Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I quite agree. I think all that needs to be said has been said. It is my view that the poster is very confused not only about the law and court procedures but about the circumstances explained in the original post. As you can see from the passages I highlighted it caused considerable confusion for the OP (and just about everybody else). My concern was that we had a worried OP about to go to court to deal with a very unfamiliar (to her) process being completely misled and confused. A principle part of her court visit was to be her SD and she was presented with a totally false impression of what might happen. I know that all forums such as this have differences of opinion. However, this matter was not a difference of opinion - it was a different portrayal of facts. One of them was utterly incorrect and no amount of persuasion could get them retracted. It's not good.
    • Post 24 on my earlier AA thread for this loan...  
    • Hello, on 9th of July 2018 I was issued a CCJ for 326£ for a non payment into my Natwest account - 6 month earlier I moved abroad and despite my better knowledge my direct debit with the phone company wasn't properly closed and the Natwest account went into arrears for that amount. As soon as I found out of that matter on 20th October 2018 I settled the amount in full with Moorcroft (the debt recovery agency instructed by Natwest to recover the amount).   When I returned to the UK I was shocked that my credit score was completely depleted - despited an otherwise good record - and that for the following 5 years I won't pretty much be able to access credit and other common financial products regardless of the fact the debt has been paid in full (and despite a stable high salary etc.).   When I contacted Moorcroft in January this year they said they can't do anything about it and the record will stay as is. They said the best they could do was to send me a letter (attached) that I can use as a confirmation that the CCJ was now settled. I was pretty sad and frustrated and shocked that a 300£ debt could put me into such distress (I literally cannot even get a monthly mobile phone plan) and despite having settled it I would carry such consequences for the next 5 years... so I archived the letter and tried to forget about it.   I recently checked my credit report and it states that the CCJ status is still active.   I would like to ask:  - is it really not possible to adjust the CCJ status ?  - are there any actions I can take to mitigate my situation ? - shouldn't at least Moorcroft have sent a more comprehensive letter stating that the CCJ was settled (instead of a generic 'payment received' with no indication of what and why) ?     Note: when I tried to contact Natwest in October 2018 they bounced mee across several departments but ultimately no-one could/would want to help as the account was permanently closed and passed onto debt recovery and they couldn't find much information about my records (apart from saying it's closed and Im no longer a customer of the bank and won't ever be able to be one again).   Thanks, V
    • I hope we can keep this thread for a discussion of SDs. If it descends into a slanging match then there probably isn't much point in having it.   HB
    • phew, just got an email from scmreferrals@justice.gov.uk.    I was worried that because the N180 was 5 days late, they would reject it.    There is still an new default on my credit file for the original amount + court costs. Surely Lowell shouldn't have submitted this yet?  
  • Our picks

BankFodder

The truth about the number of parking cases lodged by BPA members in the Small Claims court in 2011

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2686 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

Compliments of Nev - a tireless worker for the rights of motorists in the UK

 

 

I have an idea that the BPA at some point claimed that there about 36,000 cases per year? Maybe someone can correct me

Dear All,

 

Please find the attached breakdown of those now infamous 845 private parking cases that were lodged by BPA AOS members in the small claims court for 2011 (England and Wales).

 

For those who are not aware, the BPA have come up with a number of explanations as to why these 845 cases don't appear to match their claimed figures of 36,000 to 90,000

 

1) They first thought that the 845 were only appeals to a circuit judge (no they are not)

 

2) Their members list hundreds of cases on one application (no they don't - that's not how the system works - it's one case one listing)

 

3) They don't include NI and Scotland (true- but they represent only a tiny proportion of the population of the UK)

 

4) It was a best guess and they told the DVLA that, it's the DVLA's fault for using the figures in the Impact Assessment.

 

Regards

 

Nev

 

Data (2).xls


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Name of Parking Company Number of claims initiated

