Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi 1983 and welcome to CAG   Bear with us as it gets quieter here over the weekend.   CCA requests will not be appropriate for the bank account overdrafts.   Before further suggestions are made about CCA requests from the creditors, can you give us approx opening dates for each of the 5 CC a/c's and the bank loan a/c.
    • Hi,    I'm new to this forum and hoping for some advice!   I have various overdraft, credit card and loan debts, which are all a bit of a mess:   Barclaycard (2 cards) = £14,000 (1 card suspended, but not in arrears) Lloyds CC= £3,800 Tesco CC = £3700 Natwest CC = £650 Natwest Loan £17,000 Natwest OD = £1,400 Halifax OD = £1,500   Currently, I have not missed any payments, but I'm reaching a point where these debts are becoming unmanageable. I have just about kept up with repayments but now all 0% have ended and minimum payments are increasing making it impossible.    I am considering a debt management plan... Reading through other people's experiences, dmp's seem to have mixed opinions and I'm also unsure if I should use a company like Step Change or Payplan whether I'd do better approaching the various creditors myself.   My wife also has debts, but much less (approx £10k and up to date, but struggling). Is it prudent for us to both start a dmp, or will that effect our long term plans if/when we want to remortgage/move down the line? (i know it'll be 6 years after default before these will disappear from our files).   As it stands, my min payments next month are approaching £1k, which is absurd. What kind of level of min payment would I expect to pay in a dmp?   Also, there seems to be a lot of advice on obtaining CCA's. At what point should I be asking for these, or is this something best left until the debts are inevitably sold on?   Sorry for the multiple questions!   Thanks in advance,   A    
    • No I have not  . . . there are two loans bought by Intrum.  An overdataft debit and a Loan. The Overdraft debit has not been settled.   . . . It is still going and it is in the Simple Procedure Court  . . .  and this is what my post is about The Loan debit has been settled by accepting the dicounted settlement.
    • Thanks for the info. I actually got it wrong, it's not in the tenancy agreement, they were just told verbally when signing for the house so even less of an issue now. The agent did say if they had smart meters installed then the landlord would charge to revert them back to standard meters. I've already told my daughter they have no legal grounds to impose such a charge.
    • A shortage of shipping containers, rising costs, and congestion at ports are holding back imports from China. View the full article
  • Our picks

    • 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
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

F1RST Parking windscreen PCN - Royal Holloway University **WON AT POPLA**


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 744 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

Hi,

 

It's been a while since I've been on these forums, I used to give advice but I don't know how much has changed in the last few years.

 

My girlfriend today got a "Parking Charge Notice". "Reason(s) for issue: Restricted Area". She parked over yellow crosshatches (aka graffiti). She has a permit but there were no spaces. University website advises people to follow the instructions on the "Parking Charge Notice".

 

 

"Amount due: GBP 60.00". (30.00 if within 14 days).

 

 

I know she should do nothing and wait for the NTD comes through, which they have 28 days to send.

 

How enforceable is this? Have they ever taken anyone to court?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

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

For a windscreen ticket (Notice To Driver) please answer the following questions....

 

1 The date of infringement? 03/10/2018

 

2 Have you yet appealed to the parking company yet? [Y/N?] NO

 

 

Have not appealed and havn't got a NTK (only happened today)

 

 

5 Who is the parking company? F1rst Parking LLP

 

6. where exactly [Carpark name and town] did you park? Royal Holloway University - Car Park 4.

Link to post
Share on other sites

scan up the ntk to one multipage 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

that's the PCN you indicated she has received a letter today..the NTK?

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

Only NTD, I didn't indicate she received a letter.

 

I know she should do nothing and wait for the NTD comes through, which they have 28 days to send.
(I did mean NTK not NTD)

 

Have not appealed and havn't got a NTK (only happened today)
Link to post
Share on other sites

ah I understand your comment only happened today now.

 

ok you await the NTK as per that link states. 29-56 days

do NOTHING other than p'haps take photos of signs all over

and viewable from entrance before you enter and location of each on a plan at somepoint.

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

In the meanwhile get her to take some pictures of the signage at the site to see if the so called breach of contract actually has a clause that matches the breach. You woudl be surprised how many parking co's cant even get this right and accuse peopel of doing things that arent mentioned by any contract.

 

 

Also the wording should make it clear what is a contractual condition and what is a breach of the terms. They oftne confuse the 2

Edited by honeybee13
Paras, typos
Link to post
Share on other sites

Signs attached.

 

Unsure if the driver parked on double reds or the cross hatched area. Sign doesn't mention anything about double red lines.

 

The car park is always full and cars always parked at the end of rows in the 'restricted' areas. Nice money earner for them! Plenty of space for cars to get around even with cars doubled up like that. Nice little earner for them.

sign1 close.jpg

sign1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is she a permit holder? If not them the signs dont apply to her so she cant be in breach of the conditions as they only apply to permit holders and not trespassers.

 

That's a good point, however she is a permit holder.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now universities have strange laws governing what they can and cant do with their land. This is especially important as they dotn own it and usually the charter states that the uni or college must do only things that are fore the promotion of learning or for that benefit. this menas thta hiving off the car park to a third party is in breach of the charter. In my day if you got a parking ticket 400 people would stand under the Rectors office window and chant slogans until it was cancelled as he disruption was costing far more than a piffling £50 or so.

