Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just noticed that one of farages favorite poops was suggesting another stealth tax of 10 quid a month - possibly per person inc children ..   Minister proposed £10 monthly insurance-style patient charge to fund NHS dentists WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK ‘Working people can’t afford another Tory tax rise,’ says Labour’s Wes Streeting   “They are framing this as some kind of pre-payment or quid pro quo, but of course, we already pay for the NHS through income tax, and in general that is a much more equitable way of doing it.” The DHSC declined to comment
    • All righty, seems I know why it was so quiet, the case was in transfer. I just got a letter from my local county court stating that they will be now taking over from Nots (dated 28 May 2024, wow) But no other correspondence so far. Will keep you posted
    • Hey,  I've messaged my husband but he is not contactable while he is in work. As soon as he is on his way home I will find out which finance company we used. I'm so sorry, I just don't know.
    • Okay, I have read your claim form. A pity you didn't come to us earlier. You haven't pleaded any legal basis for your claim and you haven't cited the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties Act. How long have you been aware of this forum? We will have to bring that out later when you do your witness statement. Once again, do the reading very carefully. I suggest that you wait until Monday before coming back here and confirming that you have read everything. And in particular, as I have indicated, read the thread which I posted above very carefully and in particular we the details of the contractual terms which were discovered and get a copy for yourself. Post a link to them in this thread as well for other people to see. They are relying on the fact that you don't have a direct contract with them and they are referring to a contractual term which is apparently in the contract between them and Packlink which specifically excludes third parties. You will definitely want to see this. They have tried to rely on this before but they have never produced the contract. In your witness statement you will have to request that they produced the contract in court. In terms of the mediation, frankly we would have advised you to decline mediation. It's all done secretively. Nothing is ever revealed and of course they will try to get you to compromise on the amount of money you are claiming. We would strenuously suggest that you don't give up a single penny. Do the reading that I have suggested, find the details of the contract which I have told you about which accepts direct liability to you, the customer – and post it here.
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Parking Notice - Brookwood Railway Station - CP Plus Ltd


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4938 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

Hi all, please help!

 

I returned back to my car to see a horrible yellow "Parking Notice Enclosed" stuck to my windscreen.

 

It seems I have been issued an £80 charge with a reason code 03 - which looks like it says "Not displaying a Valid Pay and Display Ticket"

 

In my windscreen, highly visible was the £6 parking ticket I had bought this morning.

 

The description bit of the ticket says hand written "No Valid Season Holder's Ticket on Display". When I looked at where I had neatly parked it seems I may have parked in the "season holders" section of the car park because I arrived very early in the morning and naturally parked in the closest available and free spot. I am not a season ticket holder.

 

The paint on the ground that tells you that you've parked in a season holders spot is written in fading white paint about 5 metres up the road from where I parked and ealy in the morning its not exactly visible even if you were looking out for it!

 

The ticket was issued by CP Plus Limited - looks like a private company ticket.

 

It seems particularly nasty and unfair to issue a ticket for what appears to me to be the most minor of infringements, if it can even be called that. It is not as if I didn't actually pay for the full price ticket, or didn't park properly! I have never been warned or told in any way this is a penalty before.

 

What do I do? Should I just hand over the money? please help as I'm pretty concerned

 

Thanks

Andy

 

p.s. it says I should respond within 7 days to appeal?

Edited by Zangy
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Are you sure? It really looks official? I so want to believe you!!!

 

of course it does! If it didn't look official how can they expect anyone to fall for their [problem]?:grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

It says "Parking Charge Notice".

 

It is on a railway car park - and the notice ticket says "In Accordance with the conditions of contract relating to parking as detailed on the signs"

 

It says reason code 3 which just says "not displaying a valid pay and display ticket". I guess they are arguing it was not valid as it wasnt a "season ticket" holders parking ticket - just one I bought from the machine.

 

Just seems so harsh...

Link to post
Share on other sites

firstly there is no such thing as a legal / official "Parking Charge Notice"

 

all part of the [problem]

 

3 simple rules to follow WHEN THEY WRITE TO YOU using various titles , pre-court . plasitc solicitors , all claiming they MAY do or will recomend that legal action is about to take place

 

1) IGNORE

 

2) IGNORE SOME MORE

 

3) GOTO 1

..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok - although I am sick with worry about this, I cannot and will not pay £80 for simply parking in a badly marked "season ticket holders only" parking bay when I have actually paid the parking fee and displayed the ticket correctly. Its so wrong for them to do that.

 

Can I keep you guys updated for when the letters eventually arrive? Just so I get some re-assurance I should ignore them. ARE YOU GUYS CERTAIN I SHOULD IGNORE THIS?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Zangy

 

thats how the [problem] works, they know many people do get worried about it

 

take a bit of time to read about the [problem] NCP use one of the biggest to run this on railway stations and the never do court

 

whoever sends you letters have no more power than your local dustman / postman etc, infact the postman is one of the few people that have a right to come to your door on behalf of royal mail

 

they can say anything in a letter , but doing it is another thing, they have one intention , to get you to pay by scare tactics, if they really could do anything the county courts would be full of PPC tickets, but they cant in reality they can only sue for their loss which in most cases is less than £2 , and that would never get to court

 

doorstep collecion threats, is hogwash , if on the rare occasion ( and it is very very rare ) they turned up, yuo have ervery right to tell them to foxtrot oscar, they have legal rights @ your doorstep , and the same applied to the toothless DCA's

..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks kiptower and the rest of you all - especially for responding so quick and putting my mind at ease. I hugely appreciate it and feel more confident to ignore the notice now.

