NPM PCN claimform - overstay Un-adopted Rd entrance to old St Edmunds Hosp Northampton - *** Claim Struck Out+Costs***

[parkingbill2018]

No permitted parking to control?

 

There is no parking or if you park £100 charge,

if motorist were aware of this,

which most are not because the signs are not clear,

especially after dark.

 

And i was mentioned about a 10 minute grace period and most shoppers do not stay more than 10 minutes and NPM take their photos as soon as the driver is out of sight (entered the store)!

 

Is it worth wasting more time making a complaint to the IPC about all the codes of conduct NPM have broken?

[dx100uk]

so you've seen the signed contract?

a PPC cannot charge you for trespassing...

 

IPC are gladstones anyway...

[parkingbill2018]

NPM were supposed to have uploaded the "Landowner Authority" to the IAS for the appeal,

They stated they had done so, but had not done so.

 

I asked to see a copy of this even post the appeal being rejected and this was not supplied.

The Landowner in an email confirmed NPM had authority but this was just an email not a signed document.

 

Yes the IPC may be Gladstones, but they have a created a Code of Conduct and if a complaint is made against one of their members they should investigate this as per their set out process and if the operator is found guilty they should have penalty points issued against them.

 

If these are sufficient then they should no longer be able to obtain vehicle owner data from the DVLA.

No data, no business!!!

 

However, their complaints process is probably as corrupt as their IAS appeal process,

therefore it is unlikely that my complaint would be upheld,

but I would be interested to read their reasons why.

Edited October 29, 2018 by dx100uk
spacing

[Raykay]

So the developer can take action for trespass and NPM the car parking, providing they adhere to the IPC code of conduct, which they are not doing so in more ways than one!!!!

 

 

A private parking company controls parking in car parks etc. where parking is permitted and a list of conditions that drivers are required to comply with when parking is displayed, and claim that any driver who has not complied with those conditions is in breach of contract - and that is what they claim. As you have found out, they make up all sorts of other irrelevant and useless other reasons to try to justify their claims, irrespective of codes of conduct, appeal services etc.

 

 

A totally difference process to a landowner claiming for trespass where parking is prohibited.

[parkingbill2018]

Tonight someone went on site to get photographic evidence of NPM taking photos of cars when it is dark and the signs on the building that drivers park alongside are in darkness. They hand hold a powerful floodlight in front and behind the cars and take their photos with flash. The IPC code of conduct states:

 

"If parking enforcement takes place outside of daylight hours you should ensure that signs are illuminated or there is sufficient other lighting. You will need to ensure all signs are readable during the hours of enforcement as they form the legal basis of any charge.

 

Be clearly legible and placed in such a position (or positions) such that a driver of a vehicle is able to see them clearly upon entering the site or parking a vehicle within the site".

 

The Parking attendant asked the person taking the photos to leave the site as it was private land and he threatened to expel him if he didn't do so.

Obviously at this point the NPM employee could have been told that he had no control over trespassers, but the person decided to just tell him that that he was breaking the IPC code of conduct by taking photos of cars to issue PCN's when the signs were not illuminated

His responded by asking to be reported!!!

 

Also the NPM parking attendant parked his car by the building which could be considered as another code of conduct rule broken.

The Tesco Manager has already complained about this underhand practice.

 

"14.1 You must not use predatory or misleading tactics to lure drivers into incurring parking charges.

Such instances will be viewed as a serious instance of non-compliance and will be dealt with under the sanctions system as defined in schedule 2 to the Code".

[ericsbrother]

did you get pitures of them doing this? You should have got in their faces and explained to them that you were using this in a documentary about them and would they like to be seen on the television.

 

 

Get on to Tescos's again about this, they will have to make a lot of friends or they will be picked on for every small bit of noise pollution etc their demolition and building workks creates. Also have a word with the Bats Protection people about the pipistrelles roosting there being disturbed by the idiotic behaviour of the parking goons..No-one cares about motorists but upset a bat and the full weight of ther law will fall upon them, even if you cant see the bat

[parkingbill2018]

My friend did get right in their face, but dearn't take a photo of the guy as he was getting aggresive saying it was private land and he would expel him off the site, even when he moved to the front of the Tesco store.

