Jump to content

UKPC try a new tactic to circumvent the POFA

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1999 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

I have received copies of letters sent to a person who parked in a car park managed by UKPC.



Originally he got screen tickets slapped on his car and he ignored them and waited for the NTK.



After just under 2 months he got letters thouth the post saying "final reminder"

and they go on to say that he has been idnetified as the driver at the time by the keeper.

Well, as the vehicle is his and he hasnt said a word i wonder how UKPC can leap to taht conclusion.



It is more likely that they know they will have to spend good money making their case at POPLA

so have just let the clock run down, invent a cock and bull story

and hope that someone will be impressed by the novel approach With UKPC's track record



I would say deception but that would imply they are deliberately trying to deceive

but I am happy to accept that they are just palin incompetent or stupid.


however, if you have received a screen ticket at the Valley retail park in Croydon

please let us know so I can compare the wording on the NTK (or "final remninder" if you didnt get the NTK in time)


This doesnt change the rubbish incoherent signage at the retail park into ones that are actual contractual offers though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well haven't UKPC for at least their staff been involved in some deceptive practices before? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3229165/Is-PROOF-private-parking-firms-[problem]ming-motorists-Drivers-say-timings-photos-doctored-legally-parked-cars-issued-fines.html


Maybe this kind of approach is part of their culture maybe this kind of approach is part of their culture – or maybe it is simply human error.


We will have to see if we get any other reports.


It would be interesting to send them an SAR to get a copy of what information they think they have been provided with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In this instance it is probably quite a unique circumstance, the car was parked in the same place 3 times in a short span and 1 letter was sent as an NTK and then the others were sent for all 3 events saying the keeper had identified the person as the driver. Being kind I would say that they just used the same standard letter and didnt bother to check which of the events it could have applied to and made an assumption that they had either sent the correct NTK or couldnt be bothered to go through the correct procedures as it would obviously be the same keeper/driver wouldnt it? Well, no actually but that will be part of the response and possibly a complaint further down the line..

Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...