TPS Parking Solutions Limited **WON**

[spitfire650]

Anyone heard of these people - I couldn't find any posts using the search function.

 

Had a "Parking Charge Notice" in the post today where a third party was driving the vehicle registered in my name and overstayed the 2 hour free parking.

 

I called the freephone number and was told "by law the registered keeper is liable for all fines" - pushed him quite hard on this, obviously he couldn't quote any legal statute and fell back on "that's what his superiors told him". Even when I asked where they got their legal training he stayed calm. The guy obviously wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed as when asked "Would you pay £70 to some some dodgy outfit operating from a PO box based upon what some nameless legal wizard says" he responded "probably not". He suggest I could write in and appeal.

 

The notice doesn't mention the registered office as required under the Companies Act so at least I got to file a complaint on that, which they actioned almost instantly.

Edited September 25, 2009 by spitfire650

[spitfire650]

Thanks Michael,

 

Interesting the first post relates to the same car park as well - Jempsons.

 

Even more interesting, Jempsons have some interesting claims on their website including: "We believe in treating others with fairness and respect" and "The Jempson family acknowledges the providence of God in our continued success and strives to implement Christian beliefs in the conduct of business" as well as thinking claiming they "Glorify God through our work."

 

Funny thing is I don't recall Jesus allowing parasites like this to prey on his followers. This may bring them rewards in the next life but has just lost them a customer in this one.

 

Anyway, here's what I am sending to TPS, having got the idea of imposing a reciprocal letter charge from another cagger.

 

I acknowledge receipt of your recent parking invoice, a copy of which is attached for ease of reference. I confirm that I am the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but was not the driver on September 16, 2009 and the validity of the invoice is therefore disputed. Please note my correct address, as above.

 

When I called your office earlier I was informed by Daniel McHoist that I was liable to pay the invoice as the registered keeper of the vehicle.

 

I am unaware of entering into any contract with either TPS Parking Solutions Limited (“TPS”) or Jempsons Store (“Jempsons”) and have not authorised any third party to do so on my behalf.

 

In the circumstances I am writing to request that you supply me with a clear and unambiguous reference to the law or statute which creates the liability you refer to, bearing in mind I was not present at Jempsons on September 16, 2009 and therefore have no personal knowledge of the sign to which you refer, and appear to rely upon.

 

As you will no doubt appreciate, I have more productive ways of spending my time than responding to unjustified requests for payment and will therefore for the sake of business efficacy take the opportunity to introduce some presumptive contractual conditions of my own going forward, specifically:

 

1. Having clearly requested you supply me with reference to the law or statute creating a contract between myself and TPS or Jempsons, I expect this to be provided prior to receiving any kind of other correspondence, in particular further payment demands, from TPS, or any representative, or agent, acting on behalf of TPS.

 

2. In the event that I receive any further communication at any address from TPS, its representatives or agents that does not contain, or precede the information requested in paragraph 1 above, you hereby agree that TPS will compensate me, for my time at the rate of £70 for each and every letter (reduced to £50 if paid within 14 days) received that does not contain or precede the required information requested above.

 

3. You further agree that any invoice issued to TPS under paragraph 2 above that remains unpaid after 28 days will incur an administration charge of £40 and TPS hereby agree to payment of the that administration charge in the event of payment not being received with 28 days notwithstanding the validity of the invoice.

 

4. You further agree that receipt of any further correspondence from TPS relating to this matter confirms the irrevocable and unequivocal acceptance of these terms for and on behalf of TPS and creates a binding and enforceable contract.

 

Edited October 8, 2009 by spitfire650

[spitfire650]

Got a response from these tools, as below.

 

Thank you for your letter concerning our above Parking Charge Notice.

 

We monitor and manage this car park with cameras on behalf of and on the instructions of our clients in accordance in accordance with their Terms and Conditions, which are displayed on signage throughout the property.

 

This PCN was issued correctly and legally according to the DVLA Code of Practice for the management of camera controlled private car parking and British Parking Association guidelines.

 

We will accept the reduced charge of £50.00 if received by us within the 10 days of the date of this letter, after which point we will require the fully amount of £70.00.

 

If payment is not received within the specified time then further action will be take.

 

I am not sure how this could be remotely considered an intelligent response to the letter I sent him.

