Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

UKCPS county court claim received - Help with best avenues of defence?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3308 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

Hello,

 

Just before christmas 2013 I got a parking charge notice put on my windscreen

after parking in an allocated parking space for a small industrial unit that was unoccupied (To Let signs up, chained up doors).

 

 

The site was approximately 15 small adjoined units built around a car park with about 50 spaces, each unit having a number of allocated spots.

I believed that as the unit was not in use, nobody would even notice, let alone care if I parked there for 10 minutes.

The space was not directly outside the unit and I was not blocking any access.

The car park was only about half full and I saw no UKCPS signs whatsoever when I parked.

 

After returning to my car and realising that where I had parked was the domain of a private parking company

I had a look for some signs and found one approximately 8 ft (maybe higher) up on a wall of an industrial unit opposite,

facing the entrance to the car park (not visible from where I had parked, and not readable or even particularly noticeable to drivers when entering the car park).

 

 

A few years back a friend of mine had been issued one of these tickets, ignored it and never heard anything again, so at the time I just drove off, not unduly worried.

 

It turns out the car park for the industrial units was owned by Co-op,

although separated from the actual nearby co-op car park by a canal and a fence (no signs to show that the co-op also owned that land at all)

 

I ignored the letters they sent (I realise now this was out of date advice), and after 3 or 4 I heard nothing more for many months until

 

 

a County Court Claim Form arrived this morning for £175.

 

Unfortunately, I did not take any photos at the time as I was not think that UKCPS would actually chase me.

 

 

The site has now been bulldozed to make way for a new road.

Given that my main defence seems to be inadequate signs and I have no photographic evidence of that,

are there any other good avenues of defence I should use in addition?

 

Thanks in advance,

t

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry..they've issue a court claim for a speculative invoice

issued xmas 2013 for a car park that now no longer exists?

 

 

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

Desperate springs to mind!

 

Have you acknowledged the claim?

And defend in full.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I hope to defend in full. The problem I have is that I have no legal knowledge and I am concerned I might miss a significant point that might otherwise go in my favour.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not legal savvy either, but the simple fact that this speculative invoice does not represent any Genuine Pre Estimate Of Loss (GPEOL)

then they are stuffed.

 

You ONLY problem is that you followed the old advice of ignore, when the new advice is to hit them head on and leave them dead in the water.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you need any help, poke around the site as there are LOTS of very good threads. Suffice to say you will win this, and UKCPS are the laughing stock of parking companies. They never get anything right. At all.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's hope so! I will have a good look at some other threads and hopefully come up with an effective defence. I will also suggest a stay pending a POPLA case, despite me officially missing the time frame for this

Link to post
Share on other sites

Name of the Claimant ?

 

Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to.

 

Date of issue XX + 19 days ( 5 day for service + 14 days to acknowledge) = XX + 14 days to submit defence = XX (33 days in total) -

 

^^^^^ NOTE : WHEN CALCULATING THE TIMELINE - PLEASE REMEMBER THAT THE DATE OF THE CLAIM IS DAY 1 [example: Issue date 01.03.2014 + 19 days (5 days for service + 14 days to acknowledge) = 19.03.2014 + 14 days to submit defence = 02.04.2014] = 33 days in total

 

What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? Please type out their particulars of claim (verbatim) less any identifiable data and round the amounts up/down.

 

What is the value of the claim?

 

Be mindful of deadlines.

Calculate now when you must acknowledge the claim by

And when you must lodge your defence by.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The particulars of the claim are:

 

Claim against [name] for outstanding parking charge issued to vehicle [reg no] on land named [car park name].

 

 

This land is managed by UKCPS Ltd and vehicles parked at the site are subject to parking restrictions

which are set out on signs at the site and form a contract between the driver of the vehicle and UKCPS Ltd. [name]

or a driver parked the vehicle on [date] @ [time] without a valid permit or authority.

Or the keeper who may have been the driver or alternatively has chosen not to name the driver

and is therefore responsible for payment as required under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedom Act 2012.

 

 

By parking on this land a driver contractually agrees to pay a charge of 100.

The amount remains unpaid and stands at 100 plus an additional 50 incurred in collection fees

whereby the remaining 50 becomes a commercially justifiable figure.

 

Claimant - P Haswell

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I have emailed the CO-OP explaining the situation and requesting that they instruct UKCPS to drop the claim. I have also requested they supply me with the original contract for the car park in question and any site plans they have, specifically showing which space is allocated to which industrial unit and where the UKCPS signs were posted, if they have that info. When I have that reply I will contact UKCPS with a Part 18 request for the evidence they hold that they intend to use in court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be taking pictures of the site as it is now and ask them where the signs are that indicate where they control the parking on that land.

The defence should include inadequate signage to form a contract, no contract between landlord and UKPCS that allows them to make claim and take legal action in their own name. Dont forget, it is for them to prove that their claim is valid and as you have enough evidence to cast this into doubt their work will be very hard. Even if they turn up with a load of photos of the site they wont be able to convince anyone of when they were taken with any accuracy as to position , size etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

that is the entire point, they cant show that there are/were adequate signs to form a contract. You can argue almost any point and the proof of claim is for them to make, not for you to prove otherwise.

I bet that they had a contract with someone at some point but this had expired due to the change of ownership/occupier and thus it will be impossible for them to make any claim stick.

You should also enquire with the council about planning permission granted to them for the signage. No planning permission- no contract as it is "unconscionable" to form a contract that involves illegal activity. Again, put it in your defence and make them prove that PP exists- I bet they cant.

I will post up a list of suitable points in the near future for you to consider.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...