Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


MikeL1794

Park With Ease ANPR PCN - Ferry Meadows, Peterborough

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 406 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 everyone, I've recently received a Parking Charge Notice from Park With Ease Ltd (PWE) and I'm looking for some advice.

 

On the 30th December I parked at Ferry Meadows in Peterborough for about 50 minutes and completely forgot to pay my parking fee... that was until yesterday when I received a parking charge letter (dated Thursday 15th February 2018) from PWE - see attached pdf titled "Park With Ease PCN Letter".

 

I've had a little browse at other cases and something that keeps getting mentioned is that they have to send the letter to me within 14 days of the 'offence'. Am I correct in thinking that I would have a good chance of a successful appeal (perhaps with the Independent Appeals Service rather than the initial PWE appeal) based solely on the fact that the letter is dated 33 working days after the 'offence'?

 

Just looking to get some advice before I decide whether or not to appeal the charge. I have no real defence as I completely forgot to pay, so I'm just curious as to whether the 14 day notice period means I don't have to pay.

 

Thanks in advance for any help/advice.

 

Mike.

Park With Ease PCN Letter.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm assuming that there was not a parking ticket (Notice to Driver (NtD)) on the windscreen when the driver returned to the vehicle?

 

If there wasn't, then they only had 14 days (from the day after the vehicle was parked) to get that NtK on to your doormat. After that, they're out of time to create any keeper liability so can only go after the driver.

 

If there wasn't and you appeal it, they'll swear that black is blue that there was a ticket placed on the windscreen and therefore the keeper is liable.

 

You have absolutely no obligation, morally or legally, to tell them who was driving your vehicle on that day.

 

It's completely pointless 'appealing' to either Park without Ease or the IPC as any appeal that you make will be rejected and you also run the risk of letting them know who the driver was, and you don't want to do that :wink:

 

Can you copy & paste the relevant parts of this post to the thread please.


We could use your help

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

 

 

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.

 

If I've helped you at all, please feel free to click on the little star under my posts and leave feedback :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the quick reply DragonFly!

 

So, if it's completely pointless to appeal, should I ignore the letter?

 

There was no NtD on the windscreen, so I've copied the questions for PNC's received through the post from your linked post and my answers:

 

1 Date of the infringement

Saturday 30th December 2017

 

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

Thursday 15th February 2018

 

3 Date received

Monday 19th February 2018

 

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?

I've not received any photographic evidence. I guess the evidence they would use is probably the car entering and leaving the car park?

 

6 Have you appealed? {y/n?] post up your appeal]

No

 

7 Who is the parking company?

Park With Ease Ltd

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town]

Ferry Meadows, Peterborough

 

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

Independent Appeals Service (IAS)

 

Cheers,

Mike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the Nene Park Trust website, it says that Park Without Ease monitor the site using ANPR.

 

So, basically, they've not got a snowball in hells chance. You can just simply ignore them, let them waste money by writing to you, instructing their pet DCA's etc, but file everything, you'll be using it against them if they listen to their tame s̶n̶a̶k̶e̶ solicitors and get talked in to wasting some more of their money by taking you to court.

 

If they go that far, it'll be a nice counter claim for you as well if you fancy it for their breach of the DPA :thumb:


We could use your help

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

 

 

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.

 

If I've helped you at all, please feel free to click on the little star under my posts and leave feedback :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and just as a heads up as to how independent the "independent" appeals service is...

 

It's run by the same two clowns that own and run both the IPC and Gladstones Solicitors, which is the mob that will probably be writing to you at some point in the future.

 

So they're about as independent from one another as my fingers are to my hand :lol:


We could use your help

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

 

 

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.

 

If I've helped you at all, please feel free to click on the little star under my posts and leave feedback :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, thank you for the advice! (I'll be sure to come back and update this thread as the situation develops).

 

Haha, now I'm wondering how that's allowed considering the number of occasions where there is probably a conflict of interest :!::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Okay, thank you for the advice! (I'll be sure to come back and update this thread as the situation develops).

 

Haha, now I'm wondering how that's allowed considering the number of occasions where there is probably a conflict of interest :!::lol:

 

Well... On paper at least, they like to hide the fact that they're all run by the same two people, being Will Hurley and John Davies, they swap and change company names, business addresses and directors, which, in my opinion is only being done to attempt to hide the truth.

 

Some Judges, and most certainly some MP's* are getting wise to the fact, and Gladrags keep on losing their clients money in court like it's going out of fashion. Gladrags don't care whether they win or lose of course because they get paid regardless, it's just a question of 'by whom' to them.

 

It's a nice little earner if you can con someone enough to give you the work, and those car drivers/keepers who aren't wise to the game are bamboozled into having their wallets raped by these shysters.

