E.Kent Hospital PCN's sobell/white taking me to small claims court **Discontinued**

[peanutsallergy]

I'm just going off what I read today here, but it seems to be the general quality though.

None of those responses are a one off sadly.

I've said it used to be good in the past, but read that thread alone and you'll see what I mean today. It's not a good image.

[DBC]

It wasn't the responses that were the trouble. but only the posts from the that one individual.

[peanutsallergy]

The responses are offensive. They're the ones I can see now.

 

I notice the op has posted up on Pepipoo, and is getting advice from the same name on there, so I guess it's the same poster. He is also very quick to decry the other poster on MSE.

Also, from a convoluted logic, as I also see a new thread slagging off CPS, as they claim to have won a case against a MSE poster, the language must be affecting their credibility, as it's even mentioned by the judge in the transcript on CPS's web site.

 

I hope the op has a good read of the defence, and takes out any comments if they stray into it.

Hopefully there won't be any.

Still needs reigning in on there though.

[theratboy]

Have you checked the parking signs as hospitals were known for calling the tickets "penalty enforcement charges", a big no no i believe. If they don't refer to penalty now they may well have done when you recieved the tickets. I would be checking that out.

[DBC]

That CPS thread has probably been posted by somebody who is connected to the company, and is always popping up with multiple names and breaking both the forum's and BPA rules by not declaring their interest in the company.

 

Where does' the OP "decry" MSE on the PePiPoo thread?

[peanutsallergy]

I said/meant the op in this thread needs to be aware the poster they are getting advice from on Pepipoo, was one of the main players in the MSE thread you linked to.

So the op needs to be aware of that, and be aware of the need to look for "colourful" language seeping into any court submission, as the judge in the CPS case pointed out to the MSE member in the transcript on the CPS website.

And to be honest, who cares if Mike Perkins posts up on MSE. Everyone knows what he does. The quality of the responses say a lot more than anything he ever could.

 

Hopefully that explains what I mean, if it does, I'll leave it there, as I don't want this thread going off track, especially as it's a court case for the op.

[peanutsallergy]

Have you checked the parking signs as hospitals were known for calling the tickets "penalty enforcement charges", a big no no i believe. If they don't refer to penalty now they may well have done when you recieved the tickets. I would be checking that out.

 

Good point, also in the contract that was probably signed by you when you had the permit in the first place, if you still have it.

[EmainMacha]

"Parking Charge Notices" not penalty.

For your interest I have attached East Kent Hospitals Parking Policy. You can get to the same by googling "East Kent Hospitals Parking Policy"

[esmerobbo]

Well if you read the section on enforcement there clear as day it says "There is an appeals process built into the penalty system"

[EmainMacha]

I could find and post the stock reply to the appeals process that one of my co-workers got. I could also post the letter from our manager that disputed the refusal of appeal that didn't get a response... But frankly I have gardening to do.

[EmainMacha]

Ooops just read that through and it sounds really rude. Apologies, but I never seemed to find the time at work to faff with a system that seemed determined to waste more NHS time. I was working part-time 4 days a week as both parents were ill, but was actually fitting the same job into the four days and on top was covering for girl who was pregnant and could'nt lug heavy gear and then off on maternity leave. I have attached my calendar over 2011. Each pink day is a day out if it has anything but KCH in title. Each of those days I had to load and unload either that day or day before or after, meanwhile trying to avoid getting a parking ticket. I think I did pretty well considering, but there were obviously 7 days that year when I took too long or got distracted

[Surfer01]

Seems like the tickets are actually invoices so can we assume all these tickets are Parking Charge Notice and not Penalty Charge Notices. If Parking Charge then the issue is damages for trespass and the LL will need to demonstrate the damages suffer as a result of your parking on private land. As part of your defence request a copy of the contract between the PPC and the LL.

[DBC]

In this case the "PPC" IS the landowner (the hospital) and they are using Roxburgh/Sobell to do their dirty work for them. This is the same arrangement as at Aintree Hospital, but they use a different law firm.

[instrumentsofjoy]

And the other law firm used by Aintree Hospitals lose big style, and cost the NHS trust a fortune. You might care to read:

 

http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t67017.html

[peanutsallergy]

And the other law firm used by Aintree Hospitals lose big style, and cost the NHS trust a fortune. You might care to read:

 

http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t67017.html

 

What's the "MacDonald vs Aintree" case mentioned in post 23?

[Surfer01]

Probably the best defence is the fact that the Ll invited you onto their land so there is no issue or trespass. As the LL is the PPC they cannot also claim parking charges in addition to trespass.

