Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

I might have made things worse - UKCPS speculative invoice


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4443 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 there,

 

I like most people am looking for some advice.

 

Back in December, I parked, very breifly (about half an hour or so) in an off road carpark, so that my disabled mother could pop across to a restaurant over the road and use their toilet. (She's in her 70s, diabetic, has a replacement hip and takes loads of pills for various ailments).

 

Anyway, besides the point - I wasn't familiar with the area I was in, so in her time of need I turned off the main road into a side street, and there were some parking spaces near some flats. There were some notices saying residents only, permit holders only - but I figured this was a quick emergency - no harm, no foul. I even checked the car when we returned - no ticket, no worries.

 

However, a few days ago I recieved one of UKCPs "We want your money" letters. Apparently, they had given me a ticket, which had not been paid, and now as a result they want me to pay £90. Now there is a photo of my car on their website with a ticket on the window - and I appreciate all that proves is the ticket was there when the photo was taken.

 

The problem is, that I was so flustered by this letter, and angry - that I failed to think straight. Instead of looking online and finding this place first, I foolishly followed their appeal proceedure to plead my case. Mainly that it was an emergency, in an empty car park, and there was no ticket when I returned to the car (to which I have a witness).

 

The problem now, as I understand it, is by following their appeal proceedure, I have revealed myself as the driver, and have practically admitted that I know I wasn't supposed to park there.

 

Where do I stand?

 

As far as going to court (if it ever got that far) I'm currently unemployed due to being made redundant - and I'm an un-discharged bankrupt. Would they ever get a penny out of me?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you were certainly wrong to engage in their procedure.

 

However, from now on you should not bother respond any more - although you will have triggered them off to pursue you even harder than they might otherwise.

 

The best they can ask you to pay is a sum which is calculated to cover their administrative expenses.

 

Read the Parking Eye case on the CAGMag

Link to post
Share on other sites

On a side note, although they have photographs of my car, not one of them shows that the car is parked illegally. They don't show any signs or parking restrictions. Although I had said I know I probably shouldn't have parked there, I never admitted to seeing any such signs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The car isn't parked illegally, you have broken no laws. They are inviting you to pay an invoice for breaching a contract - the contract being the signs they would have displayed at the site. This means a couple of things: If there were no signs visible then there wasn't a contract formed and you haven't breached anything anyway. Even if you did see the signs and breached the contract then under contract law they can only pursue the driver for their actual losses only, not some arbitrary £90 sum they've dreamt up. Maybe a few quid admin fees, tops. The only other recourse for them is to treat it as trespass (i.e. NO PARKING!!!), and for this they can pursue the driver for nominal damages only (a couple of quid?). Either way, their pursuit of you for £90 is tosh and wouldn't last five minutes in a court. Either way, the photo is irrelevant unless they plan to sue your car.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also find it very odd that the ticket wasn't on my window when we went back to the car. It's not as if we were away from it for more than 15 minutes after the ticket had been issued. And while it was a very wet and windy day, are these people beyond taking their photo as evidence, then removing the ticket, knowing it will cause you to default to the full amount (should you be dumb enough to pay?). I certainly didn't see a ticket anywhere near the car. And with the exception of the possibilty that a local scallywag took it off, I think it's a bit of a gimmick to try and get more money out of people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a deliberate ploy to make sure you pay the full whack. Other ploys include sending threatening legal letters pre dated so that when you get them you panic into thinking you're too late to stop legal proceedings and you beg them to accept your payment. They're not thick, they have many tricks to fool people into paying as much as possible. However you now know that legally they don't have much of a leg to stand on, so you should just ignore them from now on. Don't forget to look out for that post-dated letter though, and have a laugh when it does.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember ONLY Police or similar have the legal power to give parking tickets. You can't get a ticket on private property with a local contravention order being in place. This isn't a parking ticket, but an invoice for monies. Anyone can raise an invoice claiming monies for anything. They are clever and disguise letters to look like fines.So, why do they do it? Cos more often then not people think they are dealing with a legitimate parking ticket and pay up. If it wasn't profitable then they wouldn't do it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any UKCPS thread comes with the usual "health warning" regarding the information you disclose on here. The "office manager" of that parking company trawls these forums trying to find information which might further UKCPS's "cause". So be careful what you say, and beware of any private messages you might receive. It could be him on a "fishing" expedition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

nothing 'illegal' about it anyhow.

 

its not a criminal offence

its not even a civil matter...

 

it a bit of paper that is a 'speculative invoice'.

 

the ONLY tickets you EVERneed to pay are those that say:

 

[AND ONLY THESE THREE EXACT WORDS]

 

PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE

 

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

Thanks for all the advice so far. Just to make it clear - I completely understand that this is not a "legit" parking "fine" - and I know it's a flimsy speculative business invoice. My concern was just that by appealing and confirming myself as the driver, I have put myself in a weaker position should it ever get to a civil court. But I'm happy for them to try and take me to one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Well, as expected I've recieved a couple of letter from UKCPS, including all the red wording and final notice BS. Today, as predicted I recieved a letter from Debt Recovery Plus Ltd - and saying the outstanding payment has now gone up to £150.

