OPC - Ingress Park

[lihi]

Accept responsibility????? when you move into a home and are open and honest about being a 2 car family and are told 'yeh no problem' and are then faced with this issue, are we not entitled to fight it or be annoyed?

 

If you read the thread properly, you'll see the majority of us are renters, and we don't receive and are neither entitled to read/review the lease paperwork that you were required to sign as a buyer and can only go by what we are told. We're not psychic. The ethos of the developments should be communicate to everyone so a choice can be as to whether we want to participate. WHY DID I CHOOSE THE BRIDGE OVER INGRESS??? Because I didn't want parking agro because we need 2 cars for our work.

 

Had either myself or Jeeves been aware of the parking restrictions do you seriously think we'd have moved on to either of the estates mentioned? Willingly taking this agro on? We're supposed to enjoy our home not worrying over whether our cars have been decorated with litter.

 

Instead an agent lied to my face and lied again when I confronted her about it and now I'm stuck in a home where I can't afford to move yet as I'm locked in a lease and am on maternity leave just about to have a baby. Making moving to relieve the problem nigh-on impossible til next year.

 

Fact is Private parking enforcements are not enforceable and theres nothing you can do bout it. I've been lied to to 'bag a sale' so the parking companies can bite me if they think they'll get any money out of me.

 

If you don't like it then maybe you should campaign with your residents association and management company for better awareness for those who don't buy or go and screw some signs up so us mere mortal renters are aware of restrictions so we don't inconvenience you poor owners!

 

If you don't like this post, go and start your own!!!

[lihi]

 

If you dont own and were told you could park where you liked by a previous resident, sorry but thats not correct, if i told you you could shoplift, it wouldnt mean that you could........

 

What has shoplifting got to do with it? What a poor comparison! If restrictions are in place and there are no signs to advertise them then how are we supposed to know? Even in shops they have signs 'SHOPLIFTERS WILL BE PROSECUTED' so how come they're afforded the right of awareness for a blatant abuse of the law but we're not?

 

Suppose it doesn't matter because we don't have to pay the [problem] attempts anyway .

[mickeyJ]

Oh, we're sorry Sweedish, what parking company do you work for? are you not making ur christmas bonus. There is such a thing as common sense, something which is seriously lacking with these idiots. I live in the quietest of quiet cul-de-sacs, whereby if you left ur car neatly outside ur garage, it is not effecting anybody, or indeed in one of the 100 empty VP bays. But ur right, it is selfish to have two cars! I work 12 hour shifts, and am a law abiding, tax paying citizen. I do not deserve to be slapped with an illegal 'fine' by a bunch of money grabbing cowboys just because I put my car in one of a row of empty bays (for all those visitors who turn up between 3-5 am) I didn't sign anything, and the implied contract bull**** on the teeny yellow signs doesnt mean crap.

I do agree that cars that have been dumped in such a way that it causes an obstruction etc, should be dealt with, but this is where common sense comes in, not "will i make my xmas bonus?"

Why don't u crawl back under ur troll bridge.

[Ingressresident]

All I can say is 'good for you Sweedish'. We are residents at Ingress Park and have lived in 2 different properties over the last 3 years. For 3 years we have had nightmares with parking - mainly finding anywhere for our guests to park and finding other people in our bays. In both properties which we have rented we were told (and it was written in our lease) exactly how many bays we had and where they were situated. When we first moved in we had 2 cars and we looked at various different properties - immediately discounting any that only had 1 bay. You should NOT take heed of what previous tenants say......surely you can read and understand the term 'visitor' which generally means someone who is not a resident here! If people took heed of the parking restrictions which are clearly marked all over the estate then there would be no need for parking companies to issue fines. Mickeyj I totally disagree with you about the number of visitor bays. There are only enough when residents don't park in them and it is only with the new rules that we can actually see how many there are previously occupied by residents. Every resident on the estate was issued with a notice outlining the new rules and how to go about getting scratchcards. (We received this through the door and via email from our landlord) We applied for ours immediately and received them shortly after. If you have moved in subsequently then your landlord should inform you of the procedure. We are totally infavour of the restrictions and for the first time in the 6 months we have lived in our 2nd property - we can actually find space in one of the 8 VP bays close by for our visitors to park in!

[lihi]

In both properties which we have rented we were told (and it was written in our lease) exactly how many bays we had and where they were situated.

 

Good for you ingressresident, your landlord/agent was generous enough to put something in your lease! So because it was included in yours you have the right to assume every other agent in the land has included it in theirs? WRONG. Nothing in my tenancy agreement, in fact not even a mention of the word parking. How about yours Jeeves? I can't speak on behalf of Jeeves but I grilled my estate agent and the sales office separately and they all LIED through their back teeth. Please don't assume because you were fortunate enough to have had someone be honest with you that everyone else has.

