I had to send off for 3 points, I have paid the £100 aswell, I sent the license off and form, on the 12th of November, and it got there on the 15th of November, it was signed by the court and it was photographed, for proof..   The letter states I have  an extra 7 days to send it in.. received the letter on the 24th of November...   what happens next? I cannot phone the number on the letter until Monday, its a Monday-Friday helpline...   The last thing  I want is them at my door for arrest, or even banning me from driving...
    • 3rd Try   STATEMENT OF  I Mr will say as follows:    INTRODUCTION  1: I am the defendant and state that the facts contained in this statement are true to the best of my knowledge.   2: There are several documents attached with this statement. (paginated)   3: The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 29/09/2017 a notice of assignment, incorrectly dated (See Exhibit 1) was sent to the defendant. It is my understanding that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct, disputed or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed ...10p to 15p in the £1 and which the original creditors have already wrote off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income. The claimant then issues on mass claims to circumvent and claim the full amount of debt to maximise profit.   4: As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party.   BACKGROUND   5: The Claim relates to an Alleged Credit card agreement between the defendant and Vanquis bank.   6: Whilst it is accepted that the defendant has in the past had contractual dealings with Vanquis, the defendant is unaware of what alleged debt the claimant refers.   7: The defendant has requested on numerous times a copy of the CCA, the first time, claimant has replied back on 23/11/2020 (Exhibit 1) with a copy of the agreement and notice of assignment, the agreement being a printed out application form, followed by my another letter containing statements(not enclosed). Defendant then again requested on the 07/12/2020 (see letter attached Exhibit 2) a copy of the CCA, claimant has replied back on the 28th Jan 2021 claiming that the evidence enclosed rebuts defendants defence and encloses a statement and default notice. (Exhibit 3) 8: The defendant stated in his defence that no evidence of the CCA has been provided. 9. The alleged account is £less that £200 over the credit limit but the default notice states that the arrears on the account is £200. Under section  87/88 of the CCA the default notice should not include unlawful fees in it sum requested. 10. The defendant sent a Subject Access Request letter dated 30/11/2021, on writing this witness statement nothing has been received.   DEFENCE:   11: The claimant has not provided a true copy of the CCA despite numerous requests being made firstly in September and secondly on the 07/12/2020 in response to claim despite stating in the letter dated 23rd October 2020 `please find enclosed a copy of the agreement. Should the claimant magically supply some form of CCA at trial, defendant would highlight why this wasn't provided, when requested, on numerous times before trial. Defendant would then highly stress to the court that this is indeed not the true copy of the executed Credit agreement.   12: There is no valid copy of an executed consumer credit agreement that complies with the CCA1974   13: The `so called ` copy of agreement stated in claimants letter dated 23/11/2020 is in fact stated as an online application and is no more than a log from either the OC`s operating system or one that has been constructed since with details from the account to look like an application. 14. The notice of assignment dated 11th May 2017 (Exhibit 1) states that the debt was sold to Lowell Portfolio I Ltd on the 29th September 2017. This is confirmed in 2 separate letters. One from Vanquis and the other from Lowell Portfolio I Ltd. Section 82A of the CCA 1974 states that the assignee must arrange for notice of the assignment to given to debtor. The above letters show that the notice of assignment has incorrect dates, thus rendering the notice of assignment invalid and thus the claimant has not acquired the debt correctly and thus cannot claim.   IN CONCLUSION:   15: Without a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA1974 the claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt and has in fact attempted to mislead the courts in to believing that they have the necessary paperwork.   16: The incorrect dated Notice of Assignments letters questions the ability of the claimant to maintain correct paperwork and thus the defendant is unsure what paperwork supplied is correct.   17: It is therefore requested that the Claimants Claim is struck out pursuant to the above.   Signed  Dated this day…….      Could you check out this part   "14. The notice of assignment dated 11th May 2017 (Exhibit 1) states that the debt was sold to Lowell Portfolio I Ltd on the 29th September 2017. This is confirmed in 2 separate letters. One from Vanquis and the other from Lowell Portfolio I Ltd. Section 82A of the CCA 1974 states that the assignee must arrange for notice of the assignment to given to debtor. The above letters show that the notice of assignment has incorrect dates, thus rendering the notice of assignment invalid and thus the claimant has not acquired the debt correctly and thus cannot claim."
    • Please fill out our court claim sticky on this forums homepage.   Dx
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Central ticketing.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4267 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

