To pay or not to pay a PCN- the scary advice I got

[Somebody Told Me]

Yes I agree, there seems to be 3 options

1-pay the charge and look at it as the price to avoid the stress of the bullying letters

2-send a letter denying there is any debt owed etc

3- ignore all the threats and cross fingers that I am not one of the unlucky small minority that gets taken to court

 

so...deep breath...option 3) I may well have to come back on here for further advice/support as the letters come in!

 

That's the spirit.

If you remain calm and unfazed by their future threats I'm sure that in a few months time you'll wonder what you were so worried about.

[andydd]

Well..you only really need to come back IF a court claim is started, all other letters/DCA's are pretty pointless, there is a school of thought though that you should reply, deny any liabilty and make it clear that you are not a pushover and will vigoursly defend any legal action..I bet a lot of claims they expect to win by defualt judgment or that the defendant just doesnt know how to defend.

 

Andy

[dontwannaberippedoff]

I have now received the 'final notice' with threats of solicitors, court proceedings etc for non-payment. I must admit it makes me feel physically ill, but having got this far I am gritting my teeth and sticking to the 'ignore it' advice.

[Tony P]

having got this far I am gritting my teeth and sticking to the 'ignore it' advice.

 

You will not get better advice.

 

Expect possibly one more letter. It might even be from a firm saying they are Debt Collectors or Bailiffs, but these people have no more power to get money from you than I have - and I obviously failed as you ignored my own request!

[Jamberson]

I have now received the 'final notice' .

 

Good news then. If it's the last one, they must have given up.

[andydd]

You will not get better advice.

 

Expect possibly one more letter. It might even be from a firm saying they are Debt Collectors or Bailiffs, but these people have no more power to get money from you than I have - and I obviously failed as you ignored my own request!

 

Do not confuse DCA's and bailffs.

 

Bailiffs are very different to Debt Collectors and should not be confused, a bailiff can ONLY be used IF there has been a court case and IF the parking company is successful and begins enforcement proceedings.

 

It is indeed true to say DCAs have no powers BUT bailiffs DO have certain legal powers to visit/enter properties and take goods, as they will be undertaking court enforcement.

 

Andy

[Tony P]

It is indeed true to say DCAs have no powers BUT bailiffs DO have certain legal powers to visit/enter properties and take goods, as they will be undertaking court enforcement

 

Not at this stage though.

 

Bailiffs have absolutely no powers UNTIL there has been a Court case, a Judgement against the OP which he then fails to pay within the time the Judge stipulated. Only then can they have powers.

 

However it is quite common for PPC firms like Parking Eye to get letters sent from firms who are also bailiffs - but they are not writing those letters as baliffs.

 

So at this stage I feel my post is correct for the OP and would not cause further unnecessary worry as it is irrelevant for the time being and almost certainly for ever.

 

In the highly unlikely event it gets to properly issued Court papers the OP can be assured he will get every assistance from us all here.

[andydd]

Well..yes..that is what I meant, at pre-action stage bailiffs cannot be involved and it would be rather dodgy for DCA to imply that they could be.

[DBC]

I have seen examples of one company stating in their letters "we are a firm of bailiffs" while neglecting to add that in that instance they are not acting on behalf of the courts ( which they do sometimes), but just as common or garden debt collectors. Very naughty!

[Parking Alf]

That's not how the civil court process works in E&W. The court would not 'agree' to hear the case, because there is no preliminary consideration of the validity of a claim before it is accepted. So Parkco could sue the RK, and the claim would be processed in the normal way. It would only end if an application was successfully made by the defendant to have the case struck out, after receiving the particulars of claim.

 

- The RK cannot expect to have a civil claim struck out on the grounds that 'there's no proof that I did it'. Axiomatically, it is for the court to weigh the evidence, not one of the parties.

- The RK could apply to have the claim struck out on the specific defence that he was not the driver, and would have a fair chance of success if that was his part 15 defence. But if that's a false statement then he's committing a serious criminal offence (PCJ).

 

I also didn't say that anyone would be found culpable by default. But the judge must make a decision, and the threshold is not 'beyond reasonable doubt' in a civil case, it's the much lower 'balance of probabilities'. So if the judge feels that the claim is slightly more persuasive than the defence, they can make that finding. A defendant who appeared evasive and dishonest in his statements to the court would be quite sufficient, IMHO.

 

This seems quite bizarre (and I say this without prejudice). Surely if a PPC took a RK to court it is for the PPC to prove to the judge on the balance of probalities that the RK and the driver are the same person? I can see if the RK offers no other evidence a judge could rule that the RK is the driver.

 

But can a judge force an RK to either:

a. incriminate himself by admitting he was the driver.

b. assert he was not the driver and incriminate someone else?

[andydd]

This seems quite bizarre (and I say this without prejudice). Surely if a PPC took a RK to court it is for the PPC to prove to the judge on the balance of probalities that the RK and the driver are the same person? I can see if the RK offers no other evidence a judge could rule that the RK is the driver.

 

But can a judge force an RK to either:

a. incriminate himself by admitting he was the driver.

b. assert he was not the driver and incriminate someone else?

 

I'd say the answer to both is no .... BUT the Judge will make a decision based on the facts and what he has been told. He could well say Mr X was driving, the Judge may well decide the PPC has no case but of course the PPC could then chase Mr X.

 

Remember this is civil law and not criminal which does differ.

[patrickq1]

Does anyone have the answer to ,what are the probabilities of a disabled person parking in the disabled bay ,but failure to display my blue badge ,the failure was accidentally knocked of the dashboard by our granddaughter possibly negligence on my part for not checking but had they checked the disability tax disc so at least they can check this out through dvla , ,so where do i stand since their is no monetary value ?,they have refused to re-consider our plea of accidental removal of blue badge was unforeseen by us

i apoligise for charging in and the company involved is ukcps

[Surfer01]

Does anyone have the answer to ,what are the probabilities of a disabled person parking in the disabled bay ,but failure to display my blue badge ,the failure was accidentally knocked of the dashboard by our granddaughter possibly negligence on my part for not checking but had they checked the disability tax disc so at least they can check this out through dvla , ,so where do i stand since their is no monetary value ?,they have refused to re-consider our plea of accidental removal of blue badge was unforeseen by us

i apoligise for charging in and the company involved is ukcps

 

There is no law compelling you display your BB on private land! Ignore any threats.

[DBC]

UKCPS ( who are allied to Disabled Motoring UK) should be aware that the blue-badge scheme does not apply to private land. They could say that you have breached their "terms and conditions", but as this is civil law then the only sum of money that can be claimed is a the actual loss suffered by the landowner and not the parking company. So that amounts to a big fat zero and this can be ignored.

 

One word of warning, UKCPS are known to monitor these forums so be very wary of any private messages you might receive. They could be from the PPC "fishing" for information.

[patrickq1]

thanks all will proceed with caution lol see what the next move should be to contact the and just let them know that the advised issue concerning an appeal to

POPLA (parking on private land appeals) no address to contact these independent assessors ? as they inform me , so i have little to gain from their obvious omission of a helpline phone number or address would inform me that they perhaps think that a threat first time round should suffice and they can expect payment as most authors on here are of the same opinion they issue these threats and me guessing they get at least 90 % paying up ?

so i shall compose them a nice letter nuff said.

patrickq1

[patrickq1]

monitor away UK