 

Why would anyone assume there would be parking enforcements in place when there are no signs and nothing in a lease agreement? Parking restriction signs are in the highway code and the local authority parking enforcement offices have to abide by them, otherwise PCN's are invalid.

 

So why should private parking estates be any different?

 

They aren't, which is exactly why we are well within our legal right to file the invoices under 'B'.

[Jeevesikins]

I thought this thread was over...it just shows you how much fun discussing parking regulations can be.

 

Sweedish, Lihi is absolutely correct - we were NOT told that having two cars would be a problem for us to rent the property we were currently at - despite letting everyone know that we were a two car family. Not by the landlord (who was unaware if the new parking regulations would affect us), not by the estate agent, and not by the (then) current tenant. Does this make us at fault? We have not signed, or agreed - verbally or otherwise to sign up to these parking regulations - unlike those tenants who have.

 

I do not apologise for being a two-car household, and I would never dream of parking in someone elses allocated resident bay. If VP bay crowding was really a problem - they (Peverel/OPC) could easily sell permits to be able to use a VP bay etc (as many other councils do for visitors street parking). They could even "forbid" parking in VP bays at certain hours, with anyone being able to park after a certain time - to ensure fairness.

But NO....it's given control to OPC who patrol at a very telling 3am-5am. When have you ever heard of putting out a parking ticket for the next day when you leave your car in the evening? Oh that's right - nowhere, because it's a cheap trick to catch as many people as possible by their parking [problem].

And 10 scratchcards a month? So only 10 visitors a month? My god...do you really believe you can be told how many people can visit you a month by a private parking company?

 

I love the Ingress Park development but it's ruined by the stupid attitude to car parking. I would never buy here knowing how cowed residents have to be into signing their lives away. Considering how expensive it is - you'd imagine residents would demand more for their money, not less.

 

Currently, I'm having fun with OPC - we have got a way of tricking them at the moment that has us in stitches (any one want to know just PM me) and just shows you how unorganised and unprofessional OPC is.

[Graham117]

The danger might be, if too many people ignore the tickets, they might bring the clampers in.

 

Invest in an angle grinder or good hacksaw ready for that fateful day...!

[Seascout]

One of the things that makes Ingress Park such a nice place to live is that it is not full of cars parked all over the kerbs and vans etc blocking the streets as Waterstone Park is. I welcome the parking company to the estate and hope they stay a long time. Maybe that car parked 2 foot off the kerb in IPA will not return!

 

However to rent an apartment and be told you can park here and there is the type of low life response an agent would make, also the system of cards has not been well promoted and advertised to allow everyone to understand it. Where the problem lies is with the planners, they insisted on reduced parking bays on the estate when planning was granted. Why a parking area has not been provided where vehicles could be left makes me wonder if they live in the real world or one they are trying to create where we all only have one car by force!

 

I sympathise that misinformation has been given but this is a nice place to live without thousands of cars all over the place, maybe anti social behaviour and litter would be a better focus of all this effort?

[Jeevesikins]

I just wish someone would tell me what is so wrong with residents parking in visitor's bays that offends the management company so? The only people who will park in visitor's bays are either residents or "genuine" visitors to Ingress Park. It is not like people are parking in these bays and skipping off to Bluewater for hours.

 

As I've stated before, the management company could be sympathetic regarding the obvious demand for parking which is not being supplied - but by allowing OPC to penalise any family with more than one car - they are just driving a wedge between the management company and residents/tenants. A case in point is how the management company have stated Sky dishes are not allowed on properties, but the amount of SKY engineering vans I've seen coming and going from Ingress Park is hilarious.

[Zamzara]

One of the things that makes Ingress Park such a nice place to live is that it is not full of cars parked all over the kerbs and vans etc blocking the streets as Waterstone Park is. I welcome the parking company to the estate and hope they stay a long time. Maybe that car parked 2 foot off the kerb in IPA will not return!

 

They're running a business though. Once they solve the parking problem, they have no choice but to start targetting residents or they will immediately be bankrupted and the staff will go unpaid. This is why permits always seem to mysteriously 'slip down' a lot when PPCs are around.

[Seascout]

We will all have a different view of the situation. I personally dont mind people parking in VP's but do not like all the vans and street parking, it has really made life difficult for us sometimes. Others have had garages blocked and private spaces parked in etc. What is the answer? We only have one car but still had tickets we had to contest before the new arrangements.

 

I think Greenhithe village has more of a problem with the cars and vans from Ingress now and that will have to be addressed. The planners have a bit of a social experiment going on here, low cost housing mixed with the residents, parking for one car and more and we can tell them it does not work but they dont want to listen.

