Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • That is great news. Many people would have given up and paid after losing two appeals so well done for hanging in and fighting. It has paid off and they have finally backed down before getting whipped in Court. I looked at your NTD and your NTK again to see if there was a chance of going for a breach of your GDPR. Sadly although your NTK on its own could have well deserved a claim, the NTD is good enough not to warrant a claim even though it wasn;t compliant with PoFA. As it is the first Notice that mostly accounts for  GDPR breaches there is a reasonable cause for the NTD to have been issued. However you are now freed from worries about appearing in Court and you have learnt about the dangers of parking especially where the rogues that patrol private parking spaces are concerned. Thank you for making a donation and should you fall victim in the future to the parking rogues or anything else that we protect from, you are always welcome .
    • Hi guys I'm about to submit the defence as per below     There has been no reply to our CPR 31:14 request.  Is it worth adding that I (driver, not registered keeper) didn't actually enter or park in the car park and was sat at the petrol station forecourt the entire time?  Or is that covered by the simple points?   Thanks
    • a DCA is not a bailiff and cant enforce anything, even if they've been to court who are they please? sar to the original creditor FIO isnt applicable they are not a public body. who was this query sent too all the more reason to teach her young upon how these powerless DCA's monsters  work... she must stop payments now  
    • Unsettling the applecart?,  I'm going to be direct here, I know how this works , I've been in far worse situation than your relative, and I can assure you , now that there i likely a default in her name, it makes absolutely ZERO difference if she pays or not. Denzel Washington in the Equalizer , 'My only regret is that I can't kill you twice'... It's the same with a default, they can only do it once and it stays on your credit file for 6 years if she pays or not, and as it stands right now she's flushing £180 of her hard earned money down the toilet  so that the chaps at Lowell can afford a Christmas party. As for the SAR this is everybody's legal right, originally under the Data Protection act 1998 and now under GDPR, it's her right to find out everything that the original Creditor has on her file, and by not doing it the only person she is doing a massive disservice to is her self. As the father of 2 young adults myself, they need to learn at some point.. right?
    • Thank you for your pointers - much appreciated. dx100uk - Apologies, my request wasn't for super urgent advice and I have limited online access due to my long working hours and caring obligations - the delay in my response doesn't arise in any way from disrespect or ingratitude. I will speak to her at the weekend and see if she will open up a bit more about this, and allow me to submit the subject access request you advise - the original creditor is 118 118 loans and from the letter I saw (which prompted the conversation and the information) the debt collection agency had bought the debt from 118 and were threatening enforcement which is when she has made a payment arrangement with them for an amount of £180 per month. It looks as if she queried matters at the time (so I wonder if I might with the FIO request get access to their investigation file?) - the letter they wrote said "The information that you provided has been carefully considered and reviewed. After all relevant enquiries were made it has been confirmed that there is not enough evidence present to conclusively prove that this application was fraudulent.  However, we have removed the interest as a gesture of goodwill. As a result of the findings, you will be held liable for the capital amount on the loan on the basis of the information found during the investigation and you will be pursued for repayment of the loan agreement executed on 2.11.2022 in accordance with Consumer Credit Act 1974"  The amount at that time was over £3600 in arrears, as no payments had been made on it since inception and I think she only found out about it when a default notice came in paper form. I'm a little reluctant to advise her to just stop paying, and would like to be able to form a view in relation to her position and options before unsetting the applecart - do you think this is reasonable? She is young and inexperienced with these things and getting into this situation has brought about a lot of shame regarding inability to sort things out/stand up for herself, which is one of the reasons I have only found out about this considerably later Thank you once again for your advice - it is very much appreciated.    
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

Parking enforcement from management company in residential development (URGENT)


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4013 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

 

I am the occupier of a flat in a development where we have 70+ flats in my building but only 37 parking spaces which are all allocated to whoever paid for them.

 

There are a LOT of people who park on the kerb or where they can find a space without blocking anyone in.

This has worked without issues for many number of months until recently when we all got letters to advise parking enforcements were coming in.

 

The letters were dated 20th May 2013 and the enforcement starts from 28th May 2013

and there are now signs on the poles threatening of £100 fine for any cars parked outside the bays or parked in the bays without displaying a valid permit.

 

My flat does not benefit from an allocated space and I have not received a permit.

Although I have heard that some people who don't own a space have been sent permits

and I did see a car parked on the pavement with a permit in the window.

 

I'm looking for some help here as I'm not keen on paying the £100 fine for parking my car outside my own flat

where there is no other parking space available.

 

I have the below questions in mind.

 

1. As a resident of the development who does not own a parking space, do I have not rights to park a car anywhere here or have anyone visit me and park their car outside?

2. Should I expect a resident parking permit although I cannot really use it because I do not have an allocated parking space.

3. Even if the above 2 questions are answered in negative, are the developers in breach of any planning guidelines because they provisioned only 37 spaces in a building that has over 70 flats?

4. Lastly, even if the answers to all of the above go against me, is 7 days considered reasonable notice period to advise residents who do not own a parking space to stop parking their car outside which effectively means either dumping the car or moving out. I have a job and my wife is pregnant. It is not easy for me to move out in an instant. If I do get a parking charge notice, what are my chances to fight it off in court?

