Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi everyone, Thanks for the responses. Just a few follow up questions in light of what's been said:   If I dont appeal to PPM, who can I appeal to?   Why should the PCN been attached to the windscreen? Is this written in law?   I assumed the document I had received was the NTK, if this is not the case, what does a NTK look like?   Regarding the compliance with the Protection of Freedoms Act, could the "period" of parking not be argued either way? The legislation doesnt state it must have a start/end time of parking, which I assumed an ANPR camera would pick up if it had one. Is 4 minutes not technically enough to show the vehicle was parked?    Thanks !
    • I see jenrick has stuck his head up with them, and I'm sure this wont faze their nasty rhetoric one wit-less UK growth since 2010 has been lacklustre and largely driven by immigration, says report UK growth since 2010 has been lacklustre and largely driven by immigration, says report | Economic growth (GDP) | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Resolution Foundation report suggests parties are dodging the economic challenges facing the country   Net migration is more than two and a half times the 2010 figure despite a string of Tory pledges to reduce it Immigration: how 14 years of Tory rule have changed Britain – in charts | General election 2024 | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Net migration is more than two and a half times the 2010 figure despite a string of Tory pledges to reduce it    
    • Will get them done asap My job changes week to week so at the time I didn’t know. 
    • You will probably get a couple more reminders followed by further demands fro unregulated debt collectors with even increasing amounts to pay. They are all designed to scare you into paying.  Don't. It's a scam site and they do not know who was driving and they know the keeper is not liable to pay the PCN. Also the shop was closed so they have no legitimate interest in keeping the car park clear. So to charge £100 is a penalty as there is no legitimate interest which means that the case would be thrown out if it went to Court.  Keep your money in your wallet and be prepared to ignore all their letters and threats. Doubtful they would go to Court since a lot more people would not pay when they heard  MET lost in Court. However they may just send you a Letter of Claim to test your resolve.  If yoy get one of those, come back to us and we will advise a snotty letter to send them.  You probably already have, but take a look through some of our past Met PCNs to see how they are doing.
    • Hello, been a while since I posted on here, really hoping for the same support an advice I received last time :-) Long, long story for us, but basically through bad choices, bad luck and bad advice ended up in an IVA in 2016. The accounts involved all defaulted, to be expected. In 2018, I got contacted by an 'independent advisor' advising me that I shouldn't be in an IVA, that it wasn't the solution for our circumstances and that they would guide us through the process of leaving the IVA and finding a better solution. I feel very stupid for taking this persons advice, and feel they prey on vulnerable people for their own financial gain (it ended with us paying our IVA monthly contribution to them)-long and short of it our IVA failed in 2018. At the same time the IVA failed we also had our shared ownership property voluntarily repossessed (to say this was an incredibly stressful time would be an understatement!) When we moved to our new (rented) property in August 2018, I was aware that creditors would start contacting us from the IVA failure. I got advice from another help website and started sending off SARs and CCAs request letters. I was advised not to bury my head and update our address etc and tackle each company as they came along. Initially there was quite a lot of correspondence, and I still get a daily missed call from PRA group (and the occasional letter from them), but not much else. However, yesterday i had a letter through from Lowell (and one from Capital One) advising that they had bought my debt and would like to speak with me regarding the account. There will be several.of these through our door i suspect, as we did have several accounts with Capital One. Capital One have written to us with regular statements over the last 5 years, and my last communication with them was to advise of of our new address (June 2019), I also note that all of these accounts received a small payment in Jan2019 (i'm assuming the funds from the failed IVA pot). Really sorry for the long long post, but just thought id give (some of) the background for context.... I guess my question at the moment is.....how do I respond to Lowell...do I wait for the inevitable other letters to arrive then deal with them all together or individually...? Do I send them a CCA?  Many thanks
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

PCN Code 07: Meter Feeding in Camden


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4633 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

Hello

 

I received a PCN for making two separate payments whilst parking my car. Apparently, you are only allowed to insert payment once, and any subsequent ticket purchases are invalid. Here are some details of the PCN:

 

Issued by Camden

Contravention: Parked with payment made to extend the stay beyond initial time

Code 07

 

Firstly, it just doesn't make sense to issue a PCN whilst a valid pay and display was visible. I understand there was a sign stating "Maximum Stay: 2 Hours" and for this reason I assumed it would be ok to park within this time frame. The pay and display tickets were for:

 

First ticket: 1 Hour 1 min, Second ticket: 37 mins (Total parking time 1Hr 38Mins)

 

Because I parked within the maximum permissible time frame, and a valid pay and display was shown, is there anyway I can get this PCN cancelled? I have already appealed this decision, but they maintain the small prints on the machine stated their rules.

 

This seems to be a money making scheme for local councils, I see no purpose of this rule and would only make sense if I had exceeded the maximum stay of two hours. Surely they can't get away with this? I genuinely paid around £4 to park the vehicle, and it seems unfair for them to issue a PCN!

 

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a shame you din't ask advice before making your informal appeal if you had asked for all the relevant information regarding the contravention from the Council there may have been grounds for appeal, have you still got the discount period or are they asking for the full amount?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have extended the discount period by 14 days - But I plan to make a formal appeal in which case the normal charge of £80 applies. Can you provide any further advise?

 

There are two ways to issue a 07 PCN a wrong way and a correct way...

