Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
    • To which official body does one make a formal complaint about a LPA fixed charge receiver? Does one make a complaint first to the company employing the appointed individuals?    Or can one complain immediately to an official body, such as nara?    I've tried researching but there doesn't seem a very clear route on how to legally hold them to account for wrongful behaviour.  It seems frustratingly complicated because they are considered to be officers of the court and held in high esteem - and the borrower is deemed liable for their actions.  Yet what does the borrower do when disclosure shows clear evidence of wrong-doing? Does anyone have any pointers please?
    • Steam is still needed in many industries, but much of it is still made with fossil fuels.View the full article
  • 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

Park Watch no waiting PCN - Ruby central shopping Center


Recommended Posts

Hi there, it's been a while :(

 

I received a shiny PCN in the post today for NO WAITING after I pulled up at the side of a bank doing a favour for someone.

 

I'm a blue badge holder and didn't get out of the car any help would be gratefully received

 

For PCN's received through the post [ANPR camera capture]

 

please answer the following questions.

 

1 Date of the infringement 24th August 2018

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 05th September 2018

 

3 Date received 06th September 2018

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [yes]

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? yes

 

6 Have you appealed? {y/n?] post up your appeal] Waiting for advice from here

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

 

7 Who is the parking company? Park Watch

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Rugby Central Shopping Centre, Service area 3, Rugby

 

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

pcn0009.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

thread tidied

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

ok well there is no such thing as no waiting on private land

as you have to 'wait' to read their signs that say 'no waiting' :lol:

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

As the idiots have to give you a 10 minute grace period and also a sign saying no waiting or similar is not a contract to park they dont have a leg to stand on. However, being both stupid and greedy they will still try and chisel you for the money.

 

If you want to waste £25 of their money you can appeal to them and when they turn you down to POPLA (that costs them).

The simplest appeal will be that there was no contract offered as there was no such clause as NO WAITING on their signage,

that the phrase is prohibitive and not a genuine offer of terms to park

and in any case they have failed to allow a 10 minute grace period as demansded by the BPA Code of Practice.

All of the above points will beat a court claim and you can sue them for breach of the GDPR for ontaining and processing your personal data unlawfully but none of that will matter to POPLA as they have very limited terms of reference.

 

However, you can show that you have been through the motions and that the parking co have been made aware that their claim has no merit.

 

Normally I wouldnt bother with an appeal but in this case the adjudicator has straightforward matters to consider

- wording on signage and grace period.

 

If they reject your appeal then it will show they break their own rules

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

are they the ONLY signs?

 

is there mention of no waiting or 10 mins grace period

are they the ONLY signs?

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

so brief letter as post 4

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

You issued me with a parking ticket on 5th September 2018 but I believe it was illegally issued. I will not be paying your demand for payment for the following reasons:

 

 

 

 

• There was insufficient signage

The car park in question has no clear signage to explain what the relevant parking restrictions are. This means no contract can be formed with the landowner and all tickets are issued illegally. Please see attached evidence, no contract offered as there was no such clause as NO WAITING on their signage,

that the phrase is prohibitive and not a genuine offer of terms to park, I have gathered as proof.

 

• Mitigating circumstances

There are mitigating circumstances to explain why the vehicle was parked where it was and the charge should be waived for this reason. Please see attached evidence, I am a blue badge holder due to mobility issues, as proof of claim.

 

• The charge is disproportionate and not commercially justifiable

The amount you have charged is not based upon any commercially justifiable loss to your company or the landowner.

 

In my case, the £100 charge you are asking for far exceeds the cost to the landowner of the short period I was there. I therefore feel the charge you have asked for is excessive.

 

 

If you choose to pursue me please be aware that I will not enter into any correspondence and this will be the only letter you will receive from me until you answer the specific points raised in my letter.

 

Yours faithfully,

Link to post
Share on other sites

not illegal unlawful

but that's not the point don't say anything

 

 

simply refer to the blue bit in post 4

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

You issued me with a parking ticket on 5th September 2018 but I believe it was unlawfully issued. I will not be paying your demand for payment for the following reasons:

 

 

 

 

• There was insufficient signage

The car park in question has no clear signage to explain what the relevant parking restrictions are. This means no contract can be formed with the landowner and all tickets are issued unlawfully. No contract offered as there was no such clause as NO WAITING on their signage, that the phrase is prohibitive and not a genuine offer of terms to park.

 

• Mitigating circumstances

There are mitigating circumstances to explain why the vehicle was parked where it was and the charge should be waived for this reason. Please see attached evidence, I am a blue badge holder due to mobility issues, as proof of claim.

 

• The charge is disproportionate and not commercially justifiable

The amount you have charged is not based upon any commercially justifiable loss to your company or the landowner.

 

In my case, the £100 charge you are asking for far exceeds the cost to the landowner of the short period I was there. I therefore feel the charge you have asked for is excessive.

 

 

If you choose to pursue me please be aware that I will not enter into any correspondence and this will be the only letter you will receive from me until you answer the specific points raised in my letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the blue bit in post 4 says nothing? about using the points in blue above?

 

the 1st bit well there is mention of no waiting.....

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'm at a loss, it does state that is no waiting on the signs so should I appeal or just pay the £60?

 

I am also on benefits and it is a huge chunk out of my fortnightly payments.

 

Thank you for your advice so far

Link to post
Share on other sites

no you don't need to pay it but you need to do a bit of self help

cant see you've read one other PPC thread at all???