 

He said the landowner was the Landlord of Tesco, so this was still private land!

My friend did get photos and they have been included in a petition that has been started.

 

I posted a link to it on this group but it was removed.

Only one photo was used.

Not very clear as it was dark, but you see enough.

 

The local paper have a full set of the photos

Tesco's have been made aware of this petition through a tweet, but have chosen to ignore this.

 

I think they are scared of upsetting their Landlord.

In the past the Manager of the store alluded to this situation.

 

Well true to form the next stage of the game has happened.

I have received a letter from a Solicitor

 

 

So what now?

Ignore this completely this time?

It has been said that this letter is from the debt collector ZZPS who have had permission to use the QDR Solicitors letterhead

Is there any truth in this?

 

The link to facebook was only one of the three posts that were removed.

There were two others.

 

One had some very useful data about NPM and the other was a link to the petition to NPM and the Landowner to improve the signs at this site and comply with the IPC Code of Conduct.

 

qdr.pdf

[dx100uk]

they cant expel anyone from anywhere powerless nerds.

 

yes you ignore that letter.

 

dx

[parkingbill2018]

My friend knew that from comment on here about trespassing, but when you are within inches of a big black guy do you continue to argue? At least he didn't take my friends camera away! He caught my friend when he was looking through the photos on thr corner of the street. He told my friend he was weird as he had been hanging around for 42 minutes. At first the NPM guy suspected my friend was there monitoring them so they drove round without stopping a few times. Hence why he was there so long!

[Raykay]

He said the landowner was the Landlord of Tesco, so this was still private land!

 

 

 

Have you established the landowner of the road, Tesco's landlord? or the developer? - (Land Registry check?) - only the landowner can have a contract with the private parking company.

[parkingbill2018]

Response from Tesco:

 

I am very sorry that you and other customers have received parking charges for parking on the unadopted road entrance by St Edmunds Hospital. I can only imagine the inconvenience and upset caused by this. I have looked into this and unfortunately we do not have any jurisdiction over the car park or the company that hands out these parking charges as this is separately owned, we do not own the car park here. The only thing I can suggest is that you contact the company directly but I can see that you have already done this. I am very sorry but there is not much that I can do for you. It pains me to say as I could not imagine being in the situation you are in right now. I wish you all the best in your efforts and I sincerely hope that this doesn't continue. Thank you

 

I pointed out I was not referring to the car park, which is not controlled by NPM.

[dx100uk]

I were near I would go back there and follow them around video everything they do

if they got leary i'd call the police.

 

unwelcome video appearing on your tube with the Tesco's name and location would very soon put an end to it through unwelcome publicity

as would newspaper exposure

[parkingbill2018]

Newspaper exposure being worked on.

[dx100uk]

[ericsbrother]

the letter is a computer generated bit of bog roll, it mentions they are instructed by ZZPS, who are powerless DCA's and so cant instruct anyone.

 

 

You seem to have great faith in methods that experience shoyuld tell you dotn work like petitions and complaining to the IPC about their members behaviour. The parking co's ony join the IPC because they dont want to obey the rules of the BPA and they are not exactly onerous. The IPC tout for business by saying that they are cheaper and you dotn lose appeals to the unwashed public. That is certainly true because their appeals process is a kangaroo court as defined in the dictionary.

 

 

So, ask council or valuations Agency who the landowner is. Tesco will opnly be tenant or but the plot after the work has finished and the actual land ownership may well change 3 times during the planning and building process ( a nice earner for some) so dates of change of ownership is important.