 

Wrong:

CEO wanders down street sees car with 2 consecutive P&D tickets and issued PCN.

 

Correct:

CEO sees car notes valve positions and ticket details and returns after expiry of first ticket to see if you have metre fed, issues PCN

 

If its the wrong way you have grounds for appeal you need to get the CEOs notes and also are there observation times on the PCN?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello green_and_mean

 

Thanks for your comments, really appreciated.

 

So basically I arrived at my car with one minute remaining, saw the CEO and gestured to him to allow me some time while I buy another ticket. He remained in the area, saw me purchase a new ticket, allowed me to replace the new ticket with the old ticket, patiently waited for me to leave the scene and then issued the PCN!

 

If it was wrong to purchase another ticket, he should have told me so!

 

Yes, there are observation times.

 

PCN issued at 13:19

CEO observed from 13:08 to 13:19

First ticket expiry: 13:15

Second ticket expiry: 13:53

 

On the letter I received from Camden, it says "Civil Enforcement Officers do act for the council and as such are expected to offer a high level of customer service"

Yeh Right! They are money hungry thieves who'll do anything to ensure a PCN is issued!

Edited by bengaltiger
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello green_and_mean

 

Thanks for your comments, really appreciated.

 

So basically I arrived at my car with one minute remaining, saw the CEO and gestured to him to allow me some time while I buy another ticket. He remained in the area, saw me purchase a new ticket, allowed me to replace the new ticket with the old ticket, patiently waited for me to leave the scene and then issued the PCN!

 

If it was wrong to purchase another ticket, he should have told me so!

 

Yes, there are observation times.

 

PCN issued at 13:19

PCN Observed from 13:08 to 13:19

First ticket expiry: 13:15

 

On the letter I received from Camden, it says "Civil Enforcement Officers do act for the council and as such are expected to offer a high level of customer service"

Yeh Right! They are money hungry thieves who'll do anything to ensure a PCN is issued!

 

If he observed the vehicle at 13.08 before you returned at 13.14 it sounds like they have you I'm afraid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The logic behind it is that your are only allowed a fixed period of time. If you were able to replace one ticket with a subsequent one, you could stay forever, always having a current ticket on show. That's why there is a rule - one ticket then you have to move. Even though you did not overstay, the rule still has to be applied to prevent this type of thing happenening generally.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The logic behind it is that your are only allowed a fixed period of time. If you were able to replace one ticket with a subsequent one, you could stay forever, always having a current ticket on show.

 

Not strictly true they could chose to only use the contravention if the driver exceeds the maximum stay I know where I live its Council policy not to issue unless they have done so. The CEO could have logged the vehicle and waited to see if he bought a 3rd PD taking him over the 2 hours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With regards to the signs, there was a big sign board saying Maximum stay 2 hours.

 

On the Pay & Display Machine, there were small prints of which number 7 read the following:

 

"Tickets should be purchased only at time of parking. Subsequent ticket purchase is a contravention"

 

This in my opinion is quite ambiguous. The above still indicates to me that parking within the two hour limit is permissible, but any subsequent tickets purchased to extend beyond the maximum stay of two hours is a contravention. A more clear sign would probably read DO NOT PURCHASE MORE THAN 1 TICKET

 

Would you not agree the information on the Pay & Display machine is quite confusing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, that means you can only buy a ticket at the time you park the car, so meter feeding is not permitted.

 

Of course the interesting question there is how anyone can comply - is it really possible to buy a ticket while parking the car, as this rule suggests the driver must do? Surely we would normally park the car, get out of the car, then buy the ticket, which would be a contravention under this rule?

Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, that means you can only buy a ticket at the time you park the car, so meter feeding is not permitted.

 

Of course the interesting question there is how anyone can comply - is it really possible to buy a ticket while parking the car, as this rule suggests the driver must do? Surely we would normally park the car, get out of the car, then buy the ticket, which would be a contravention under this rule?

 

Yes, this is quite interesting because time of parking is not clearly defined. Could I not argue that my time of parking was between 12:16 to 13:53? In which case I did purchase my P&D tickets within "time of parking"

 

And yes, my actual time of parking was probably a few minutes before this time, which therefore indicates that a contravention had already occurred (under their rules).

 

Now I am thinking if councils are actually allowed to apply this rule under any circumstances - Is it actually legal for them to do this? Because there is no valid reason for this rule except to generate funds.

 

I still maintain the wording on the machine is quite confusing, but the council is having none of it. Any further suggestions?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There could be valid reasons for the rule - for instance, the council wants to keep it as a very short stay car park, and is using a very cheap first hour, then an expensive second hour, to do that.

 

Even if that is not the case in this car park, they may have the same T&Cs in all their car parks to keep it simple for their enforcement staff. Have you worked out how much you paid for parking, in total, and how this relates to the cost of a single ticket covering the full two hours?

 

 

 

How far have you gone in the appeals process? Have you got to the formal appeal, or just the informal?

 

 

I

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello

 

The cost of purchasing one or two tickets is the same. You essentially pay for the time you stay so it doesn't matter how many tickets you actually purchase.

 

I've also read up somewhere on the internet that councils are using a legal loophole to apply this rule. Because actually the rule was set up to ensure no one stays beyond the maximum permissible stay - They are now using this to their advantage and now issuing PCN's for purchasing multiple tickets.

 

I have only just heard back from the informal appeal - So my next step is to write a formal appeal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...