Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Presumably you have received your own NIP/s172 request after the lease company identified you as the person the car is leased to?   First thing to say is that, regardless of any questions over the date of the first NIP, you must still reply to your own NIP/s172 within the time limit given otherwise you are committing an entirely separate and more serious offence than any speeding infringement.  If you were the driver you should nominate yourself.   You need to be careful arguing that the first NIP was not sent out in time.  Note that it is only the first NIP that is subject to the 14 day limit, and that NIP needs to go to the Registered Keeper.  There is no time limit on subsequent NIPs.   So are you 100% certain that your lease company is the registered keeper and do you know that for a fact?  Please note that the registered keeper of lease vehicles is often not the lease company, but a finance company.   If the police are saying that the first NIP was sent to the RK within the time limit, you can be 99.99999% certain that they will have evidence proving that fact.  Assuming it was sent out first-class, there is a legal presumption that it was delivered two working days after posting, unless the addressee can prove it was never received.  So if the police are saying the first NIP was sent out within 12 days, the RK would have to prove it was never received within 14 days to provide a defence.  As you might imagine, that is very difficult to prove otherwise everybody would claim it.  Unfortunately, "reminder" NIPs are usually not marked as such and may be indistinguishable from the original.   So you need to confirm (preferably by sight of a copy of the actual V5C document as staff of lease companies do not always know) who the Registered Keeper is, and when they recived the first NIP.  If it was received after 14 days can they prove that fact (eg by a date received stamp and an appropriate system for dealing with mail received) and can they prove that they didn't receive an earlier NIP?   Hope that makes sense!  If it doesn't another poster called Man in the Middle will clarify what I 've not explained well or got wrong.
    • Simply confirming no mediation and the claim is proceeding to allocation.   Andy
    • Thanks for the swift response. Will continue to read around.   I have a date of march 10.
    • First of all, they always say that you should be prepared to give up ground. If you are convinced as to your rights in the matter – and we certainly are – then there is no reason for you to give up any ground at all. You may come under pressure to give up ground – but you don't have to concede any ground. The benefit to Hermes is that they don't end up going to court so that they are spared extra expense and also there are spared the embarrassment of a judgement against them. When you are given the mediation date, then let us know and then we will go through it with you. However, read up on all of the threads in this sub- forum. You will find exactly your situation have occurred several times and have already gone to mediation and you will find that we have already given explanations on each one of the points. Familiarise yourself with the stories and the principles involved. When you get your mediation date then come back here and let us know.
    • I have read the page on mediation, but wanted to clarify a few details.   I have been given an arranged time for the mediation call. The email from the court states:   "for mediation to be successful, you would need to be willing to negotiate on the amount of the claim and have a degree of flexibility".   Should I have to give up ground? At this stage, I feel I am owed what I have lost, and what the claim has cost me, not to mention my time. The email says if you aren't willing then mediation is unsuitable.   It then also suggests:   "It is crucial that you are able to briefly and accurately explain your claim or defence. It is vital that you have prepared for the mediation by putting together a brief summary of your opening position. Only the key points are necessary at this stage as the longer the time taken discussing the disputed issues will reduce the time available for exploring settlement options."   I am of course aware of my opening position - that they were negligent and lost my item and thus I believe I am due recompense. However, I am not certain of the legal particulars of my argument.   Furthermore:   - Should I mention that the defendant may not wish to proceed to court as it may support a precedent for others in a similar situation to also claim against them? - Are there any other things I should be mentioning to the mediator?   Appreciate the guidance.
  • 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

NCP ANPR PNC - Tacket Street, Ipswich


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 981 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

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

the date you received the letter is too late to create keeper liability as long as it was sent second class mail. It will have been deemed delivered a day earlier if first class unless you can show the postmark on the envelope was after the 28th

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...