Dear All,

 

I recently received a letter from a company called Central Ticketing, giving a PO BOX address in Birmingham. They are persuing me for £85.00 for "Patron Parking Abuse" in a free car park at the Beach Retail Park in Aberdeen. The letter states that the sum must be paid before court action. As you can imagine, I am very destressed about this, as I am not aware of what I have done wrong.

 

On the date of the letter, I had popped into that carpark to briefly visit one of the shops, it was a Saturday morning and the carpark was empty. I wasn't in a disabled bay and I wasn't parking obstructively.

 

I remember once I arrived home I noticed a yellow parking slip at the passenger side of the windscreen, tucked in at the corner. I opened it and there was a tick in a box next to "Patron Abuse". There was no penalty sum indicated, nor a company name or contact address. Having shown this to my partner, we both came to the conclusion this was not a parking fine. I had one a few years ago from the council for parking on a single yellow line and the fine and contact details and period it had to be paid in were clearly stated on the £30 fine.

 

Nothing on the yellow slip indicated a fine.

 

Then 3 weeks later, I receive a letter requesting £85 before court action. I am still unaware of what I have done wrong.

 

We often visit Dunelm Mill, Pagazzi, Comet, Asda, JJB sport shop and never have either of us received this before.

 

I went back to visit the carpark after receiving this letter, as citizens advice requested I check if there is adequate signage. It's only when you see a sign with the company's crest (on the top of their letter) do you recognise the signs. Aside from that, the signs aren't clearly recogniseable that the carpark is attended by a company.

 

My plan is to write to the company - sending the letter recorded post, to the Birmingham address indicated and ask what I have done wrong.

 

If I don't get anywhere with that, I have been advised by a friend to contact my local MP to look into this matter.

 

This letter has really made us think again about shopping at the shops in the Aberdeen Beach Retail site in future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop worrying. its a [problem], youhave done nothing wrong but I bet central ticketing have. For a start their letter that only shows a P.O. box is against regulations. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/164651-problems-ppcs-face.html?highlight=problems+ppc+face Do NOT write to the PPC. by all means write to your MP. have a read around on here and be comforted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Thank you for both pieces of advice.

 

When i received the letter, i firstly called a family member who works in the Police. They said that often these cases dont go to court, but these companies can be pests; they can send sherriffs officer round and also they can affect your credit ratings too. But i havent done anything wrong. I found an article online regards the problems people are having at the beach.

http://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/Article.aspx/1117872?UserKey=

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Thank you for both pieces of advice.

 

When i received the letter, i firstly called a family member who works in the Police. They said that often these cases dont go to court, but these companies can be pests; they can send sherriffs officer round and also they can affect your credit ratings too. But i havent done anything wrong. I found an article online regards the problems people are having at the beach.

http://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/Article.aspx/1117872?UserKey=

 

I'm sorry to say your family member in the police is wrong on this point. Your credit rating can only be affected :-

 

1) IF they take you to court (chance = 0.001%)

2) WIN!! (chance = 0.000001%)

3) You refuse to pay the fine (why on earth would you refuse to pay at this stage?)

4) They go back to court for default judgement

5) Finally, and only now can the COURT instruct a bailiff (note the PPC does not/can not instruct bailiffs)

6) Your credit file ONLY NOW has a bad entry recorded on it

Link to post
Share on other sites

I occasionally shop down there and i've seen the "parking attendants" wandering around and wondered if they would have got anybody. As suggested, just ignore the ticket completely. Legally, they don't have a leg to stand on, despite what they claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your MP will probably demonstrate a similar ignorance of the issues surrounding PPC tickets as your family member in the force.

