Announcements
-
-
Tweets
-
-
Posts
-
Hello, Firstly, I am a few steps into this whole process so unfortunately I have missed out on the advice which states what I should have done initially. I am hoping I can still salvage my situation from this point. Facts- - I own the flat and the parking bay that comes with it. - The management company have hired a separate company (LinkParking) to manage the parking. - I have a permit for my car but my car was elsewhere which is why I couldn't give the permit to anyone else. - My girlfriend parked her car in my bay without a valid permit, instead we had a photocopy of the original permit- I realise this is where I went wrong but the original permit itself was printed on a piece of A4 paper AND when I bought the flat I was never told about requiring a permit and had issues with these guys before. Unfortunately we appealed to LinkParking with a substandard appeal (I realise this was substandard after reading through everything else on these forums). They of course denied it. We then appealed to IAS directly based on guidance from other websites, copy of the appeal is below- I was issued with a parking ticket on 20/12/2019 but I believe it was unfairly issued. I have responded to this notice and 'LinkParking' have denied my appeal and have requested I contact the IAS. I am writing to you as per Section 7.4.2 from the IPC Code of Practice and would therefore like appeal this notice on the following points The car was parked in my own car parking bay which I OWN. I was still unfairly issued with parking tickets. The lease agreement does not state that I require a permit to park in the bay as I own the property and the parking bay that comes with it as per the HM Land and Registry register. This lease has primacy of contract over any agreement the management company may have with LinkParking and therefore legally is invalid. The large sum demanded amounts to a penalty and/or is not an accurate reflection of any loss suffered so it is not a reasonable charge. The monetary claim is disproportionate, punitive and unjustifiable in total. It may also be an unfair term and therefore in breach of Schedule 2 of the Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. The contractual breach can have caused no financial loss whatever to LinkParking or to the land owner. Once again, the car was parked in my OWN bay and therefore did not cause damage to any third parties. The Parking Charge Notice constitutes an invoice for payment. Accordingly the invoiced charge must include an element of VAT. However, the parking charge notice does not state either a VAT registration number or an invoice reference number and so cannot constitute a lawfully valid demand for payment. Having examined the parking charge notice further I believe it is a non compliant demand for payment as the notice wrongly requires payment to be made “within” 28 days of issue which is contrary to statutory requirement that provides a period of 28 days from the date of receipt. As a sign of good faith, I had purchased a permit anyway to avoid any unnecessary hassle for both parties but have been issued a notice anyway which is unacceptable. I understand that LinkParking are appointed to monitor the car park to prevent trespassers and I agree with this but it seems it is the residents that are being 'ticketed' without good reason for parking in their own bay. I look forward to hearing from you. We have now received the following response today- The operator made their prima facie case on 27/01/2020 14:10:48. The operator reported that... The appellant was the driver The appellant was the keeper The operator is seeking keeper liability in accordance with PoFA.. A manual ticket was placed on the vehicle The ticket was issued on 29/12/2019 The charge is based in contract The Operator made the following comments... The appellant parked their vehicle on land we manage and incurred a charge as they were not displaying a valid permit. Our signs clearly advertise the terms of parking and the charges which apply if they are met. The appellant chose to display a very poor copy of one of our permits, it is a fraction of the size of a valid one. We are unsure why they chose to do this and to date we have not received an explanation. We do not have to prove any loss and invoice does not have to have a VAT number on it if the issuer is not VAT registered. Our PCNs have passed audits by the IPC and DVLA. In addition to this I have also looked through all my documentation with regards to any requirements to require displaying a permit in the contract and I can't find anything. I've owned the flat for almost 2 years now and I do not believe I was given any documentation which mentions this. I have also looked at the HM Land Registry document which doesn't state I need a permit and I believe this ties in with the Primacy of Contract (my law understanding isn't the best). I have also contacted the management company last week to request all information from them with regards to giving me copies of documentation which covers car parking, building services etc. so I have everything. What really annoys me is that I didn't cause anyone any damage AND I WAS PARKED IN MY OWN BAY!!! I really hope I haven't messed it up too much and this can be salved. Any help for a response is greatly appreciated! Thanks! -
Yes DX, both come up as Cap 1, one a classic Card and the other a Mastercard.
-
.thumb.jpg.bf2f59e5260173230834ce3ad8015900.jpg)
Now that you have the proof - I think its time to consider taking legal action against the Bank. Remind me who made the decision at the FOS? Adjudicator or Ombudsman? -
I would be starting by sending Plusnet a SAR and gather all your data......one DD for two accounts...alarm bells ringing. Andy -
Its easier if you wait until you get the claimant's statement...then you can use this as a guide on the points they will rely on and then simply respond by refuting or agreeing or offering alternative argument. Problem is they tend to leave it to the death and you dont have time..or they wait for yours first then counter your points.If they fail to serve a statement at all then thats a good sign that they are getting ready to discontinue the claim.... Here is an example...and I stress example ....no use to you apart from showing you the usual layout into and conclusion. Witness statement Lob.pdf
-
-
Our picks
-
Shocking pictures reveal ‘disgusting’ conditions inside @Hermesparcels depot where workers ‘feel like slaves’
dx100uk posted a topic in Postal and Delivery Services,
Shocking pictures reveal ‘disgusting’ conditions inside Hermes depot where workers ‘feel like slaves’. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/419726-shocking-pictures-reveal-%E2%80%98disgusting%E2%80%99-conditions-inside-hermes-depot-where-workers-%E2%80%98feel-like-slaves%E2%80%99/- 4 replies
-
Euro Car Parks issued this ticket to the police in Devon and Cornwall
BankFodder posted a topic in Private Land Parking Enforcement,
Euro Car Parks issued this ticket to the police in Devon and Cornwall. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/419522-can-anyone-identify-the-parking-company-which-issued-this-ticket-to-the-police-in-devon-and-cornwall/-
- 20 replies
-
-
@AO tumble dryer faulty at 13 months AO.com - brilliant customer service - **Bravo AO**
messimagician posted a topic in Online Stores,
@AO tumble dryer faulty at 13 months AO.com - brilliant customer service - **Bravo AO**. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/419448-ao-tumble-dryer-faulty-at-13-months/-
- 22 replies
-
-
Be a kid this Chistmas
BankFodder posted a topic in Bear Garden,
Be a kid this Chistmas. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/419309-be-a-kid-this-chistmas/- 1 reply
-
Article 50 Discussion
By
Consumer dude, in
Bear Garden
-
Recently Browsing 0 Caggers
No registered users viewing this page.
-
Have we helped you ...?