[lihi]

 

However to rent an apartment and be told you can park here and there is the type of low life response an agent would make, also the system of cards has not been well promoted and advertised to allow everyone to understand it. Where the problem lies is with the planners, they insisted on reduced parking bays on the estate when planning was granted. Why a parking area has not been provided where vehicles could be left makes me wonder if they live in the real world or one they are trying to create where we all only have one car by force!

 

 

This is our point, had all of the information been available at the time the properties were available then would any of us seriously have considered living in these developments. No. We would have carried on looking until we found somewhere that met our needs. Moving is stressful and expensive, it's infuriating to be in this position because the truth has been deliberately withheld. Why were some agents so upfront about the information and others so deceiving?!

 

It's so deflating to be in a home which I thought met all our needs and would be our home until we were ready to buy in a few years. Now I'm pregnant and we're stuck in a position where we can't afford to move right now and I'll have to return to work quicker than I wanted to so we can pull the money together to move AGAIN.

 

None of us on this thread promote parking in others bays, being selfish and parking dangerously or blocking others access. I think we would have taken the enforcements a lot better had we willingly entered this stressful situation with our eyes wide open but we didn't so we're going to fight every ticket.

[Seascout]

I agree with you completely. We also feel we were misled over service charges and the quality of service from Peverel is very poor. As you say moving is a soul destroying experience if you feel it is the wrong move. This is a first class development but needs better management.

 

The whole manner of the parking seemed to me to be confused by those implementing it, what I see are a lot of councillors, managers etc with agendas and it still is to a degree. Please don't get me wrong, I fully understand how difficult it must be in your situation and would take the same line of action. I wish you well with your new baby and hope it all works out well.

[mickeyJ]

One of the things that makes Ingress Park such a nice place to live is that it is not full of cars parked all over the kerbs and vans etc blocking the streets as Waterstone Park is. I welcome the parking company to the estate and hope they stay a long time. Maybe that car parked 2 foot off the kerb in IPA will not return!

 

However to rent an apartment and be told you can park here and there is the type of low life response an agent would make, also the system of cards has not been well promoted and advertised to allow everyone to understand it. Where the problem lies is with the planners, they insisted on reduced parking bays on the estate when planning was granted. Why a parking area has not been provided where vehicles could be left makes me wonder if they live in the real world or one they are trying to create where we all only have one car by force!

 

I sympathise that misinformation has been given but this is a nice place to live without thousands of cars all over the place, maybe anti social behaviour and litter would be a better focus of all this effort?

 

Yes, this is where common sense prevails!! Tickets the vans that are left all over the shop. There is a difference.

[electron99]

We also feel we were misled over service charges and the quality of service from Peverel is very poor.

 

Peverel have an appalling reputation for managing pproperties.Residents of course do have the option of sacking them and finding someone else.

[Jo1983]

My boyfriend parked outside my house in Ingress Park at about 5.10am, the sign states that any vehicle parked within a VP bay between the hours of 3am and 5am will receive a ticket. He was not parked in a VP bay, he was parked just opposite my house and not blocking any roadway. He received a ticket at 5.17am which is clearly outside of the stated hours. When he called the OPC they said that as he was not in a VP bay he is subject to a ticket and has to pay this. Please clarify if this means that he can not park anywhere on the development unless within VP bay with a permit??

I can understand it between the hours of 3 and 5 as stated but is it reasonable to issue and demand payment for tickets outside of this time which goes against what the signs say?

I am pretty sure that the sign does not state that and wish to know whether he is able to contest this. Please help as the fine is due by Wednesday 22nd October.

 

Thank you very much.

[Al27]

There is no 'contesting it'. It's a [problem].

 

• do not pay

• do not contact them

• ignore their threatening junkmail

• they will then give up and go away

 

Private companies have no powers in law to issue fines. Anybody can buy an address from the DVLA for £2.50 a time and then bombard them with letters.

 

It's a mail trick. Send out letters and a percentage of people will pay.

 

Tell your mate and spread the word about these vultures.

[Ingressresident]

Unfortunately the MANY signs around Ingress Park do state that cars must be parked in bays - not just on the road. Even if it's not blocking anyone it is still not parked legally. Even if the roads in Ingress Park are private - the company still has the power to ticket you as they are contracted by the management to enforce the regulations. FYI the first cases are now being hounded.......people have had the bailiffs at their door for non-payment and a magistrate who resides in Ingress Park has said that no resident who has parked in a VP overnight and been ticketed will get the fine squashed as there is signage all over the estate clearly stating the parking restrictions! Sorry!

[crem]

Unfortunately the MANY signs around Ingress Park do state that cars must be parked in bays - not just on the road. Even if it's not blocking anyone it is still not parked legally.