 

 

 

Also look up the actual landlord at Companies House. Occasionally the landonwer is so in hock the lenders dont allow them to enter into contracts without their say so. That has won one court case (lack of authority to enter into a contract) and would be another reason for a judge to prefer your evidence over theirs should it come to it (they are never called out and out liars because then the judge would ahve to consider having them sent down for perjury and that is a messy business when it comes to companies)

 

 

All this still doesnt change the main thing that thee is no offer of a contract to park though so they are stuffed. What you are trying to do is make it impossible for them to even get that far and thej if they are daft enough to still want to then cost them a small fortune

Edited November 2, 2018 by honeybee13
Paras

[Surfer01]

Do they require planning permission for the signs as it is an unadopted road?

[ericsbrother]

yep, all private land need PP for signs with certain exceptions that are "deemed consent" so theoreticlly you need PP for your house number but the law says that is a given.

[parkingbill2018]

Yes I know complaining to the IPC is a waste of time. I foolishly used their corrupt IAS appeal process and despite flaws with the evidence given by NPM, which I highlighted to the Adjudicator, my appeal was rejected and the IPC would not accept my complaint of how this was handled because it would affect the independance of the Adjudicator (LOL). The purpose of the petition and contacting the press is to highlight what a rogue company NPM are and the more people who are aware that they are not following even the IPC Code of Conduct the better, then more like myself will refuse to pay.

 

I already know who the Landowner is and I have looked them up on companies house, to find out the name of the Director.

 

I have been trying hard to stop them wasting time and money with DCA's and Solicitors by asking them to instruct NPM to take me to court, but they don't seem to understand English, so now I am just going to ignore them until I receive a letter from the court. ZZPS stated that thier client belive they have strong case so why have they been wasting all this time. Don't they have to take you to court within a specific time period? What is amazing is that this has been going on for over 4 years as this media story confirms. Same issues of people not seeing the signs, signs being in darkness. How can they keep passing the IPC audits of this site? And yes I know all about how the IPC have won business from the BPA.

 

https://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/misleading-signs-have-led-to-hefty-fines-at-car-park-off-wellingborough-road-in-northampton-1-6277100

[parkingbill2018]

Not sure I am understanding the significant of the red and blue borders on this site plan from the planning documents. Anyone else understand what they are showing us? I can make assumptions.

 

 

site plan from the planning documents.pdf

[Raykay]

That is one reason why you need to establish who owns the road. In that plan there appear to be three separate sites - the building including Tesco, the road and site behind Tesco and the old hospital site. They could each have a different owner.

[parkingbill2018]

I started by looking at planning applications and luckily before I purchased a land registry document I discovered the planning department were looking at the wrong address!!!!! Phoned them back and as this is complicated I have had to submit my request by email.

[ericsbrother]

no problem as the planning people are usually busy but helpful. As said, you can also try the Valuations Agency as it is a commercial premises. You might want to dob NPN in for running a car park without paying rates for doing so. Convoluted law but sometimes the landowner gets a kick in the backside for this.

[Surfer01]

i wonder if the PPC are paying any council tax etc for the income derived in that area?

[ericsbrother]

no, hence dobbing them in to the VA.

the council will get some money as well but they dont decide on whether the land attracts business rates, the VA does.

 

Rare for a car park to be separate but I have forced the issue once in Selsdon where Lidl demolished a pub and used the land as a car park without telling anyone so both they and PE got clobbered.

 

PE subsequently wriggled out of it but Lidl then got a bigger bill anyway and this shows that in reality the parking co's are actually servants of the landowner and have no locus or agency to create contracts but that is ignored Just read the opening paras of POFA and you will see that.

 

big business has the clout and the law is to protect rich people from losing their money to poor people.

Been that way since the 1600's and the defeat of the Diggers and Levellers movements

[parkingbill2018]

I now have the correct planning application number and confirmed that the Tesco's landlord is the the same company, who own the whole site.

 

Also seen the deeds to the land.

 

Read the attached with interest.

 

Have they broken their agreement for the planning consent by not painting double yellow lines before Tesco's etc moved in or because the road is un-adopted is that a get out for them?

 

planning.pdf