Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the xx/xx/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the xx/xx/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, xx/xx/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

NCP ANPR PNC - Tacket Street, Ipswich


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2135 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 all,

 

I have been directed your way from an advice thread on reddit.

 

I received a letter in the post from NCP the other day stating that I now owe them £100 (reduced to £60 if paid within 14 days) for parking in their car park without paying.

 

However, the kicker is that I didn't actually park there.

I entered the car park to pick somebody up and left 15 minutes later.

 

I've logged in to check what pictures they actually have, all they have are pictures of my vehicle entering the car park and leaving 15 minutes later.

They don't have any evidence of me walking off into town for example (they wouldn't, because I remained in my car the entire time).

 

it seems to me that they can't claim that I parked there without paying if they have no proof of my car actually being parked.

 

I would like some help with appealing this and any suggestions would be appreciated :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not a fine. Its a speculative invoice.

 

Sit tight and the regulars will be around to ask you a few questions.

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

Hi and welcome to CAG

 

Can you fill this in as much as possible.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?462118-Have-you-received-a-Parking-Ticket-(1-Viewing)-nbsp

 

I assume this was a pay and display car park and the grace period is 10 minutes however, they would have a hard job convincing a court that you parked and didn't pay. If it was a free car park then they can go forth.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst it Is a speculative invoice and the company wont follow the law and you will more than likely get off with it do not say " the kicker I I didn't park"

You did unless you kept your vehicle moving for the 15 mins you were actually in the car park.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thanks for your response! Please find completed details below:

 

1 Date of the infringement 15-10-2017

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 27-10-2017

 

3 Date received 01-11-2017

 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [y/n?] No

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Photographic evidence of my vehicle entering and leaving the car park.

 

6 Have you appealed? {y/n?] post up you appeal] Not yet

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up

 

7 Who is the parking company? NCP

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Tacket Street, Ipswich

 

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. - BPA

 

Hope I've done that all correctly!

Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you

can you post up the NTK to PDF please

read UPLOAD

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

I have had a look on Google streetview and there were some images taken a year ago.

 

As well as insufficient lighting when parking at night, I could see no signs other than the one at the entrance from the road and one at the entrance to the car park. there is a yellow cabin at the end.

 

Is that how it is or have things been updated.

 

The only mention of pay and display is in a small font where you enter from the road and if you were to turn left into that street, you would miss that entirely. Even turning right you could see NCP but not the small font at the bottom of the sign.

I think you would need to go back and photograph the car park with any/all signs visible.

 

As it stands, NCP do not take court action often. (around 6 cases this year) and as the are members of the BPA you will get a (hopefully) fair hearing with POPLA as NCP, as well as all the others out there, never cave in at the beginning.

 

All you need from NCP is the POPLA code.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you

can you post up the NTK to PDF please

read UPLOAD

 

Happy to do so dx100uk but I only have pictures of this letter from my phone I'm afraid, the link in your message states it's (understandably) not preferred. I don't have access to a scanner at this present moment (I can use the one I have at work but I won't be able to get to that until Monday) - do you have any alternative solutions for me to upload the NTK? Thanks.

 

I have had a look on Google streetview and there were some images taken a year ago.

 

As well as insufficient lighting when parking at night, I could see no signs other than the one at the entrance from the road and one at the entrance to the car park. there is a yellow cabin at the end.

 

Is that how it is or have things been updated.

 

The only mention of pay and display is in a small font where you enter from the road and if you were to turn left into that street, you would miss that entirely. Even turning right you could see NCP but not the small font at the bottom of the sign.

I think you would need to go back and photograph the car park with any/all signs visible.

 

As it stands, NCP do not take court action often. (around 6 cases this year) and as the are members of the BPA you will get a (hopefully) fair hearing with POPLA as NCP, as well as all the others out there, never cave in at the beginning.

 

All you need from NCP is the POPLA code.

 

Without going back and looking myself silverfox1961 I couldn't tell you off the top of my head. If the images were taken a year ago then I doubt it would have been updated since, but I can go back and check in the morning to confirm. The letter states that I would need to appeal this decision to NCP first, before appealing to POPLA. I am guessing that once NCP have rejected my appeal they will give me the POPLA code or I can at least request this from them? What should I mention in my appeal? Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, go back and take some pictures. Make sure you include the lack of lighting and signs.

 

Yes you need to appeal to NCP first and when they reject your argument (and they will) they must give you a POPLA code.

 

I was also thinking that as this was an ANPR ticket, they may have been timed out but the dates (in my opinion) may be fine. You should have received the notice by the 30th but as the date on the letter is 27th , it could take an extra couple of days to get to you however, have a look at the envelope and see if it is stamped and the date it was done.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

read the link in UPLOAD JSTL

theres program there list officelens

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

convert to pdf so we see the whole thing. What about the envelope?

 

Apologies - I uploaded both pages in pdf format, at least I thought I did.

 

There should be 2 attachments,

first being the front page and second being back.

 

If you can't see that let me know and I will try a different method.

 

Unfortunately my mother threw the envelope away,

I was away from home and expecting an important letter

so asked her if I had any post,

 

she responded that I had just 1 letter and I asked her to open it for me and send me a picture of it.

