Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
    • Massive issues from Scottish Power I wonder if someone could advise next steps. Tennant moved out I changed the electric into my name I was out the country at the time so I hadn't been to the flat. During sign up process they tried to hijack my gas supply as well which I made it clear I didn't want duel fuel from them but they still went ahead with it. Phoned them up again. a few days later telling them to make sure they stopped it but they said too late ? had to get my current supplier to cancel it. Paid £50 online to ensure there was money covering standing charges etc eventually got to the flat no power. Phoned Scottish Power 40 minutes to get through they state I have a pay as you go meter and that they had set me up on a credit account so they need to send an engineer out which they will pass my details onto. Phone called from engineer asking questions , found out the float is vacant so not an emergency so I have to speak to Scottish Power again. Spoke with the original person from Scottish Power who admitted a mistake (I had told her it was vacant) and now states that it will take 4 weeks to get an appointment but if I want to raise a complaint they will contact me in 48 hours and it will be looked at quicker. Raised a complaint , complaints emailed me within 24 hours to say it will take 7 days till he speaks with me. All I want is power in the property would I be better switching over to EON who supply the gas surely they could sort it out quicker? One thing is for sure I will never bother with Scottish Power ever again.    
  • 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

ParkingEye car park management 'speculative invoice'


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4514 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

My wife parked in the Priory Fields Retail Park in Taunton which is isolated from the town centre.

 

She spent 3 hours 26 minutes shopping only at that retail centre and had not realised there was a limit of 3 hours.

 

I find it highly unlikely that this would stand up in court as we can prove by receipts that she never left the retail park.

 

ParkingEye have clearly been employed to catch out people who just use the car park.

 

My wife is considering writing a letter of appeal to them but I feel that we should write and tell them that we will not be paying as we can prove she never left the site.

 

Does anyone have similar experience of this scenario?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Ignore completely and DON`T appeal, you will get the six standard letters of threat.

Now instead of being peed off at getting at ticket you can laugh, relax and sit back with a smile on your face having found this site!:lol:

I know what its like! But trust me, ignore and laugh and tell your friends!

 

Tell them you got a fake parking ticket and sound happy! Really happy!

Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife parked in the Priory Fields Retail Park in Taunton which is isolated from the town centre.

 

She spent 3 hours 26 minutes shopping only at that retail centre and had not realised there was a limit of 3 hours.

 

I find it highly unlikely that this would stand up in court as we can prove by receipts that she never left the retail park.

 

ParkingEye have clearly been employed to catch out people who just use the car park.

 

My wife is considering writing a letter of appeal to them but I feel that we should write and tell them that we will not be paying as we can prove she never left the site.

 

Does anyone have similar experience of this scenario?

 

 

its NOT a fine

 

nowhere on the paper work does it say that

 

its a speculative invoice

 

ignore them

 

and do some reading in this forum.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They do take people to court. Apparently one person was ordered to pay costs totaling £2500!!!

 

My wife parked in the Priory Fields Retail Park in Taunton which is isolated from the town centre.

 

She spent 3 hours 26 minutes shopping only at that retail centre and had not realised there was a limit of 3 hours.

 

I find it highly unlikely that this would stand up in court as we can prove by receipts that she never left the retail park.

 

ParkingEye have clearly been employed to catch out people who just use the car park.

 

My wife is considering writing a letter of appeal to them but I feel that we should write and tell them that we will not be paying as we can prove she never left the site.

 

Does anyone have similar experience of this scenario?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They do take people to court. Apparently one person was ordered to pay costs totaling £2500!!!

 

 

Really?

Care to give details so we can verify and then believe it?

(because, Dear brand new subscriber, quite frankly I don't)

Link to post
Share on other sites

That, according to numberous threads on various forums, was a highly suspect case. None of the circumstances, claims, defense and details have been revealed.

 

Widely thought to be a Plant Case in the hope of success for its future threat purposes. This is especially in view of the number of 'new posters' who keep appearing and 'know' all about it in discussions. and who certainly did not always quote correctly about such circumstances and involvements as are known.

 

It is interesting that full details are never produced in suport of the fear effect they try to induce. Maybe the thinker, unlike those before him, can assist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

surely if it was a plant case then the perpetrator would be guilty of fraud or purgery or something?

 

why? PPC says he owed charges, "victim" agreed. Court orders payment. Seems straight forward enough to me.

