Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

UKPC Ticket - Disabled Bay No Badge - Advice Pls **Won at POPLA**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3536 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 All

I am hopping that i may be able to get some advice on how to deal with this Charge Notice.

 

I am a driver who at the moment has restricted mobility, and use a walking aid, i am registered disabled with the DWP however i do not have a BB.

 

I parked this morning in a private car park Managed by UKPC, and did park in a disabled persons bay without a badge (due to restricted mobility) when i got out of the car I did see the parking Attendant, and he saw me, he saw me get out of my car with my walking aid and didn`t say anything ( he was booking a car 3 away from mine).

 

I walked into the, and did what i needed to and came out and saw the charge notice.

 

no sign of the issuing attendant or his car.

 

the advice i seek is this.

1) do i have grounds for appeal

2) what are the points to use in the appeal

 

the sign nearby was around 10ft in the air. (photo attached)

the ticket received is barely readable (both sides attached)

 

 

many thanks for your help

 

Lets

Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be better if you can upload the photos as PDF files - the jpg images are a little small

 

Also, have a preliminary read of other UKPC cases on this forum and you will quickly start to get an idea of what to do and how easily these charges are defeated

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

just also remember theres no such thing as a BB badges or bays in a private carpark

 

regardless of if you have a BB badge or not

 

means nothing.

 

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

Do nothing at the moment. Wait for the Notice to Keeper to arrive then you can appeal as the owner and not the driver (you are under no obligation to identify the driver)

 

As we all know, parking bays on private land are graffiti and nothing more but your grounds of appeal will GPEOL as there is no way this ticket has cost them that much, especially in a free car park

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

letsgetitsorted,

Don't be "tempted" to ring them.

Wait for the NTK as Silverfox 1961 has advised.

This has to land on your door mat between 29 and 56 days from the date of the "windscreen job"

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Well today is the day that the NTK has arrived on my door mat.

 

This is the Appeal I intend to use....any thoughts

 

I am the keeper of the Renault Megane with the registration xxxxxx that was issued with the parking Charge Notice on 11th may 2014 at xxxxxxxxxxx Leisure Park,xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

The PCN was issued for parking in a Disable Bay without a displaying a valid Disable persons Badge

 

I wish to Appeal this notice on a few points.

1) The driver of the Vehicle at the time the PCN was issued, is disabled and has disabilities as determined by both the Equality Act 2010 and the Department for Work and pensions, although the driver is disabled the driver DOES NOT hold a Blue/Disable Badge. But this is not required in private parking areas.

The driver was seen getting out of the above mentioned Vehicle by the issuing Parking Attendant who at the time was about 4 cars away issuing another PCN to another Vehicle. The driver getting out of the car did indeed have a walking aid, the P.A did see this.

2) By issuing the PCN for not having a Disabled Persons Badge in a Disable Bay, where the driver has been seen with a disability and walking aid gives rise to a clear breach of the Equality Act 2010

3) Unless UKPC can prove otherwise, Disabled parking Bays in off –street car parks –for example supermarket car parks, are actually not covered by the blue badge scheme regulations, nor are they covered by the road traffic regulations, in such car parks , spaces marked for badge holders only are not legally enforceable.

4) With the P.A observing the driver vacate the car and walk aided into the Maplin store, the P.A did not in any way attempt to negate any losses that UKPC may have, if any.

 

Based on the above information I trust that this PCN will be cancelled. If UKPC refuse to cancel this PCN then I will insist that that a Valid POPLA code is supplied with the refusal notice.

 

Upon receiving the refusal to cancel the PCN, I will reserve the right to inform the governing body for the Equality Act and will also seek legal advice on a claim under the Equality Act for Disability Discrimination.

I will also seek all costs involved in defending this Parking Charge notice and those in pursuing a claim, these costs will be at the court rate of £18 per hour.

 

Thank you for taking time to read this appeal and I look forward to your response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On point 4 the word you want instead of negate is "mitigate"

The body involved in EA matters is the Equalities Commissioner

The costs request is for £18ph as LIP costs

this should then be good enough. They may well argue that their contract was still breached but then when you get to POPLA they will still lose on the basis that they cannot show that failing to put a BB on your dashboard has cost them money. If they want to go further than that in their arguments they would be very foolish indeed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks for that Ericsbrother.

 

If they want to go further than that in their arguments they would be very foolish indeed

 

I read a piece where the POPLA failed and a county court claim was issued by the PPC and this failed in court because the PPC failed in their duties and did not make "reasonable adjustment" for the disabled person...