 

there is a 10 mins grace period..

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

right, the first sign is a prohibition so not a contract

, the second sign is not a contract but an invitation to treat so cant be binding and anyway carries no offer of terms so how can you accept them?

 

there is no illegality involved by either side in this matter, it is civil law, not criminal law.

 

No one gives a stuff as to why your car was where it was, it is completely irrelevant.

 

There is no such thing as mitigation in contract law so forget about it, you will get no sympathy and you will never win an appeal or a court case if that is what you think will help.

 

Now, read and understand a load of other posts, you have more than enough to destroy any legal claim these idiots may make.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

These clowns would ticket a DPD/Yodel/Parcelforce/UPS van delivering at the location, no waiting is a prohibition, so as EB says no contract can be formed, as it is Private Land, there can be no criminal element.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You issued me with a parking ticket on 5th September 2018 but I believe it was unlawfully issued. I will not be paying your demand for payment for the following reason:

 

 

The signs are a prohibition so not a contract, as it is private land there can be no criminal element.

 

 

If you choose to pursue me please be aware that I will not enter into any correspondence and this will be the only letter you will receive from me until you answer the specific points raised in my letter.

 

Yours faithfully,

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, dont send that, it will only cause them to know they are pursuing the right person for starters. At present they dont have a clue who was driving so why are you telling them it was you?

 

It was suggested that you read a bundle of other threads and this is evidence you havent. If you want to write something you need to be more strident so I suggest something like:

 

Dear sirs,

with regard to your claim that a contract was breached I suggest that you find someone who understands english as well as the law to explain to you why there can be no breach of a contract when a contract doesnt exist.

No waiting is a prohibiton, not an offer to park.

 

Consider yourself lucky I have no desire to sue you for breach of the GDPR over this matter but stop wasting my time with your begging letters, you arent getting any money because none is due so you will just have to resit your GCSE's and try it on with someone else.

 

You dont invite then to pursue you or even request further correspondence as they see that as a sign you will pay up if they apply a thick enough layer of bull****.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you,

I did read quite a few posts but could not find one that was relevant to the information that I required.

 

I appreciate the times that you have taken to reply.

Appeal sent

 

Thank you for your email.

I can confirm that your appeal has been received and you will receive a response within 35 days.

 

Please provide any evidence you have to support your appeal, such as a valid disabled badge, evidence of purchases and proof of delivery.

 

Please note, you must include your parking charge notice reference number and vehicle registration mark in order for us to process your appeal.

 

Your PCN, and the associated charges will be placed on hold until a decision has been made and communicated to you.

 

*Important information*;

 

We endeavour to review and respond to appeals within 10 days.

Your appeal response will not be sent from this mailbox, it is the appellant's responsibility to ensure their mailbox/junk box is checked daily to ensure you have the opportunity to pay at the reduced rate within 14 days if your appeal is rejected. After 14 days the charge will revert back to the original amount.

 

Please note; POPLA verification codes are live for 28 days only.

 

Kind Regards,

 

Park Watch

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are dozens that talk about signage that is prohibitive in nature, looking for one from your site mentioning no waiting isnt necessary as it is the applicable law that counts and there are plenty to choose from.

 

so now you have given them your email address so they can pass it on and get other rentathreats to harass you for free.

 

If you had read more threads you would have seen that we advise to use old fashioned letters so the parking co's are put to the maximum inconvenience and expense in chasing you.

 

A common theme for any alleged debt that is disputed is to NEVER phone them, text them or email them as these methods allow them access to you at no expense.

 

they are also noted fro breaching the data protection laws so expect a load of spam from claims co's and whatever as they sell on lists of contacts to supplement their income and you then get claims management companies on the phone as well as people from the Phillipines working for "Microsoft" telling you by name that your computer is compromised etc.

 

None of this will make any difference to the outcome though, they will still tell you to pay up because they say so and they are still wrong in law

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a throw away email address that I can change at the drop of a hat and as far as I know I don't have any rent a threats chasing me for money. I definitely haven't provided them with a contact number. But i do get the odd phone call telling me my internet provider has been stopped.

 

Thanks again for your advice

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Morning,

 

The Parking Charge Notice was issued due to the vehicle being on private land for over 36 minutes, where the terms and conditions are 'No Waiting' and 'No Parking'.

 

Please state your grounds for appeal, if you do not wish to make an appeal or make payment the Parking Charge Notice will continue to escalate.

 

Kind Regards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

go get the original planning permission granted for the whole shopping complex to be built from the relevant councils planning area of their website

 

I bet it says atleast 2hrs even 3hrs free parking.

no PPC can change that

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

ignore them,

they know they are wrong but will not admit they cant read or write properly.

 

As for the notice continuing to escalate,

there is nowhere for it to go other than in the parking worlds fantasy world.

 

they get away with all of this because people generally dont know any better so they worry, pay up and then moan afterwards.

 

We believe in making the parking co worry

- worry they are going out of business because their lies have been exposed and no-one will then pay them becuase the debt isnt real.

 

Sit tight, better to say nothing no as you have created a paper trail and their ignorance or greed wont create a contract that doesnt exist

 

Good Morning,

 

The Parking Charge Notice was issued due to the vehicle being on private land for over 36 minutes, where the terms and conditions are 'No Waiting' and 'No Parking'.

 

Please state your grounds for appeal, if you do not wish to make an appeal or make payment the Parking Charge Notice will continue to escalate.

 

Kind Regards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...