 

Sad to say that this lack of understanding also affects the likes of Trading Standards, the very organisation charged with protecting your rights as a consumer. All people see is the words "parking ticket" and almost always equate it with those issued under the road traffic act, not understanding that the road traffic act is irrelevent on private land.

MBNA - Agreed to refund £970 in full without conditions. Cheque received Sat 5th Aug.:D

Lloyds - Settled for an undisclosed sum.:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I have been looking at Money Saving Expert and what his site says - he advises to contact them and dispute the fine - which was my initial intention, until i was advised by the people above to not contact them in any way.

 

Money Saving Expert talks alot about going to court.. and after reading the text, you start to think "wow, maybe i should just pay what they want".......

 

I cant believe how pedantic Central Ticketing are, for giving me a ticket for parking breifly in an empty car park... The thing that gets me too, is their name wasn't on the ticket, nor the discounted sum......... i drove back to the carpark in questions the morning after receiving the invoice/letter (3 weeks aftr the yellow ticket was issued), to check out whether ther are signs...... the signs are there but not noticeable........ they are on posts which are higher than my car...... I only recognised them by their crest on their letter sent to me.

 

Thing is i don't mind £30 for parking on single yellow lines, by the local council - that's justified. But a private - free - empty carpark...... you grudge getting slapped with £85.00 for 5 mins.

 

They way i see it now - better paying £2.20 to park in bon accord centre to nip to john lewis for household items.... probably be cheaper in the end.... as although pagazzi or dunelm and co are cheaper... add on the £85... and they will be more expensive!!

 

Im still in two minds, whether to follow Martins Lewis's advice and appeal.. or just ignore as the guys say above.

 

:???:

Edited by Honest Citizen
Link to post
Share on other sites

Martin Lewis is generally good, but his parking guide has some gaping errors. Citizens Advice are clueless - it's manned by part time WI women.

 

he advises to contact them and dispute the fine

 

1. It's not a fine. Private companies have no such powers - they, you and me can only recoup actual losses. Your actions have not cost anybody £30 (not to mention that 'patron abuse' means diddly squat). All you have is an unenforceable invoice.

 

2. This is a private company who will never do itself out of pocket by allowing 'appeals' - your 'appeal' will always be rejected. The mention of appeals is all part of the [problem]. They want you to contact them so you can weigh you up. The fact the person has fallen for the appeals [problem] shows they aren't clued up and will probably pay up if pestered enough. These people go on the hooked fish pile and get a higher priority with regard to quantity of letters.

 

I cant believe how pedantic Central Ticketing are, for giving me a ticket for parking breifly in an empty car park

 

It's more than pedantic. It's a [problem].

 

Money Saving Expert talks alot about going to court.

 

You've more chance of winning the lottery.

 

 

 

• do not pay

• do not contact them

ignore the threatening junk that comes through your door

• they will give up and go away

 

We know Central Ticketing very well. Ignore the clowns -nothing will ever come of your comedy 'fine' and they will go away if you ignore. [problem] relies on people's fear and ignorance over these joke invoices - they will not be taking you to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

better paying £2.20 to park in bon accord centre

 

Just remember that the Bon Accord Centre, as well as the Trinity Cnetre, Shiprow and College Street car parks, are all ran by [problem] merchants...Chapel Street, Gallowgate, West North Street (OPPOSITE Morrisons, not the Morrisons Car Park) and the ones just off East North Street (both sides) are ACC car parks in the centre.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honest Citizen, I know it is very difficult to ignore this type of correspondence as it is designed to frighten a honest law abiding motorist into paying.

Look at the facts.You parked in a free car park and entered one of the shops.The PPC now want to charge you £85 for 'patron abuse'.

