Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Nick Wallis has written up the first day of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence to the inquiry. I thought she was awful. She's decided to go with being not bright enough to spot what was happening over Fujitsu altering entries on the Horizon system, rather than covering up important facts. She's there today as well. The First Lady of Flat Earth – Post Office Scandal WWW.POSTOFFICESCANDAL.UK Angela van den Bogerd, on oath once more It is possible that Angela van den Bogerd and her senior colleagues (Rodric Williams, Mark Davies, Susan...  
    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
  • 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

PCN from New Generation Parking Management


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3069 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

Can you help me?

 

I have just received a second letter from the above private firm for apparently parking in a "permit holders only" section of a free car park

(I went into a bank for 10 mins).

 

 

I read a few blogs on this site and decided to write back to them.

 

 

I haven't admitted to being the driver, only the registered keeper of the car

and told them they had no right to enforce this penalty.

 

 

However, they've just written back telling me that the law changed in Oct 2012

and the registered keeper may be held liable for this PCN.

 

My only possible appeal is that the restriction was obviously not marked clearly,

because I would never have parked there!

 

 

Do you think there is any way I can get around this fine, or should I just pay it?

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

it is NOT A FINE

 

 

it is NOT A PENALTY

 

 

nowhere do they use those words.

 

 

its a speculative invoice.

 

 

if its a free car park

how can they bill you for parking anywhere in it?

 

 

they cant.

 

 

when did you park there

and did you get a window ticket or was this afterwards you found out about your 'crime'

 

 

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

No, no ticket on car.

 

 

I found out 3 days later, when I received this so-called "parking charge notice"

 

The letter had date/time my car was parked in the car park and 3 photos all taken from same angle (front).

 

 

I have been back since to see what they meant by "parked in permit holders" area.

 

 

There is a row of spaces with blue markings on the road (which obviously I didn't see when I parked there).

 

 

This is also a small sign at the entrance to the car park.

 

 

The whole area is small, houses about 20 spaces only.

 

 

Always a nightmare to get a space there!

 

 

The ironic thing is, when I entered the car park,

I immediately spotted a space, but then realised it was clearly marked in yellow as disabled.

Then saw somebody leaving and quickly nipped in that space. Very frustrating!

 

Is there any way I can respond to this letter refuting this charge?

 

Thanks for your help!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the exact same car park!

 

 

I had already read this thread, which is why I registered to this site and posted a new thread.

 

 

I just need to know what to do now?

 

 

I've already written back saying I don't believe they have the right to enforce this 'charge',

indicating they only know the registered keeper of vehicle and not the driver.

 

 

They wrote back (I received today) saying the law changed 1st Oct 2012

and the registered keeper MAY be held liable for this pcn, under Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (are they making this up??!!)

if I'm unable to provide driver details or have a valid appeal.

 

 

They've asked me to provide a "UK serviceable address for the driver" or a valid appeal within 21 days.

 

Can you give me an idea of how I should respond?

 

Yours gratefully!

Link to post
Share on other sites

did they not send the popla code?

 

 

that's your route

 

 

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

Well head this next and last letter Valid Appeal and make it big...

 

 

' As registered keeper of vehicle xxx xxx, I am appealing your parking charge notice xxxx xxxxx.

 

 

As registered keeper I am not liable for this charge.

 

 

£100 is not a genuine pre estimate of loss that this charge must represent, for an alleged breach of contract by the driver of my vehicle.

 

 

Please cancel this charge forthwith, or provide a valid code for the independent appeals service POPLA.

 

 

I am under no obligation to name the driver of the vehicle at the time of event.

 

 

No further correspondence will be entered into regarding this matter.

 

 

This appeal has been sent with proof of postage. '

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Armadillo

Just had a reply from NGP again re my letter above. Their letter is identical to previous one, making reference to how law changed 1st Oct 2012 and that they can now take the registered keeper of the vehicle to court if I won't divulge the identity of the driver. And I have 21 days to give them this info or make an appeal.

Should I just ignore this letter now? As advised by you previously, I requested a Popla code, which they have not provided and I said I would not enter into any further correspondence with them!

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

they are talking out of the wrong end of their alimentary canal and they know it.

They can apply to high court for a Norwich Pharmacal Order but they wont get one as they cannot show a clean pair of hands so that will be a waste of £20k.

basically it is all bluff. Ignore them from now on, they have had their chance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Armadillo

Just had a reply from NGP again re my letter above. Their letter is identical to previous one, making reference to how law changed 1st Oct 2012 and that they can now take the registered keeper of the vehicle to court if I won't divulge the identity of the driver. And I have 21 days to give them this info or make an appeal.

Should I just ignore this letter now? As advised by you previously, I requested a Popla code, which they have not provided and I said I would not enter into any further correspondence with them!

Cheers

 

 

They make no reference to your new appeal?

 

 

Yet they offer another 21 days to appeal... again.

 

 

It is up to you how you wish to play it from here. You have done all you need to ' legally ', and NGPM have not...

 

 

You can carry on with letter tennis, or ignore them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks both. No, no reference to my request for Popla code. Their letter was identical to previous one, which does seem very lame! They seem to be still trying to get me to admit to who was driving the car. I'll ignore from now on and hope for the best outcome :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they haven't left a NTD on the car, or sent one out via post within 14 days (and this isn't an ANPR capture) then surely they haven't complied with the terms of Schedule 4 and PoFA is not applicable?

 

NGPM seem to be quite prevalent in S.Wales. They also cover the big retail park near Cardiff City Stadium, where Costco and Asda are. I was there on Sunday and was sat in the car watching the attendant going around. He was taking pictures front and back of cars parked in disabled spaces (presumably without blue badges) but not leaving any kind of NTD on the car.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hello

 

 

I have now received a letter from ZZPS Limited stating that my unpaid PCN has now been passed to them to resolve. The letter states that the balance owed is now £160.00, which includes £60 late payment and debit recovery charge!

 

 

Please can you advise me what I should do next?

 

 

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello

 

 

I have now received a letter from ZZPS Limited stating that my unpaid PCN has now been passed to them to resolve. The letter states that the balance owed is now £160.00, which includes £60 late payment and debit recovery charge!

 

 

Please can you advise me what I should do next?

 

 

Thank you

 

Nothing is owed.

 

Who are they trying to get to pay? The RK or the driver?

 

You can ignore this and receive 3/4 more begging letters, or send a cease and desist letter-debt is denied. Refer back to principle.

 

Could you post up a redacted copy of the letter? Just for reference purposes please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a techno biff! How about the attached? Won't let me save as .pdf? Only allows jpg, jpeg, png, gif. I can try again tomorrow, can scan it from my work email, which will be .pdf. see if that's any better.

Edited by bevmillie
Link to post
Share on other sites

atts unapproved.

 

 

ignore the roxy sheep

 

 

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

agree, ignoring them is the cheapest option. If they want to waste a tree by continually writing that is up to them but you dont owe anything and the prtocols of the PoFA havent been adhered to so they cant successfully claim anything from the keeper of the vehicle and you are under no obligation to identify the driver.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...