ARMTRAC SECURITY SERVICES 28

BALFOUR BEATTY WORKPLACE LIMITED 8

BALFOUR BEATTY WORKPLACE LTD 2

BUSINESS WATCH GUARDING LTD 2

CAR PARK SOLUTIONS 1

COMBINED SOLUTIONS UK LTD T/AS COMBINED PARKING SOLUTIONS 10

COMBINED SOLUTIONS UK LTD T/AS COMBINED PARKING SOLUTIONS 8

COUNTY PARKING ENF AGY LTD 22

DEVERE PARKING SERVICE 4

DEVERE PARKING SERVICES 92

DEVERE PARKING SERVICES ( A FIRM) 14

DEVERE PARKING SERVICES (A FIRM) 58

DEVERE PARKING SERVICES LTD 52

DISTRICT ENFORCEMENT LIMITED 30

EAST KENT HOPITALS UNIVERSITY NHS FOUNDATION TRUST 1

EAST KENT HOPITALS UNIVERSITY NHS FUNDATION TRUST 1

EAST KENT HOSPITAL NHS TRUST 1

EAST KENT HOSPITALS U.NHS.F.T ROSS HOUSE 25

EAST KENT HOSPITALS UNIVERSITY N H S FOUNDATION TRUST 1

EAST KENT HOSPITALS UNIVERSITY NHS 1

EAST KENT HOSPITALS UNIVERSITY NHS FOUNDATION TRUST 14

EAST KENT HOSPITALS UNIVERSITY NHS TRUST 1

EAST KENT HOSPTALS UNIVERSITY NHS FOUNDATION TRUST 1

EAST KENT UNIVERSITY NHS FOUNDATION TRUST 1

ELITE MANAGEMENT (MIDLANDS) LI 53A LOWER HALL LANE 8

ELITE MANAGEMENT (MIDLANDS) LI BRADFORD HOUSE 7

ELITE MANAGEMENT LTD 53A LOWER HALL LANE 7

ETHICAL GROUP LTD 1

EURO CAR PARKS LIMITED 7

EXCEL PARKING SERVICES 1

EXCEL PARKING SERVICES LIMITED 7

EXCEL PARKING SERVICES LTD 10

LEGAL PARKING ENFORCERS(UK)LTD 23

NAPIER PARKING LIMITED 1

NCP LTD 2

NEW GENERATION PARKING MANAGEMENT LTD 2

NEWLYN PLC 7

NORTHERN RAIL LTD 2

OBSERVICES PARKING CONSULTANCY LTD 167

OBSERVICES PARKING CONSULTANCY LTD 56

OCS GROUP UK LTD T/A CANNON C ONSUMABLES NORTHGATE WHIT 7

PARKINGEYE LIMITED 40 EATON AVENUE 5

PARKSHIELD.COM LTD T/A PCPEA 9

PREMIER PARKING SOLUTIONS 13

RESIDENTIAL MANAGEMENT GROUP LIMITED 1

RESIDENTIAL MANAGEMENT GROUP LTD 1

RISK CONSULTANTS LTD T/A APSECT PARKING SOLUTIONS 1

RISK CONSULTANTS LTD T/A ASPECT PARKING SOLUTIONS 5

RISK CONSULTANTS LTD T/A ASPECT PARKING SOLUTIONS 19

RISK CONSULTANTS LTD T/S ASPECT PARKING SOLUTIONS 1

RISK CONSULTANTS T.AS ASPECT PARKING SOLUTIONS 1

RISK CONSULTANTS T/A ASPECT PARKING SOLUTIONS 1

ROSSENDALES COLLECT LIMITED 1

ROSSENDALES LTD 1

SALISBURY NHS FOUNDATION TRUST 2

SECURE CAR PARKS LTD 26

SECURITAS SECURITY PERSONNEL L TD CREDIT CONTROL REGENT BU 2

SECURITAS SECURITY PERSONNEL LIMTED 1

SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES 1

SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES LI MITED 203-205 LOWER RICHMOND 1

SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES LI MITED UNIT 2 REDHALL COURT 1

SUSSEX SECURITY SOLUTONS LTD 34

TOTAL PARKING SOLUTIONS LTD 1

TOTAL PARKING SOLUTIONS LTD SOMERSET HOUSE 4

VEHICLE CONTROL SERVICES 2

VEHICLE CONTROL SERVICES LIMITED 8

VEHICLE CONTROL SERVICES LTD 7

VINCI PARK CAR PARK SERVICES U PORTSOKEN HOUSE 2

WING PARKING LTD 1

Total 845


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a colleague of mine has just dryly commented......'It's nice to see the hospitals leading the way!'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One name that seems to be missing from that list is UKCPS who boast on their website that they are always taking people to court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a FOI request to the MOJ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd already done some more work on this and got hold of the email exchanges between the BPA and the DVLA that give the audit trail for the original figures (the emails are redacted courtesy of the DVLA).

 

What is clear from those emails and must not get confused is this.

 

The BPA did not supply the DVLA with a numeric figure, they gave then a percentage return of between 2-5% of all AOS members PCN's taken to the small claims court each year (this is important because of what I will get to in a minute or so).

 

It was the DVLA who took that 2-5% range and converted it into a numeric range of being between 36,000 and 90,000. The DVLA did this on the basis that they reckoned on 1.8 million BPA AOS PCN's per year.

 

OK park that there for a minute.

 

Lets go back to the email exchanges, when the BPA gave the 2-5% figure, they also claimed that they believed that their members were issuing 4 million PCNs per year

 

This means that the BPA were (in effect) at that time feeding the DVLA a numeric range of between 80,000 to 200,000 cases in the small claims court each year!

 

The email subject boxes are marked as "AOS Operator Survey Results" - this was not therefore a 'best guess' nor anecdotal evidence informally provided to the Dft. This was information that was passed to the DVLA under the email heading of 'AOS Operator Survey Results'

 

Furthermore, this was information repeatedly asked for by the DVLA to (quote) 'satisfy the economists'

 

It is this 'smoking gun' email sent by Steve Clark (Cc'd to Patrick Troy and Kelvin Reynolds) which contained the crucial 2-5% response for the DVLA and the claim of 4 million tickets

 

That means that 'they' (all three of them were party to the email) were trying to convince the DVLA that their members were taking between 80,000 and 200,000 motorists to court each year!!

 

Now I know that the DVLA challenged them over the 4 million figure which was eventually haggled down to 1.8 million but surely to God the alarm bells should have gone off in the DVLA with the huge disparity and the retraction, when pushed, from 4 million to 1.8 million.

Edited by Nev Met
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to ask yourself how is it that if a member of the public can obtain the true figures via an FOI request from the MoJ, why couldn't the DVLA do the same?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only speculate on that. The true figures would not have supported the argument for RK liability and secondly, if you read the actual Impact Assessment that the DVLA wrote I don't think the BPA could have done a better job themselves at making the arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...