 

that will be included in my POPLA appeal should it go that far

 

I will amend and then send it off today.

 

cheers

Lets

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

You have the POPLA code, so the charge will get cancelled with a simple appeal to them.

 

Breach of contract means that the charge must be a genuine pre estimate of loss to the land owner resulting from the parking event.

 

£100 is not... nor is £60. And it can't be two figures anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I wouldn't bother going into great detail with the appeal. Just deal with GPEOL and no breach of contract.

 

Even if POPLA refused your appeal, you are still under no obligation to pay and UKPC would have to instigate court action and while they do this on occasion, a sensible judge would see it for what it is. Total rubbish

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would guess that there are no signs instructing you to display a Blue Badge? Your letter is too long winded. Just deny everything stating that there is no compulsion to display a Blue Badge on private land. Whether it is an in depth letter or just a brief note, it is going to be rejected anyway. Once rejected apply to POPLA who will probably uphold your appeal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the appeal for UKPC was not upheld ...so a letter to them notifying them that i will be seeking damages for disability discrimination..an appeal has gone to POPLA, want them to hear appeal on disability and failure of UKPC to allow reasonable adjustment...but to be safe added GPEOL right at the bottom.

 

my appeal will be heard on 14th August, time to allow UKPC to get their information together.

shall see what happens

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the appeal for UKPC was not upheld ...so a letter to them notifying them that i will be seeking damages for disability discrimination..an appeal has gone to POPLA, want them to hear appeal on disability and failure of UKPC to allow reasonable adjustment...but to be safe added GPEOL right at the bottom.

 

my appeal will be heard on 14th August, time to allow UKPC to get their information together.

shall see what happens

 

Why do you think it is disability discrimination?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no such thing as a disabled bay on private land so not much of an argument? What failure? What did they not do? The fact remains that ther is no law compelling you to dispaly a BB on private land and that should be considered as one of your arguments. Secondly are there any signs stating that you must display a BB as that could be another argument?

Link to post
Share on other sites

you should now argue that they havent been caused a loss so the charge isnt a GPEOL.

 

 

This was the point I was making when I said that the failure to display your badge hasnt cost the parking company anything.

POPLA cannot consider the EA in isolation so make sure the main thrust of your argument is that

 

 

1/ supermarket obliged to provide disabled parking spaces as part of the planning consent and is not part of the blue badge scheme and UKPC's interpretation of what that entails isnt compatible with that consent nor disability legislation.

 

 

To this end you seek sight of the contract between UKPC and the landowner to see if the contract overrules that planning consent and the EA.

(If it does then UKPC must accept liability under the EA for any claim of disability discrimination).

 

 

2/ That in any case, a breach of UKPC's otherwise contrary to law conditions has not caused them a loss nor is their claim a genuine pre-estimate of their losses but an unlawful penalty.

 

POPLA will undoubtedly make their consideration on the latter point only as they have in every other case where theability of the parking company to form contracts under such conditions has been raised.

Link to post
Share on other sites

dont forget to ask to see the contract that allows them to claim anything at all as it must allow them to do so in their own name. Often it is vague and says they are agents-agents cant make up the rules.

The GPEOL argumant is currently winning every appeal it is used in so give it plenty of airing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi All

Many thanks for the advice on this charge notice. i have just had a response from POPLA with regards to my appeal.

many thanks again

Lets

PARKING ON PRIVATE LAND APPEALS PO Box 70748 London EC1P 1SN 0845 207 7700

[email protected] http://www.popla.org.uk

Parking on Private Land Appeals is administered by the Transport and Environment Committee of London Councils Calls to Parking on

Private Land Appeals may be recorded

21 August 2014

Reference 8xxxxxxxx31

always quote in any communication with POPLA

(Appellant)

-v-

UK Parking Control Limited (Operator)

The Operator issued parking charge notice number 6xxxxxxxxx2 arising out of a

presence on private land, of a vehicle with registration mark Xxxxx.

The Appellant appealed against liability for the parking charge.

The Assessor has considered the evidence of both parties and has determined

that the appeal be allowed.

The Assessor’s reasons are as set out.

The Operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.

Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination

It is the Appellant’s case that the parking charge notice was issued incorrectly.

The Operator has not produced a copy of the parking charge notice, nor any

evidence to show a breach of the conditions of parking occurred, nor any evidence

that shows what the conditions of parking, in fact, were.

Accordingly I have no option but to allow the appeal.

Christopher Adamson

Assessor

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...