[peanutsallergy]

There is no trespass claimed, so that would be thrown out.

 

If you read the claim form though, they initially claim breach of contract, then claim contract.

 

The other point to address is how much is claimed.

 

From the op's link, the PCN should be £30, after an initial period of £15.

How does it become £778 for 9 pcn's?

The signage at the carpark is probably key here.

[Scouse Magic]

My ex employer is taking me to court for non payment of parking fines.

 

I parked to load and unload equipment as part of my job, as i use my own car to travel between sites doing quality assurance checks on x-ray equipment etc.

 

I used to have a "hot parking permit" to allow me to do this, but the rules state that you need to do 12 trips a month and have proof for three months to qualify.

 

For some reason the rules started to be strictly enforced.

 

I had a slack three months, lost my hot parking permit and kept getting tickets.

 

I still had normal staff parking permit, but there are never any spaces after 9am and I might not get back from another hospital till pm.

(which is why we used to get the hot parking permit, which gave us dedicated space right outside our place of work).

 

I thought I was being chased by Roxborough, but East Kent is taking me to court.

 

Is it worth trying a solicitor or is it throwing good money after bad.

 

Hello friend !!! The matter relates to private land not public highway therefore any bays such as hot parking or disabled bays are as good as graffiti. It is done on the assumption that everyone will adhere to their terms and conditions. Same applies in supermarkets etc

 

Although it says on the letters your old employers are taking you to court, its actually roxburghe. If you get a letter from the illusive sobell I would ask for a full break down of costs and what percentage East Kent Hospitals get if the case was ever successful.

 

I would also request a full close up photograph of the dash board clearly that shows the correct permit was not on show. In the absence of this, there is a question of liability.

 

Also the charge is a penalty for non payment and disproportionate to any loss the Hospital Incurred and therefore unrecoverable in law........................ Heatherington Jakeman 2008 mansfield county court

[peanutsallergy]

Hello friend !!! The matter relates to private land not public highway therefore any bays such as hot parking or disabled bays are as good as graffiti. It is done on the assumption that everyone will adhere to their terms and conditions. Same applies in supermarkets etc

 

Although it says on the letters your old employers are taking you to court, its actually roxburghe. If you get a letter from the illusive sobell I would ask for a full break down of costs and what percentage East Kent Hospitals get if the case was ever successful.

 

I would also request a full close up photograph of the dash board clearly that shows the correct permit was not on show. In the absence of this, there is a question of liability.

 

Also the charge is a penalty for non payment and disproportionate to any loss the Hospital Incurred and therefore unrecoverable in law........................ Heatherington Jakeman 2008 mansfield county court

 

Admitting you won't adhere to their terms and conditions admits you accept they offered a contract, your choice in that case should have been not to use the parking facility.

No one forced the op to park, it was quite clear what the t&c's were at the time the permit was purchased.

The charge isn't a penalty for none payment, the op paid, and at least part of the charge is clearly defined in the link the op posted.

It's a penalty for parking where they shouldn't have.

 

That fact needs to be addressed to fight the charges.

 

It's not worth the op trying to claim they had a permit, as they admitted they haven't, they would have to lie in court, and their employment records would clearly show they hadn't at the time.

[Surfer01]

I find your posts very confusing with a lot of conflicting information!

[peanutsallergy]

Which bits, and I'll be happy to try to explain more.

[Mike_hawk]

Is there any evidence of breach or non performance, if not.......... has it been requested or an application filed to disclose?

[ericsbrother]

Do you get paid for using you own vehicle for work purposes? If so, what do they pay you for and how? Insurance? fuel? flat rate for wear and tear?servicing? depreciation allowance?

If not, why arent they paying or providing suitable means of moving the equipment instead. There is always the argument of necessity, though it is poorly understood in courts. If you havent received the correct level of renumeration for using you own car for work purposes then I would suggest counterclaiming for all of your daily costs of using your vehicle. If they ask where these figures come from you can point them to HMRC's rules governing use of private vehicles. They may also want to be reminded of their obligations under the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regs 1998 with regard to lifting and moving items. Why hasnt a vehicle been provided as it appears to be a necessity.

I suspect this is why all this was left until now, they would take a hammering if you were still employed by them and they tried this.

[Scouse Magic]

Hi you need to contact me asap im new on here

[honeybee13]

Hi you need to contact me asap im new on here

 

Hello Scouse Magic.

 

Contact by PM is not encouraged at CAG, it's much better to have the advice on thread for the protection of all concerned. If you have questions, please start a thread or post them up.

 

My best, HB