 

I'll keep you guys updated in the hope that anyone else who comes across this thread will hopefully see that the outcome is as predicted - i.e. nothing will come of it.

 

a more relieved and slightly less nervous poor blighty!

Link to post
Share on other sites

glad we have been of help to you

 

when they send their toilet paper file it under rubbish and have a chuckle to yourself, that its getting to then that your not responding

 

one thing you can do is forward the information to all your family / friends workmates etc , they more that know the more the [problematic] loose :rolleyes:

 

 

like cooking check this out

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/218990-cooking-halogen-cookers.html

..

Link to post
Share on other sites

you have to laugh - this is on CP Plus' website:

 

"When it comes to parking enforcement issues, we emphasise the positive. We prefer to work through encouragement and prevention, identifying parking abusers and persuading them through a range of strategies not to re-offend, rather than primarily focusing on punishment and penalties."

 

Utter rubbish - never had anything from them before ever.... what a load of sh1t

Link to post
Share on other sites

And just how would they do this "identifying parking abusers and persuading them through a range of strategies not to re-offend"

 

take them round the back of the building and give them a kicking

 

in the first place they have no legal rights to do anything

 

more twaddle from the PLANET PERKY

..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im back to being worried again (sorry). i can't help but read more and more about railyway bye-laws etc...

 

see this thread;

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/207364-private-parking-fine-i-2.html

 

seems like there was not a conclusion drawn....

 

Does someone DEFINITIVELY have a view on tickets issued at railyway stations?

 

:-(

Link to post
Share on other sites

The ridicilous amount charged shows that it is a [problem] invoice

 

Ignore

 

You will receive reminders increasing in the amount charged - IGNORE

 

you will then receive letters from their debt collectors - IGNORE

 

you will then receive letters from their solicitors - IGNORE

 

you may receive a phonecall from the solicitors - IGNORE

 

If uncertain of any of the above proceedures try IGNORE

 

The Debt Collectors and Solicitors are the PPC in its many disguises trying to frighten and bully you into the paying. Only way to deal with bullies is to stand up to them or IGNORE them

 

If still uncertain then read through the various threads and you will see that IGNORE works well - have used it on several occasions and have invited the PPC's concerned to take the matter to court however they seem reluctant to take this step probably because they know they would loose and it would cost them money

Link to post
Share on other sites

The view I have taken is absolute worse case is a visit to the civil court with a judgement to pay the parking notice.....in other words no worse off and the PPC has had to go through a great deal of time and cost - and probably more cost than the value of the payment received!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im back to being worried again (sorry). i can't help but read more and more about railyway bye-laws etc...

 

see this thread;

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/207364-private-parking-fine-i-2.html

It is almost certainly an invoice. Do the signs mention the rail byelaws? Does the invoice? Other key terms to look for are Penalty Charge Notice, Excess Charge Notice or Fixed Penalty Notice. If they don't contain these terms then I would say that you are looking at a private parking company invoice. If they do it might indicate legitimacy but be warned that some PPC's use these terms (unlawfully IMO) in an attempt to appear legitimate when they are not.

 

If you are really worried you could contact the car park owners (usually Network Rail) and ask if CP Plus are acting as their agent?

 

A couple of other things if they are enforcing under the byelaws then you go to magistrates court as this is technically a criminal offense (albeit a minor one). The fine would be paid to the court and the PPC would receive sweet FA. As PPC's want the dosh they seek redress via invoices and contract law. This matters are in the settled in the county court (small claims) if it ever gets that far.

 

I don't ever recall a case of CP Plus doing court on this forum. They are definitely "court shy" because their invoices are dodgy on a number of grounds. The model for PPC's rely on people not knowing the that the invoices are dodgy and blindly paying up.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is almost certainly an invoice. Do the signs mention the rail byelaws? Does the invoice?

 

No mention of rail byelaws on the penalty notice.

 

I have to say, I have been on this forum for the last three days learning an awful lot since I got the PCN. I would probably have paid the fine if it was a reasonable sum. £15, 20 even £25. But £80!!! It was probably the size of the "fine" that stopped me in my tracks because it was in my view pure extortion.

 

I also had a look at some screenshots that other victims had put on the web from CP Plus. Looks like last year their standard penalty charge was £50 so they have increased the standard fine by £30 (approx 60% inflation rate in a year?!).

 

Does the government seriously not want to get involved to stop this practice?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also had a look at some screenshots that other victims had put on the web from CP Plus. Looks like last year their standard penalty charge was £50 so they have increased the standard fine by £30 (approx 60% inflation rate in a year?!).

 

Takings are seriously down due to forums such as this, so they need to up the bill to the mugs that actually pay.

 

Does the government seriously not want to get involved to stop this practice?

 

Do you really want the Government to get involved? They would only make a bad situation worse, look at the hash they made of clamping.

 

regards

Please remember our troops, fighting and dying in our name. God protect them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've managed to now get a photo of the sign in the car park and it does mention railway byelaws. Does this make a difference? Should I pay this?

 

the pcn does NOT mention railway byelaws specifically, but it does say subject to the sign in thhe car park which does.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...