 

Ordinarily I would ignore anything from a PPC, but this one is so dumb I am sorely tempted to engage him just for fun!

[spitfire650]

Well here's what I sent back (together with an invoice for £70!)

 

I am in receipt of your letter dated September 29 sent to my old address despite your previously being advised of the correct address as above.

 

In my letter to you dated September 24, 2009, I specifically requested you to explain on what basis I was liable under the contract you refer to, as I was not the driver of the vehicle on the date you allege this to have been parked at your client’s property. Since your unhelpful and vacuous response fails to provide this information, I am repeating that request and await an intelligent reply.

 

In the meantime, I am attaching for your attention, my invoice for the processing of your recent communication in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in my last letter, and which you have now accepted.

 

I will accept the reduced amount of £50.00 if received here with 14 days of the date of this letter, after which point I will require the full amount of £70.00.

 

If payment if not received within the specified time, proceedings will be instigated against yourselves to recover this amount together with attendant court costs.

Edited October 8, 2009 by spitfire650

[spitfire650]

You can't charge them because they are entitled to write to you if they want, so you haven't provided consideration.

 

That aside, their response is clearly a stock letter which is presumably sent without reference to the actual content of the 'appeal'.

 

Good point.

 

What consideration do you suppose they provided me with when I sat in my office 30 miles away at the point in time they are charging for parking in their client's car park?

[spitfire650]

Absolutely none as you're not a party to the contract.

 

But you are forgetting in PPC La-la land the normal rule of law doesn't apply.

 

Just like I was under the impression that s.172 of the RTA only entitles the constabulary to require the driver's details before they kindly shared there unique insight on this apsect with me.

[spitfire650]

Spitfire, why are you wasting time and money communicating with these idiots? You allready said you would normally ignore them, so why are you not?

jed

 

Entertainment

[spitfire650]

Good for you, but you need to get out more. He he.

jed

 

Probably true, but giving dross like this a hard time has it rewards!

[spitfire650]

Because there's no legal basis to do so.

We'll see about that

[spitfire650]

Another letter today - this one with plenty of read ink - I thought it would rude not to respond:

 

I write further to my letter dated October 7, 2009 and to which you have not responded, having today received a curious document entitled “Parking Charging Notice” in red ink which was sent to my old address despite your repeatedly being advised of the correct address, as above. Please note the redirection service from my previous address will end shortly and any mail sent there will be returned undelivered.

 

Assuming that can read, you will see that in my letters of September 24 and October 7, 2009, I specifically requested you to explain on what basis I was being held liable under the contract you refer to, as I was not the driver of the vehicle on the date you allege this to have been parked at your client’s property.

 

I am assuming from the absence of any reply that there is no in fact explanation and therefore no liability. In the circumstances, I would suggest you take this matter up with the driver of the vehicle, as I do not believe I can be of any further assistance to you.

 

In the meantime, I am attaching, for your attention, my invoice for the processing of your recent communication in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in my letter of September 24, 2009, and which you have now accepted.

 

I will accept the reduced amount of £50.00 if received here with 14 days of the date of this letter, after which point I will require the full amount of £70.00.

 

If payment if not received within the specified time, proceedings will be instigated against yourselves to recover this amount together with attendant court costs.

[spitfire650]

Thought as I wasn't getting a satisfactory response from the company it would appropriate to send a copy to Mr Tito Ponzetta at home the guiding light behind the TPS Parking Solutions [problem] which from looking at the latest accounts is making a six figure annual profit defrauding the UK public.

 

Tito Ponzetta

1 Warwick Court

Kettering

Northants NN15 5NL

 

 

 

Dear Tito,

 

Disputed Parking Invoice:

I am enclosing a copy of a letter sent to your office today and would be grateful if I received an intelligent response instead of further meaningless drivel.

 

Many Thanks,

Edited October 16, 2009 by spitfire650

[spitfire650]

Good luck, I like the idea of copying in the boss at his home address.

regards

 

Thanks - he'll be getting quite a bit more mail too

Edited October 16, 2009 by spitfire650

[spitfire650]

No response from Tito yet ....

 

Found him on Facebook maybe he would prefer to be contacted via this.

 

Looks like a respectable businessman doesn't he?

 

 

And here's his partner Steve Hill

 

[spitfire650]

Had another letter from these maggots this morning - see below - not much of explanation of why the registered keeper is liable, which is hardly surprising as there isn't one.