 

 

 

A Student and campus unions dont do this sort of thing any more though, the SU are more interested in snowflakes and the AUT and other staff unions can no longer motivate people to stop the excesses of the college adminlink3.gif.

 

 

So she read the colleg charter and then tries to get the SU president interested in making sure that the college obeys it and gets the adminlink3.gif to cancel the charge or risk a challenge to the presence of the parking co.

 

We still have the lack of planning permission to go with if thsi fails plus anything else that the siting of the signs can yield.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

it is a PRIVATE company, any argument she ahs with them is nothing to do with the college BUT she can get the college to order the parking co to cancel.

 

A scholarship? that means her bills are paid by a dead person or alumnus group and still nothing to do with the college admin.

 

 

What you are saying to us is that you want us to cure your ills but arent prepared to do anything for yourself other than moan. We area self help group and offer advice, we cant force you or anyone else to act upon it but would prefer it that you say she is just going to pay up if that is the case and we can put our efforts in elsewhere.

 

 

I once had our rector banging his fist on the table whilst turning bright red in front of a room of people that included Generals and the leaders of some fo the biggest Uk businesses because I had chucked a spanner in the works of a development scheme by using knowedge of the law and the university charter. Get support from the SU or department and the admin people will be told where to go if they try and put pressure on elsewhere so peeing off the paper shufflers should be a badge of honour if they have employed a bunch of bandits when they shouldnt have.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I understand fully what you're saying.

 

I will have to speak with her to see what she wants to do. I know they have nothing to do with it but she may see it differently. Shes away so I haven't discussed it yet.

 

Will update shortly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

NTK arrived today (09/11/2018) and is attached.

 

 

1 The date of infringement? 03/10/2018

 

2 Have you yet appealed to the parking company yet? [Y/N?] No

 

If you haven't appealed yet - ,.........

 

have you received a Notice To Keeper? (NTK) [must be received by you between 29-56 days]

what date is on it 06/11/2018

Did the NTK provide photographic evidence? No

 

3 Did the NTK mention Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) [Y/N?] Yes

 

4 If you appealed after receiving the NTK, No

 

5 Who is the parking company? F1rst Parking LLP

 

6. where exactly [Carpark name and town] did you park? Driver parked in Royal Holloway University - Car Park 4.

 

 

 

Looking at the NTK, we've noticed:

  • 40% discount was not offered - should be offering her to pay £24 within 14 days?
  • They list 3 reasons for the charge in the first paragraph - "Restricted Area" and then "By either not purchasing the appropriate parking time or by remaining at the car park for longer than permitted.."
  • No evidence of what what the charge is for
  • Doesn't actually say which car park the charge is for, there are multiple car parks with different restrictions

NTK.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

well, they got 2 things wrong with the NTK,

they have said money is owed because of not purchasing the correct time or overstaying. You did neither.

 

Secondly they say they have the right to charge you futher costs for passing the matter on to their tame dca - no they dont, the POFA and the Consumer Rights Act are both very clear about this but as all of their friends say the same they do it as well.

 

they dont have to offer a discount period but if they do it has to be clearly made in the NTD and NTK

 

You can chuck a spanner in the works by sending a FOI request to Royal Holloway asking for sight of the contract they agreed with FP.

 

they wont give it to you but get a copy of the college charter as I bet old Thomas Holloway didnt give them carte blanche to allow private companies to charge students for going there.

 

usually it will say something like anything done will have to be beneficial to the education of students and this will fall outside that necessity.

 

Clobbering staff for parking is one thing but this may be a cause celebre if the Student Union want to do something

Edited by dx100uk
merge /spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, will get on with the FOI request.

 

You mentioned the discount has to be clear in both the NTD and NTK, there was a discount notice in the NTD but not in the NTK, should it be on both? (NTD was uploaded on the first page).

 

Does it matter about the location since there are multiple car parks with different signage and restrictions?

Link to post
Share on other sites

the location is entirely irrelevant, this is about contracts and nothing else.

However, you should get piccies of all of the different signage in the different car parks as it will show that the signage itself is confusing and probably contradictory.

 

Also if the signage is specific to clearly marked areas then it doesnt apply to areas such as access roads and even double yellow line as they fall outside both the marked areas and also the terms of the contract (ie prohibition rather than an offer of terms to park)

 

Discount only needs to be mentioned when they offer one.

No law forces the to offer a discount period to anyone but usually for a screen ticket it is offered to the driver. The POFA is vague on this point so the parking co's abuse the point.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

FOI sent today, asking who is the land owner, a copy of the parking contract and the charter.

 

Will update when I hear back.

 

 

I mentioned about the location as they don't say which car park, and indeed, there are several with different restrictions. We will get pictures of all the signs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

good, the vaguer their wording is the better for you as it can then be argued that the sigange doesnt apply to where car was parked/confusing as to which conditions might apply when no location is mentioned.

force them onto the back foot

 

so probably contracts apply to parking areas and as car went in one nowt to do with the signs guv so no contract offered to breach

Edited by dx100uk
spell/space
Link to post
Share on other sites

So because the car wasn't in a space, the signs don't apply?

 

Also found another FOI request that breaks down all the charges: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/parking_fines_at_royal_holloway#incoming-660846

 

They confirm they don't make profit or a loss, and the previous FOI requet shows they issue around 4250 a year. First parking make a killing on charges here!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...