In the unlikely event of this going to court, not only would the judge throw the claim out, he may even suggest this was an act of fraud by the PPC.

 

With the facts you have given, you are absolutely safe in ignoring all future corrrespondence.

Post each letter you receive here so that we can all have a good laugh; and then eventually they will give up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All people see is the words "parking ticket" and almost always equate it with those issued under the road traffic act, not understanding that the road traffic act is irrelevent on private land.

 

No 'parking tickets' are issued under the Road Traffic Act.

 

Decriminalised parking enforcement is under the auspices of the Traffic Management Act 2004.

 

Non-decriminalised enforcement is under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't that what Richard was gettiing at Pat?

 

I didn't think so. Richard's exact words were

always equate it with those issued under the road traffic act,

I was merely pointing out that no tickets are issued under the RTA

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was trying to imply that most people receiving/advising on such documentation believe that it is issued in accordance with traffic related legislation, when regualrs of this board all know that this is not the case.

MBNA - Agreed to refund £970 in full without conditions. Cheque received Sat 5th Aug.:D

Lloyds - Settled for an undisclosed sum.:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he meant people incorrectly equate it with those issued under the RTA?

 

Anyway, OP - don't pay!

 

Richard has cleared up what he meant. ;)

 

My point was that there can be no equation as no tickets are issued under the RTA

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Hi. My first time on a forum so bear with me! I arrived at the Beach Retail Park Aberdeen on Saturday at around 2.30pm and received a ticket at 2.44pm whilst in Dunelm Mill. I then went into Asda. I only noticed it on Sunday morning. I have a receipt from Asda from 3.55pm. Incidentally it was Central Ticketing and the fine is £100. Should I ignore it or seek advice from friend who is a policeman in Aberdeen to see if he can shed any light on this crowd. I am raging!

 

Please help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. My first time on a forum so bear with me! I arrived at the Beach Retail Park Aberdeen on Saturday at around 2.30pm and received a ticket at 2.44pm whilst in Dunelm Mill. I then went into Asda. I only noticed it on Sunday morning. I have a receipt from Asda from 3.55pm. Incidentally it was Central Ticketing and the fine is £100. Should I ignore it or seek advice from friend who is a policeman in Aberdeen to see if he can shed any light on this crowd. I am raging!

 

Please help.

 

Help is easy - do nothing, and ignore all the rubbish they send you. Please note this is not a fine, but an invoice to a contract you did not agree to.

 

The going rate for Central Ticketing from the Beach Retail Park is: 1 letter from CT themselves; one from Roxburghe debt collectors; and 2 from Graham White Solicitors.

 

They are all bogus and should be ignored.

 

Do not contact them in any way. Do not tell them anything. They are desperate for something to cling on to, to beat you with. Don't give them any rope and they can't hang you.

 

Seriously, this is not the first time I have heard of people being ticketed for parking in the "wrong half" of the car park. I think they must be getting desperate to drum up business. It is absolutely scandalous.

 

Incidentally, I strongly urge writing to your MP on this - and it should be your MP, not MSP, as I have found. I got a letter from the Scottish Parliament Transport Minister, via MSP, who sounded very confused - referring to it as a "fine"...and urging me to seek legal advice!

 

FtBS

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I need Help!!

 

I parked my company car at the side of JJB at the Beach Boulavard in Aberdeen,albeit not in a space but definately NO yellow lines and there was plenty of room for other cars to pass.

 

I have been given a fine of £100 which can be reduced to £65 if I pay it in 28 days. I can appeal it if I can give them grounds!

 

What do I do.This is a huge fine! My problem I have is that As it is a company car if these cowboys contact the leasing company they in turn send a letter to my company,I get charged by the leasing company for sending the letter,as per speeding tickets!

 

Can they find out who the car is registered to?

 

Or should I just pay the £65 and learn my lesson?

 

I really don't want the hassle,If I appeal it they then have my name and address!!

 

Hopefully someone can help me.

 

Regards DB

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...