 

 

 

[spitfire650]

Ha ha.

 

Computer says no.

 

Simples - but then we already knew a parking [EDIT] has a lower IQ than a meerkat

[spitfire650]

Even though their last letter obviously doesn't warrant a response, I thought it would be discourteous to ignore it ....

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

Disputed Parking Invoice: 0226090916001

I acknowledge receipt of your letter dated October 16, 2009.

 

I note that despite repeated requests, you have been unable to provide any credible authority confirming the registered keeper of a vehicle being liable under your contract with Jempsons, and am therefore of the view that none exists.

 

As I have previously indicated, I do not drive the vehicle in question. It is a pool car used by different employees of our business. I am not currently aware of who was using the vehicle on September 16, 2009. While I have absolutely no obligation to provide you with details of the driver, I will endeavour to obtain these subject to being properly reimbursed for my time. I estimate this will take at least one hour, for which my charging rate is £95.

 

If you wish me to make further enquires please submit your remittance in the sum of £235, being £95 for my time together with the two attached unpaid invoices totalling £140, to the above address. Once your cheque has cleared I will use my best endeavour to obtain the driver’s information.

 

Until such time as I receive the payment outlined above, I will be unable to assist you further and remind you, whilst writing, that further frivolous demands will incur an administration charge in accordance with our existing agreement.

[spitfire650]

Must be my lucky day - TPS Parking have decided to waive the penalty that they were never entitled to.

 

I'd be interested if anyone here knows on what basis a member of the public is not allowed to write to the director of a company at his home address, particularly when the company concerned is in the business of retrieving addresses from databases itself and then sending bogus invoices and threats!

 

[spitfire650]

Thanks - I was bit surprised how easily these parasites accepted the reality of the situation.

 

I guess you can make them back off if you make enough of a nuisance of yourself!

[spitfire650]

I think that would be a good idea, with a photo, home address, email address and mobile number, if known.

 

Would you like to start the thread? I'll add these two clowns!

 

Its time to fight back against this kind of exploitation.

[spitfire650]

Just had a nice email from him too:

 

Without prejudice

The notice was cancelled as a goodwill gesture and was never issued invalid, you were issued a ticket as the registered keeper. We are happy to attend court if required. We also reserve the right to charge administration, legal and any other cost associated with your case including harassment from this point on.

Yours Sincerely,

 

TPS Parking Solutions Ltd

Central Processing Office

TPS UK

PO Box 7135

Kettering

NN16 6BP

]E: pcn@totalparking.co.uk

[spitfire650]

Look at this lot at Town and City, they've got more directors than a FTSE 100 company lol.

Why not? Like pigs at the trough.

 

Couple of them look like they were straight out of prison when the pictures were taken - which is where they probably belong.

 

It appears that pirates like this also "police" the mother and baby spaces at the supermarket, rather than the proper authorities, which is handy to know as they are always close to the entrance and a bit wider which avoids some oik banging their door into your car!

Edited October 28, 2009 by spitfire650

[spitfire650]

I don't supposed they have explained on what authority they are issuing the ticket?

 

How can they impose a penalty if he actually is disabled but forgot the badge - at the end of the day he was still entitled to be in the space, and wasn't depriving anyone that was entitled to use it.

[spitfire650]

FAQs - Private Parking Companies/Charges (everything you need to know)

 

Help above.

 

Thanks for that - the author of that article knows his stuff. I feel like calling the cops regarding the TPS posstops - there's a breach of the Administration of Justice Act there that could do with investigating.

[spitfire650]

Find out who the Inspector is at your local station and write to him explaing not just what has happened but also the implications of it and why it must be investigated. Have a look through your paperwork and see if you can find any breaches of the Fraud Act 2006 aswell.

 

TFT

 

I think I will do just that.

[spitfire650]

Tell them you have no such 'good will' on your part, and still require your invoices to be paid.

 

I am seriously thinking about filing a claim for the £140 invoiced in the County Court as it only costs £25 and their office is a good long way from the court if they want a small claims hearing to argue it.

 

Bearing in mind that my "contract" was them was based upon the same logic as they issue the penalties and I can show a loss for time incurred corresponding I think it is worth a shot.

 

The input of others before making a decision, would be appreciated!