 

-

 

*Here's what was said by Stephen Doughty MP during the 2nd reading of the current Private Members Bill in Parliament

 

I am glad to hear that the Minister supports the Bill. Will he also look closely at the links between one of the so-called trade associations, the International Parking Community, and Gladstones Solicitors, and the listing of all these accredited operators? It is clear from Companies House information that there are clear links between the individual directors of Gladstones and the IPC, which goes under United Trade and Industry Ltd, and that there has been a repeated changing of names and addresses in an attempt to cover up these links.

We could use your help

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

 

 

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.

 

If I've helped you at all, please feel free to click on the little star under my posts and leave feedback :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they are too late to create a keeper liability.

 

If you look at the wording f their letter carefully it isnt a NTK under papa 9 of the POFA but an invitation to pay up on behalf of the driver or to name the driver, neither of which you are obliged to do.

 

They have however breached their contract with the DVLA by obtaining your details outside the time allowed by the POFA so ahve lied about why they want them as they have no reasonable cause to do so. That means you can sue them if you are minded to do so. also this late approach negates then asking ANYONE ofr oney as they must act within time to they have ost the right to enforce theoriginal contract (assuming it was valid).

 

shot themselves in both feet so sit tight and ignoreanything that isnt a solicitors letter threatening court action. If you get one of them come back here and we will help compose a suitably blunt response.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was on Nene Valley railway property i am one of the original shareholders and I gave you permission to park there as occupier of the land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again everyone,

 

Yesterday (21st March 2018) I received a second letter - see the pdf attached.

 

Should I be concerned about the 'pay now to prevent legal action' comment? Or is this just their standard terminology to scare people into paying?

 

Thanks,

Mike.

Park With Ease - Parking Charge Reminder.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wont make any differnce, they dont have a claim against you so they would be just wasting money.

 

PWE ran a car park at a NT property and got very keen on suing people. They lost a load of claims and got booted off the site as well, after that they have been more circumspect. However, you can still do yourself a favour and get photographs of the sigange at the site and also of the entrance to the land from the public highway whether there are signs or not as that is where a contract should be advertised so you can make a decision before you enter the land.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again,

 

Received another letter today dated 30th March 2018 (see attached pdf). Should I take this as a hint that they will be taking legal action in some form or is this just a last ditch attempt to try and intimidate me into paying? Any help/advice appreciated!

 

Thanks,

Mike.

Park With Ease - Parking Charge Reminder 2.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not a letter that fulfils the requirements for a pre action protocol letter. You can safely ignore this.

 

PWE got an absolute spanking at court over a site oop north a couple of years ago when they took dozens of people to court and it became instantly apparent they had no right to do so, lost the claims and got booted off the site for ther stupidity. They may say the one thing but they also know they are stuffed unles you admit driving

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not being funny mike

but you've not read one other parking thread here at all unless you've done it whilst not logged in


..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello again esteemed Caggers,

 

It's been a very long time since my last letter from Park With Ease (about 8 months) and I've now received a letter from Equita on their behalf (see the attachment to this post).

 

I've had a look at some other posts on here but can't find anything close enough to my case for me to understand what my best course of action is (given my limited understanding of the legal process).

 

Am I right to think that at this stage I should just keep quiet and wait for a 'pre action protocol letter' (if one is ever sent) that was mentioned by ericsbrother?

 

Additionally, can anyone point me to any good threads or other information that I should read in advance of receiving that letter?

 

Thanks for any help,

Mike.

Equita Letter 01-12-2018.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you need to do anything, that letter uses the words 'may' and 'could' rather than saying they're actually going to do something. As you say, wait for the letters EB mentioned.

 

You can search CAG for relevant threads, type into the box at the top of the screen in the maroon strip.

 

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

correct that's not a headed PAP letter of claim from a fake/tame paperwork only solicitor

 

dx


..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome, thanks!

 

I do want to check something though, should I contact Equita to dispute the fact I was the driver (their letter states "driver/keeper")?

 

One other thing, am I right to think that if they do try to issue court proceedings then it would be reasonable for me to issue a counterclaim because they're in breach of the IPC code of conduct by trying to rely upon keeper liability (since their request for my details from the DVLA was not in accordance with the POFA)? Or have I misinterpreted this?

 

Cheers,

Mike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

equita cant issue a claim only PWE can through a solicitor but they must 1st send a PAP letter

 

equita in this instance are a DCA

a DCA is NOT A BAILIFF

and have

ZERO Legal powers

 

your other point only become useful if you get a PAP letter


..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not even a decent threatogram.

 

If it does get to court dont counterclaim as this makes it more likley they will actually turn up as it becomes double of quits.

Let them fail their own claim first and them make your own separate claim against them.

 

They are then likely to pay that without a hearing as they know they will lose a properly worded data protection claim. Their solicitors will of couse say there is no case to answer, you cant win etc etc but there are plenty of examples that prove it is actually very likely they are going to lose.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...