 

"Not parked legally"!! How can a car be parked "illegally" on a private estate?

 

Even if the roads in Ingress Park are private - the company still has the power to ticket you as they are contracted by the management to enforce the regulations.

Yes they have the power to ticket, and the RKs of the vehicles have the power to ignore them

 

FYI the first cases are now being hounded.......people have had the bailiffs at their door for non-payment

Bailiffs at the door?? so these scamvoices have been to court, won their case, then the RKs of the cars (who may not have even driven it to that location) have refused to pay the court, then the PPC has been back to court (several months later) and got a default judgement and then sent bailiffs in! I doubt it!! More likely you mean the PPC has sent toothless DCAs in to beg for their money.

 

and a magistrate who resides in Ingress Park has said that no resident who has parked in a VP overnight and been ticketed will get the fine squashed

...and he is empowered to state this by what authority? Is he planning to hear every PPC [problem] case for this estate, which btw he would have to have himself barred from because he has a vested interest. Further, no county court case sets a president so each case has to be heard on it's own merits. e.g. I go away on a business trip for a week, my wife and brother both have keys to my car, I return and am given a scamvoice by OPC. Neither of them tell me who was driving that day so OPC take me to court (as the RK) I have work documents/hotel receipts proving I was out of town. Now, tell me how this idiot of a magistrate is going to find me guilty of parking my car there!

 

as there is signage all over the estate clearly stating the parking restrictions! Sorry!

 

 

So is someone just Trolling?

Edited October 19, 2009 by crem

[Ingressresident]

Listen Crem - get a life! If you want to live in Ingress Park - then abide by the rules that are clearly stated all over. The magistrate in question is merely stating that whoever parks their car (be it you or your family) can presumably read and should know better than to flout the rules that are there to make Ingress park a better place for all of us. There are MANY residents who are 100% behind the new restrictions and are delighted that the new rules have largely been very successfully received and adhered to. It has made the parking situation a lot better and our visitors can finally find a place to park. If you choose to be one of those who will constantly stick your finger up against them........then I can only hope you come up against a very unsympathetic magistrate when the time comes! If you don't like it - try living in Waterstone park which is a NIGHTMARE to live in or visit!

[crem]

Listen Crem - get a life!

Got one thanks.

 

If you want to live in Ingress Park - then abide by the rules that are clearly stated all over. The magistrate in question is merely stating that whoever parks their car (be it you or your family) can presumably read and should know better than to flout the rules that are there to make Ingress park a better place for all of us.

He can think that all he likes, it doesn't make the scamvoice enforcable against the Registered Keeper, therefore the court case will fail, or doesn't your friendly magistrate realise that?

 

There are MANY residents who are 100% behind the new restrictions and are delighted that the new rules have largely been very successfully received and adhered to. It has made the parking situation a lot better and our visitors can finally find a place to park. If you choose to be one of those who will constantly stick your finger up against them........then I can only hope you come up against a very unsympathetic magistrate when the time comes! If you don't like it - try living in Waterstone park which is a NIGHTMARE to live in or visit!

..

Edited October 19, 2009 by crem

[Ingressresident]

Unfortunately.....if you checked your facts - you would know that the law of the land states that the RK is ultimately responsible for all fines unless he can prove otherwise - and being away on business/someone else driving your car doesn't exhonerate you - you just have to nominate them to pay it. The only time you would not be held responsible is if you have reported your car stolen!

[Startkey&Clutch]

Unfortunately.....if you checked your facts - you would know that the law of the land states that the RK is ultimately responsible for all fines unless he can prove otherwise - and being away on business/someone else driving your car doesn't exhonerate you - you just have to nominate them to pay it. The only time you would not be held responsible is if you have reported your car stolen!

 

The law of the land may well indeed state that, but its not a fine.

[Jeevesikins]

Just to say as another Ingress Resident who sees the same cars receiving tickets time and again, and still parking where they want - I know that NOONE is being hounded for anything. OPC rely on their [problem] and the fear of "legal action" to make people fork over £50. Word of mouth and this very helpful website has pretty much ensured most residents who have been here a while know what's up. People like Jo are the ones at risk of paying up - so Jo, listen to the people here and ignore them! Forever!

 

I have received some junk mail stating that "OPC vs Me" legal action if I do not pay the money soon. So am expecting some more threatening mail soon, and like the rest of OPC's documents - are put out of sight and out of mind.

[lamma]

Is this a self ticketing operation ? Is Ingressresident one of the ticketers ? Is there commission payments involved ? And the law of the land does not state that the RK is ultimately responsible for all fines. And as Startkey&Clutch says these are not fines in any event.