Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What is the name of the window cleaning business? Have you taken photographs of the dirty windows et cetera?
    • i would suggest that you stick to researching on here only. use our search top right for say CTAX or liability order.   you seriously have some wild theories, but those are understandable.   as i have said, there won't be a court hearing you need nor would that help you at all nor are expected to attend, it's not like that, it's merely a rubberstamp exercise .   there is no right of forced entry for bailiffs collecting CTAX debts. the bailiff process is one of a letter which will be entitled Notice of enforcement, this gives you 7 days to pay the sum it outlines with an associated fee of £75 for it being sent. the 2nd step will be a visit, you have no legal remit to engage with them at all, i i would not do so under any circumstances, that visit will add a further £235 fee those are the only things a bailiff can do. the most they can charge is a total of £310.   police do not ever get involved in civil matters like CTAX debt. not sure where you ever got that idea from.   its saturday now so use the W/end wisely, get reading up HERE ONLY it might well pay you on monday to go RING the council CTAX dept and plead poverty etc etc. it might also pay you to find the email address or even better phone number of your local MP and get him involved. they can do wonders.   dx 
    • NPAP see here: VCS Spycar PCN PAPLOC now Claimform - no stopping - London Southend Airport ***Claim Dismissed*** - Page 7 - Private Land Parking Enforcement - Consumer Action Group
    • Hi Stu and dx1000uk,   I have done the online assessment and as I suspected I already receive the maximum benefits available to me.   Yes I was referring to the fact that some times I know that non-payment of council tax can lead to imprisonment so thanks for clarifying.   let's say I can't make their demands for payment and they do send bailiffs in, I assume these are the type of bailiffs I can just not let in and then after a certain amount of attempts they give up right? does the council then not send the police round? This is what I can't work out and worries me.   The council already know that I am struggling and can't make the payments but when do I get my chance to tell a court or the police that it's not that I don't want to pay but that I can't pay?    Walshy
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Parking Eye State Judge Ackroyd 2008

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3274 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi Forum,


Firstly, thanks for all the help, even though I only just joined properly,

I’ve been taking advice for a while from here, so thanks.



I have had several letters from Parking Eye regarding their Parking Charge Notice.

I ignored them all, until the last one, stating I had to pay their full amount of £70 and another £70 on top of that if not paid by yesterday, which I didn't pay of course.


I wrote using snippets from other letters posted on forums, including:


“You appear to claim that I, as the keeper, am legally responsible for this alleged debt/charge. I deny this. Please substantiate your claim with appropriate citations of case and/or statute law.


Please also note that I am familiar with the Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidance which states that it is unfair to send demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question.

I would also point out that the OFT say under the Guidance that it is unfair to pursue third parties for payment when they are not liable. In not ceasing your pursuit of the alleged debt you are using deceptive/and or unfair methods"

which I'm sure you have all seen already,


the letter says;

"My Appeal" has not been accepted (I didn’t make one?)

“You have stated that you were not the driver of the vehicle at the time, but have failed to tell us who was.


Judge Ackroyd, 2008, Oldham Court, Combined Parking Solutions Vs Mr Stephen Thomas, where Mr Thomas claimed not to be the driver, but did not state who was, ruled that on balance of probability he was the driver and ordered the charge to be paid plus costs”.


and now they will hold my charge for a further 14 days to give me a chance to appeal again ?


can anyone see any reason why I should take any action ? thanks for your advice


I added a PDF of the letter

Parking Eye forum.jpg

Parking Eye forum2.pdf

Edited by Phiddius
image is shrunken
Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to the forum.


You say you have been reading and taking advice from these forums for some time and yet you wrote to them which is against all the advice given on here for invitational invoices.


edited to add: You should go sit on the naughty step.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You probably shouldn't have given in and answered that last one either.

I'm afraid that you blinked first.


Also, the responses you have made indicate that you might pay up if pressed.


Read the article linked to the parking charge link

Also read the discussion here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?341260-court-claim-forms-from-ukcps%2815-Viewing%29-nbsp and especially think about sending the letter suggested in post 7 of that thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, Conniff it s not a thanks just for parking eye, theres a goldmine of info in here :)

but I will go to the naughty step right away !


Yes, BankFodder, it looks like I blinked first, but I wont be giving in, even if pressed,

thanks for your advice

Link to post
Share on other sites

With the Stephen Thomas case he had something in excess of 30 tickets and had a poor defence, and was not terribly reliable when questioned.


Given the number of tickets he found it difficult to answer the question on whether he was aware of the risk associated with parking there.


He relied solely on 'I was not the driver', when in fact if he had also questioned the fact that the charges were unenforceable contractual penalties he might well have won.


Some people have even speculated that he might have been a patsy for the parking companies

- they certainly use his case quite a bit on websites and correspondence.


It has no bearing on your circumstances whatsoever.


Please cease corresponding with them, you are more likely to receive a speculative punt in court from the PPC, than if you simply ignored them completely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you

I shall not communicate with them any further ,

I'll post anything they send here though, incase its of any use for reference


Thanks again :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes i think at a later point it was discovered he was 'related' to the company or it's family.

though the info was latterly buried.


it was even published in a newspaper i seem to recall.



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
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...