 

Appreciate any URGENT help I can get on this one as the parking enforcement starts tomorrow morning and I fear I'll find an ugly PCN stuck on my car window tomorrow.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

its NOT a FINE.

its a speculative invoice

 

with NO statute in law.

 

ignore them.

 

time to write to your agency any complain.

 

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

Hi dx100uk

 

I would very much like to believe what you say. I am a bit confused and concerned by the information I find on adviceguide dot org dot uk where it states "If you park on private land, such as a supermarket car park or a privately owned multi-story car park, you will have entered into a contract with the landowner. If there are signs displayed in the car park setting out rules for using the car park, then these are the terms of the contract. If any of these rules are broken, then the car park owner can take steps to enforce them."

 

I also read about the POPLA appeals procedure, the existence of which seems to suggest there is some legitimacy to these parking tickets or speculative invoices. I am just beginning to learn the details of this and would much appreciate it if you could clarify in a bit more detail.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ther is no legitimacy to these claims,as stated earlier they are speculative invoices claiming a fixed penalty . in reality any claim MUST BE A GENUINE PRE ESTIMATE OF LOSS, this is clearly stated by the Department of Transport and the Office of Fair Trading. Of course this is something that these companies fail to mention or choose to ignore.

 

In your case it is difficult to see what loss could be suffered if any by the land owner.

 

There are two options you can ignore all correspondence as many people do, on the other hand some choose to write, this includes agencies who are now collating information surrounding the unanswered questions and the tactics used to try and enforce payment.

 

If you choose to respond let us know and we will provide some very specific questions, which they will refuse to answer.

 

The secrtet is NEVER GIVE IN as making payment encourages their existance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I am the occupier of a flat in a development where we have 70+ flats in my building but only 37 parking spaces which are all allocated to whoever paid for them.

 

There are a LOT of people who park on the kerb or where they can find a space without blocking anyone in.

This has worked without issues for many number of months until recently when we all got letters to advise parking enforcements were coming in.

 

The letters were dated 20th May 2013 and the enforcement starts from 28th May 2013

and there are now signs on the poles threatening of £100 fine for any cars parked outside the bays or parked in the bays without displaying a valid permit.

 

My flat does not benefit from an allocated space and I have not received a permit.

Although I have heard that some people who don't own a space have been sent permits

and I did see a car parked on the pavement with a permit in the window.

 

I'm looking for some help here as I'm not keen on paying the £100 fine for parking my car outside my own flat

where there is no other parking space available.

 

I have the below questions in mind.

 

1. As a resident of the development who does not own a parking space, do I have not rights to park a car anywhere here or have anyone visit me and park their car outside?

2. Should I expect a resident parking permit although I cannot really use it because I do not have an allocated parking space.

3. Even if the above 2 questions are answered in negative, are the developers in breach of any planning guidelines because they provisioned only 37 spaces in a building that has over 70 flats?

4. Lastly, even if the answers to all of the above go against me, is 7 days considered reasonable notice period to advise residents who do not own a parking space to stop parking their car outside which effectively means either dumping the car or moving out. I have a job and my wife is pregnant. It is not easy for me to move out in an instant. If I do get a parking charge notice, what are my chances to fight it off in court?

 

Appreciate any URGENT help I can get on this one as the parking enforcement starts tomorrow morning and I fear I'll find an ugly PCN stuck on my car window tomorrow.

 

Thanks.

 

Several things to this.

 

Are you a tenant, or an owner.

What does it say in your lease, or management agreement?

 

What you have described isn't uncommon.

Modern city centre developments are actively trying to limit the number of cars brought into the city centre, so it's now normal for planning guidelines to have less parking than residents.

Hence the paid for parking, as it's a privilege, not a right, which I guess you have never had an allocated space from when you moved in, as your flat doesn't come with any parking?

 

So, it's unlikely you have any rights to park where you are. 33+ flats parking on the pavement isn't going to be a long term solution, pedestrian/disabled access suffers for a start, with long term damage to kerbing etc, and the management are obliged to keep the parking under some control.

 

While tickets are unenforceable, many PPC's are going to court, this one looks like the landowner is behind them, so multiple tickets may spur them on as well.

At best you may not be under any contract, as you shouldn't be there, it's not like a supermarket car park, so maybe it's trespass. The remedy to that wouldn't be a "penalty", but they could still take you to court to get an injunction to stop you parking, or could eventually tow you out.

 

Any other parking nearby?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ther is no legitimacy to these claims,as stated earlier they are speculative invoices claiming a fixed penalty . in reality any claim MUST BE A GENUINE PRE ESTIMATE OF LOSS, this is clearly stated by the Department of Transport and the Office of Fair Trading. Of course this is something that these companies fail to mention or choose to ignore.

 

In your case it is difficult to see what loss could be suffered if any by the land owner.

 

There are two options you can ignore all correspondence as many people do, on the other hand some choose to write, this includes agencies who are now collating information surrounding the unanswered questions and the tactics used to try and enforce payment.

 

If you choose to respond let us know and we will provide some very specific questions, which they will refuse to answer.

 

The secrtet is NEVER GIVE IN as making payment encourages their existance.

 

I cannot further endorse the above

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...