 

Seems unlikely that a car parking company would do that when the freedoms bill is shifting everything in favour of parking charges being more enforceable.

 

Really? So how do you figure the freedoms bill is shifting in their favour? It's still a "contract" which cannot involve a 3rd party.

 

Anyway, this is looking more and more like a plant thread soI think I will head for the door now. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right the contract is between the car park owner and the vehicle owner. The PPC is hired by the property owner to collect the money owed. Seems fairly straight forward.

 

If you stay in a hotel and go without paying, you will get an invoice. It would be fair to assume that the hotel owner will use the legal process to enforce payment of the amount owed.

 

Morally, it seems that anyone that uses a property should be prepared to pay the charge that applies. That is as long as the property owner makes the charges clear up front.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you stay in a hotel and go without paying, you will get an invoice. It would be fair to assume that the hotel owner will use the legal process to enforce payment of the amount owed.

 

Bad example!

 

If, after a night in a hotel, you fail to check out by the time stated the maximum they will seek is no more than for another period (night) at the same rate.

Compare that with a private car park where the first period is free or maybe a couple of pounds - there the PPCs feel it 'fair' to try to claim many many times the original amount, and then escalates the amount if unpaid, all dressed up as a 'penalty'!

 

(un)thinker - please give us the details of the case you are quick to quote.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you go away from the hotel without paying, then you will get charged more than the original cost as they will add collection fees... or the third party will.

 

Sad fact is that you don't get something for nothing. And if you want them to chase you, you will have to pay them for it!

Edited by Thinker123
incorrect
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you go away from the hotel without paying, then you will get charged more than the original cost as they will add collection fees... or the third party will.

 

Sad fact is that you don't get something for nothing. And if you want them to chase you, you will have to pay them for it!

 

£90 (for example) "collection fees" for a FREE car park?? In what way is that a fair cost of losses + reasonable collection fees, rather than a penalty? Just look at the recent case of Parking Eye v Smithy, where all they got was the daily charge + the £2.50 DVLA fee.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What i never understand is , why a large retail park would be happy with a PPC limiting the time its customers can stay before penalising them? surely that is counterproductive to the retail outlets on the park?

The only reason i can see for a time limit is for the greed of the PPCs.

hello all:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

What i never understand is , why a large retail park would be happy with a PPC limiting the time its customers can stay before penalising them? surely that is counterproductive to the retail outlets on the park?

The only reason i can see for a time limit is for the greed of the PPCs.

 

These commercial companies must have some reason for doing it. If the car park is full and genuine shoppers can't get in, then they will be missing out on revenue. Those that are in the car park, but are not genuine shoppers are blocking others from getting in.

 

The car park is a service provided to customers. People that use it without shopping or paying are engaging in an act of theft!

Link to post
Share on other sites

To Dave the Porch

What you are seeing is, to me, clearly a PPC 'plant' trying to unnerve you into paying unreasonable amounts of money to his employer.

 

Note the extensive 'knowledge'and one sided arguments - but never a mention of the details of the Case he quoted.

 

My advice to you is to follow the advice of those who have a good reputation and post count on these threads sooner than a newby.

Having followed these threads for a long time, posters and posts 2, 3, and 4 would convince me.

And you will get support and assistance from them and others in the unlikely event of things progressing beyond threats-o-gram letters to the Registered Keeper, who may or may not be the Driver.

Don't write and dont tell them the Driver's details - there is no obligation to provide these details to anyone other than to Police and Local Councils.

 

IGNORE and enjoy life!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The car park is a service provided to customers. People that use it without shopping or paying are engaging in an act of theft!

 

You mean unlike private parking companies who send frightening letters. carefully designed to look like official documents, to motorists trying to con them out of their money?

 

I'm endeavouring to find out more about this case. I don't believe it's genuine. I will post on here whatever I can find.

 

Perhaps meantime, you can answer the request above for more info, or at least tell us where you got your case details from.

 

I wait with little hope - go on, surprise me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

These commercial companies must have some reason for doing it. If the car park is full and genuine shoppers can't get in, then they will be missing out on revenue. Those that are in the car park, but are not genuine shoppers are blocking others from getting in.

 

The car park is a service provided to customers. People that use it without shopping or paying are engaging in an act of theft!

But people who park on large retail outlets are genuine shoppers or users of the retail park. most retail parks i have been on are in out of town areas or dissused old industrial areas. The car parks are not used for anything other than customers!

hello all:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...