 

I just wanted to ask, as I have seen some conflicting advice on this forum. Some suggest contacting this Debt Recovery agent and deffering the alledged debt back to the PPC, as it is in dispute. Others advise to Keep Calm and Carry On Ignoring the little insects.

 

Please advise the best course of action.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, as expected I've recieved a couple of letter from UKCPS, including all the red wording and final notice BS. Today, as predicted I recieved a letter from Debt Recovery Plus Ltd - and saying the outstanding payment has now gone up to £150.

 

I just wanted to ask, as I have seen some conflicting advice on this forum. Some suggest contacting this Debt Recovery agent and deffering the alledged debt back to the PPC, as it is in dispute. Others advise to Keep Calm and Carry On Ignoring the little insects.

 

Please advise the best course of action.

 

Thanks

 

Everyone has their own opinion on this.

 

Some say to ignore and carry on receiving letters and probably phone calls and eventually on the balance of probability they will go away.

 

Others prefer to engage them.

 

Personally I've wrote them a single time telling them to get stuffed, invoicing them for wasting my time and advising them that any correspondance will be returned at their own costs.

 

I've then gone on to return undelivered everything they have sent me.

 

It's no more than a civil claim for monies based upon the civil tort of trespass.

 

They are chancers basing on the probability that the vast majority will pay up thinking it's an official parking charge.

 

They are in it for the money nothing else.

 

Whether you reply or ignore is purely down to yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, as expected I've recieved a couple of letter from UKCPS, including all the red wording and final notice BS. Today, as predicted I recieved a letter from Debt Recovery Plus Ltd - and saying the outstanding payment has now gone up to £150.

 

I just wanted to ask, as I have seen some conflicting advice on this forum. Some suggest contacting this Debt Recovery agent and deffering the alledged debt back to the PPC, as it is in dispute. Others advise to Keep Calm and Carry On Ignoring the little insects.

 

Please advise the best course of action.

 

Thanks

 

 

cag's line is to ignore

 

end of!

 

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

It's great news that you've received these latest letters. It means the process is going exactly as predicted, they haven't done anything to you and they are following the usual pointless paper trail. Great. Not long to go now before they give up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The wording of the letter is as follows, for your own ammusement (personal details ommited);

 

Dear Mr.....

 

We act on behalf of UK Parking Control LTD

 

Our client has written to you previously explaining that your vehicle was parked in breach of the agreed terms and conditions regarding parking on their client's private land. As payment has not been received our client has instructed us to recover the above monies from you as the driver at the time the vehicle was parked.

 

It is essential that payment is made to us within 7 days of the date of this letter. If you are having difficulty in making the payment then please contact our officer on (0844 number) to discuss your proposal for payment.

 

We are a member of the British Parking Association (BPA) and its Approved Operator Scheme and we adhere to its code of practice. As the registered keeper it is important that you inform us immediately if you have sold/hired the car. If you were not the driver, please provide us with the name and address of the person who was driving the vehicle at the relevant time. This is important so that we can avoid pursuing the wrong person.

 

The BPA code of practice states that "the courts do not look favourably on motorists or consumers who try to withhold information from operators when it has been asked for with genuine, reasonable and proper cause". Accordingly, if we do not receive full payment or contact from you with your proposal for payment, this matter may be passed to our solicitor to commend County Court proceedings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The wording of the letter is as follows, for your own ammusement (personal details ommited);

 

Dear Mr.....

 

We act on behalf of UK Parking Control LTD

 

Our client has written to you previously explaining that your vehicle was parked in breach of the agreed terms and conditions regarding parking on their client's private land. As payment has not been received our client has instructed us to recover the above monies from you as the driver at the time the vehicle was parked.

 

It is essential that payment is made to us within 7 days of the date of this letter. If you are having difficulty in making the payment then please contact our officer on (0844 number) to discuss your proposal for payment.

 

We are a member of the British Parking Association (BPA) and its Approved Operator Scheme and we adhere to its code of practice. As the registered keeper it is important that you inform us immediately if you have sold/hired the car. If you were not the driver, please provide us with the name and address of the person who was driving the vehicle at the relevant time. This is important so that we can avoid pursuing the wrong person.

 

The BPA code of practice states that "the courts do not look favourably on motorists or consumers who try to withhold information from operators when it has been asked for with genuine, reasonable and proper cause". Accordingly, if we do not receive full payment or contact from you with your proposal for payment, this matter may be passed to our solicitor to commend County Court proceedings.

 

More gutless threats then. Note the careful use of the word MAY. I MAY win the lottery at the Weekend. I MAY run naked up and down the street outside my house LOLIt's all complete b*llocks and you are under no obligation to give out any information without a Court Summons. That isn't going to happen though as they have to prove who was driving at the time, that they understood that they understood the T&Cs of parking there and there was an act of trespass so bad that they remedies demanded match said breach.Write to your local MP and let's get this legal con sorted out once and for all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...