This wasn't the letter I was expecting.

I asked her the other day if she still had the envelope and she said she threw it away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant the pictures of the signage you mentioned.

 

as for the envelope then this makes it difficult to deny service of the NTK in time as it is deemed delivered by first class post within2 days of its issue.

 

Many parking companies put a false date on the NTK and then claim it was sent within the statutory time when that is untrue.

 

Sometimes they are undone because they apply to the DVLA for keeper details at the wrong time

Link to post
Share on other sites

Attached are the pictures I took.

 

1556 picture is taken from how I entered the car park.

 

1553 is what you see once you've turned in to enter the car park. Just beyond the sign on the right hand side there is a light, but it does not appear to be facing the sign next to the entrance.

 

1547 is taken from the perspective of driving into the entrance.

 

1546 is a closeup of the sign.

 

1642 is an image of smaller signs with a view of the entrance/exit. There are a few of these dotted around, I'd say a collective of around 5-6 points across the whole car park.

 

I'd be grateful if you could advise me on what grounds I can appeal this?

10112017, 1553 Office Lens.pdf

10112017, 1547 Office Lens 1.pdf

10112017, 1546 Office Lens.pdf

10112017, 1642 Office Lens.pdf

10112017, 1556 Office Lens.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

now the sign refers to other signs so we need to see them.

 

They are supposedly scattered about the place but are also going to be attached to the ticket machine

so it is important we see decent pictures of this.

 

The big sign is NOT the contract, it is an invitation to treat so the other signs are the ones likely to create the contract if you did indeed enetr into one

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I see what you mean, the picture with the littler signs has the terms and conditions but it is not very clear. I will go back and take a new one tomorrow and count how many of them there are, in case that information is useful. Is there anything else you think might be useful to gather while I’m there?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have attached the terms and conditions.

Sorry that it isn't fully clear.

 

The writing was so small that if I had taken the picture from any further away you wouldn't have been able to see it and if I'd gotten any closer I wouldn't have been able to fit it all in one picture.

 

When I returned to the car park,

I re-looked at the smaller signs which I thought were the T&C's,

they weren't, they were just smaller versions of the sign in the front of the car park.

 

There is only one sign that lays out the terms and conditions.

The other 17+ signs all state "the terms and conditions, which can be found in and around this car park".

 

What I found most interesting, however, is that there is a car wash in this car park.

The only way to access this car wash is to enter the car park.

 

As the parking company has not provided evidence of my vehicle being stationary within a marked bay and given the amount of time I was there could I argue that I entered the car park, reviewed the parking costs/terms and conditions, enquired about the car wash and then left?

16112017, 1916 Office Lens.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just thought I would mention that as far as I am aware, NCP have taken just 7 cases to court this year so the chances of getting that far are slim. This is based on over 64,000 tickets issued.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

the sign with the contract is interesting.

 

Point 5.2 says they will recover their costs so that will be about a fiver not £60.

 

All in all the signage is contradictory, confusing and inadequate to offer a clear contract to park.

 

Plenty of other examples where claims have been chucked out with better signage than this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have appealed the parking charge with NCP - I have not included my mobile number or my email address, so they have no choice but to write to me in person as before. As alluded by other members in this thread, I expect that they will reject this appeal, so any advice on what to include (including any critiques in my current appeal) would be very much appreciated.

 

The following is what I included in my appeal:

 

I am appealing this parking charge notice on several grounds.

 

You have not provided sufficient evidence of my vehicle being parked. Your photographic evidence provided by your ANPR Camera only shows my vehicle entering the car park and then leaving 15 minutes later, it does not show my vehicle stationary in a marked bay. It is imperative to clearly evidence the contravention occurred rather than the speculative evidence you have provided.

 

In your Notice to Keeper you have stated that in accordance to the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002 - you have requested information from the DVLA and are pursuing the registered keeper for the charge. However, you have not stated in either the terms and conditions or the Notice to Keeper the legislation which allows you to pursue the Registered Keeper without proving who was driving the vehicle, which you have not done.

 

I have visited your car park and reviewed the amount of time it would take to find a parking space on a typically busy day and then review the terms and conditions in full - this took just under 10 minutes while on foot. This means that it would typically take longer to physically park the vehicle, walk to the ONLY sign in the car park that displays the terms and conditions and then make the informed decision as to whether or not they wish to enter into such a contract and then return to the vehicle either to leave or display a ticket. As evidenced by the timescales provided in your images, the terms had been reviewed and the driver made an informed decision not to enter into a contract and then left the car park.

 

While this is mostly speculative, it could also be argued that the driver entered the car park to enquire about a car wash which can only be accessed by entering the car park and again deciding not to go ahead with entering into the contract and therefore not being liable for the charge. Nowhere in your terms and conditions do you state that there is a grace period, yet all the signs around the car park refers the drivers to the terms and conditions which is only located in one place in the whole car park.

 

Overall, I do not believe that I am liable for this parking charge and request that you respectfully cancel the charge and update your records accordingly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

kregrs

your posts and responses have been moved to your existing thread

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?481154-Parking-Eye-charge-question

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...