Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The card number at the top right of the Advanced Application Form and Agreement does not reflect the same card number the number is 546780 and ends 5931 (however that card was taken out in 2005) the card number on the POC - there isn't one it is just the reference number that they use or they call the 'original account number'.   As for the statement (excel spreadsheet type) that has the same reference number but not credit card number.  However this is different to the spreadsheet paperwork they have sent previously to me. Which looks like it comes from Lloyds and shows the debt being written off by them. I've attached that here.   I wrote to Lowell asking for the deed of assignment and they haven't furnished us with it either. They did state that they don't have it as it is too old or something in the offer letter.      new doc 2021-02-25 08.15.42.pdf
    • Hello All   Update   As per post #83, I had mentioned that for some unusual  reason, there had been two deadlines from the court for responding, namely the 18th of January 2021 and 1st of Feb 2021.   With everyones great help I filed in the response by the18th of Jan 2021. I think I was bit concerned that the claimant, Mike Ashley may use the second deadline as a chance to add a supplementary statement in response to my defence.    Well, Mike Ashely has in fact does exactly this. He has responded and filed a supplementary witness statement and has responded to all the defence points. He has addressed most the issues I had raised in my defence.     His Supplementary WS is dated 30 January 2021 and his solicitors emailed it to me on the 17th of February 2021.   Not sure what to do, but he seems to have amended everything which i could have used as a loophole leaving me with the thought of , should we have waited till the 2nd deadline ie 1ist Feb2021 and submitted the defence rather than the 18th January 2021. this would have deprived him of the chance to response with a supplementary WS. Thats what really had a worried me and I raised it a few times on this platform.     Not sure now because he has kind of amended a few things, removed the incorrect exhibit ( where the signages had belonged to a different site, and called it a clerical error).   Will post his redacted supplementary WS later as at work now.   Thanks all
    • An eye-opening new report from the payment processor Worldpay found so-called 'mobile wallet' payments were used for just under a third of all online transactions in 2020. View the full article
    • Adding to all the other difficulties (address for service, proving an agreement, obtaining enforcement even if you succeeded) that have been raised: Has the obligation to repay yet arisen?   You say the agreement was repayment once the divorce settlement occurred, but then point out settlement has yet to occur!.
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Parking Control Management (UK) Limited PCN.


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1896 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Good morning.

 

Unfortunately, on 03/10/2015 i was issued a Parking Charge Notice by Parking Control Management (UK) Limited for the sum of £60.00 whilst I was parked on a private car park.

 

I had appealed on the grounds that the signs had been vandalised which of course was rejected by PCM and decided to follow it through with another appeal to The Independent Appeals Service and also this was dismissed.

 

I have left it whilst seeking advice but PCM have now referred it over to Debt Recovery Plus Limited who are chasing me for the amount of £160.00

 

I'm not the best when it comes to this sort of stuff, and hope someone would be able to advise me further about the whole situation and where I stand.

 

I have linked in an album as there are too many images to display on here of my PCN, Evidence and also the appeal that i submitted to TheIAS which can be viewed here: http://imgur.com/a/Eld1V

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated as I do not want to pay these people a penny as they do not deserve it.

Edited by honeybee13
Pejorative term removed.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just ignore them, they won't do anything apart from send nasty letters.

Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd are the phoenix company of Parking Control Management Ltd, the bullying clamping company, when clamping wasn't illegal.

It would cost them more to take you to court than they would win from you, and you can't claim legal expenses in a small claims court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

Others who know more than me will be along to comment later, I expect. But if you've got to the DR+ stage, from our experience you're approaching the end of the road with this. Have a read around the forum for threads about DR+, I don't think anyone has ended up paying them.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you appeal as the driver or keeper?

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

It doesnt really matter what you say to the IAS or in what capacity, they think the law doesnt apply to them or their clients (they dont act independently as they are Gladstones solicitors, who are registered as the owners of the IPC- see parking prankster's in depth insight). In short, if the signage is defaced then how are you supposed to make an informed decision whetehr to accept the terms offered by the signs when you cant read it. If illegible you can say that there were no restriction imposed by the signs and that is that.

There are many reasons that make the supposed breach of conditions a nonsense so if you get a letter from eeither a solicitors or the parking co marked " letter before action" or letter before claim then come back here. Begging letters from debt collecting agencies or any other letter from a solicitors such as Miah's, Gladstones or the like are just scrap paper. keep them safe but dont panic, they hope to frighten you into paying up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK that's fine, I will continue to ignore them until they send court papers or letters before action. Hopefully it doesn't come to that but we'll see what happens and i'll update this thread accordingly. Thanks so much for the information provided!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Good morning.

 

I have received a letter this morning from Debt Recovery Plus Limited with the heading "Letter before referral for legal action"

 

The letter states the following:

 

Dear Mr Client

 

I am writing to you personally because I have been instructed by Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd to obtain immediate settlement of the outstanding balance of £160.00

 

Despite previous requests for payment you have either failed to respond to our letters or settle the debt. I now advise you that unless fill payment is received within the next 14 days I am instructed to report back to Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd with a recommendation to refer your case to our clients solicitor, to consider commencing court proceedings against you.

 

Should Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd issue proceedings against you and a judgement is awarded in the favour, it may affect your ability to obtain credit in the future.

 

 

Would anyone mind advising me in what steps I should take now to deal with this issue?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there.

 

I suspect the guys will tell you to ignore the letter. Looking at it, they don't say they will issue court proceedings, they are going to consider that, and it may affect your credit rating.

 

If you read around the forum, plenty of people have had letters from DR+ and it's been the end of the trail. The forum guys should be along later.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore it Garreh, they are still fishing.

 

Full of ifs, maybe's, might's and could's.

 

if you receive a claim form, thats different but for now, enjoy your xmas!

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

 

 

 

GEMHL Settled

Barclaycard Settled

A & L SETTLED IN FULL :lol:

Spml Reluctantly withdrawn

Blackhorse pre 31-7-06 Demand removal sent 23 8 06. ICO ordered removal jan 2007....REMOVED:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The last letter I had from them said that months ago. I'd say you've probably heard the last of them.

 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

dont forget DR+ CANT do anything as they dont own the debt so they have no legal standing. that is why the letter says things like "recommend" or "advise our clients to". My granny would recommend they wash their mouths out with soap for saying some of the things they spout forth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...