Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • ok looks like that's what you need to do. but keep it bare bones for now as post 5  
    • stuff and all if there no signed agreement in the return   dx  
    • 1st again why do you keep changing things before you send them   you've added counterclaim in to our std CPR 31:14 you sent? why? this opens you up to additional costs and I hope you didnt tick counterclaim when you did AOS on mcol too?   also I notice you've  played with our std OD defence above too...   pers I would refrain from continuing to change things as they are written in the frain they are for specific reasons.   your defence is due by 4pm Monday [day 33]   here are 2 versions you will ofcourse need to adapt them to lowells para no's and remove the NOA stuff as your docs show Lowell have complied with those. but don't forget to mention other documents provided to date notably statements contain no proof they came from Lloyds but rather Lowells own internal data system    dx   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant entering into an Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim ('the Agreement') with the [insert original creditor] . .  2. The defendant denies that the account exceeded the agreed overdraft limit due to overdrawing of funds but is as a result of unfair and extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account. .  3. I refute the claimants claim is owed or payable. The amount claimed is comprised of amongst others default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, missed or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety. .  4. It is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon. .  5. The claimant is denied from added section 69 interest within the total claimed that as yet to be decided at the courts discretion. .  6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. .  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-. .  (a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification.  (d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.  (e) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct. .  7. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated [xxxxxxx] namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request. .  By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. .  .............. or  Particulars of Claim  1.The claim is for the sum of 2470.56 in respect of monies owing pursuant to an overdraft facility under account number XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX.  2.The debt was legally assigned by Santander UK Plc to the claimant and notice has been served.   3.The Defendant has failed to repay overdrawn sums owing under the terms and conditions of the bank account.   The Claimant claims:  The sum of 2470.56 Interest pursuant to s69 of the county courticon Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 7/04/2015 to the date hereof 14 days is the sum of 7.58Daily interest at the rate of .54  Costs Defence  The Defendant contends that the particulars of the claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant once having had banking facilities with the original creditor Santander Bank. It is denied that I am indebted for any alleged balance claimed.   2. Paragraph 2 is denied.I am not aware or ever receiving any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925. It is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon.   3. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Original Creditor has never served notice pursuant to 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974  Any alleged amount claimed could only consist in the main of default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, rejected or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbeyicon National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety.  4. As per Civil Procedureicon Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-.  (a) Provide a copy agreement/overdraft facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of all excessive charging/fees and show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.   (d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (e) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.  5. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated April 2015 namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request.   By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  Regards  Andy    
    • Hi   Just read your thread and looked at the Docs posted in your PDF.   1. from AST to rent a Car Parking space you need to have signed a Car Parking Agreement for a Space and for visitors you should have asked permission for another space in advance with a fee to pay. (i also assume renting a parking space would be at a cost)   2. You have no signed Car Parking Agreement nor visitor space agreement.   Did you not fully read that AST before you signed it and pick up what is stated about parking and ask them about this Car Parking Agreement and if you need one to park in the car park?   You could formally complain to them about what was verbally said to you but unless you have evidence of this it may be hard to prove.   You should also contact them and ask how you go about renting a Car Parking space/costs and about the Car Parking Agreement also what the process is for a visitor car parking space/costs.   You need to be aware that they could class you and your visitor as illegally parking in there car park without consent nor a signed car parking agreement which they could use as a Breach of your Tenancy Agreement so you need to be careful in how you are approaching this and where you are parking.   Just for info on checking Manchester Life website they have numerous buildings/apartments/car parks but you may be in a building where some of the apartments are leasehold and as part of there leasehold they may have purchased a car parking space in that building. (so how do you know you are not parking in a space that someone in the building has legally purchased?)
  • Our picks

parkingbill2018

NPM PCN claimform - overstay Un-adopted Rd entrance to old St Edmunds Hosp Northampton

Recommended Posts

in short they have told lies to your MP because they know that it wont be looked into again by them.

 

the other thing you need to do is change your mindset from being defensive and seeing their point of view to looking agressively for why they are wrong.

 

You have been given loads of examples and reasons yet want to look for reasons to fail.

Believing you are right and it becomes easier to fight the chisellers becuase your worries disappear

Edited by dx100uk
quote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I agree with as to why they told lies to my MP,

but she did not accept the these and has written to the MD again to challenge them.

 

It is unlikely they will respond.

I am not looking for reasons to fail and do not intend to do so.

 

I most definitely believe that I am right, otherwise like many I would have already thrown in the towel.

As Margaret Thatcher once said "The lady's not for turning"

 

I worked out a few typos in your message but one I was unable to do so which is the word "orer" in the the sentence

"I will be seeking full costs recovery orer under.........."

Edited by dx100uk
merge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.

 

Had some good news today.

The woman who was taken to court by NPM for not paying the PCN for her car being parked in this same location as I was won her case today.

This was her second appearance in court.

 

The first time the Judge adjourned because NPM were not properly prepared, but the Defendant was.

Today the case resumed and the Judge dismissed it!

Oh happy days!!!!

 

This is a big boost to my confidence.

Will they still bother to carry out their threat to take me to court especially when they have fallen at one of the same first hurdles as this case?

Edited by dx100uk
quote/spacing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep preparing, they are likely stupid enough to continue.


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 OTHER

 

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!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you can use that as being a persuasive case. That may well put them off suing yu if they send a proper lba and ypu taunt them with it. knowedge is power an they wont expect you to know they have been gladstoned ( hammered for bringing a poorly prepared hopeless claim to court and losing badly, named after Gladstones solicitors who do most of this)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think they will know I am aware of the case as NPM probably have spies on this forum and also the one that helped the girl to win her case.

 

My Father has already made the landowner and Tesco aware that NPM lost the case to reinforce the complaint they received.

Edited by parkingbill2018

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that assumes they only ever issued 2 tickets so they can determine who the second one is. they rely on ignorance to collect the majority fo their money as they have no legal grounds to do so. They know that but it hasnt made them alter their behaviour in the last 7 years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have probably issued hundreds of tickets over the last 4.5 years since Tesco Express opened in this road and you are right they haven't changed their behavior or signs in that time despite many complaints, but I think the tide is about to turn and this case being dismissed is just another part of making this happen.

 

It is still hoped by Tesco's staff that they have permanently lost the contract in this road, but their Landlord/Landowner is being evasive in confirming this. I am not sure how many cases have been taken to court for this location. This may have been the first one and a test case. Obviously most PCN's have been paid through ignorance, fear and drivers wanting to qualify for the 14 day discount.

 

Someone on this thread stated they had it in writing from Trading Standards that they had not approved the signage in this road as was quoted by the NPM Managing Director in the Chronicle & Echo in September 2014. I now have that added to my growing defense file.

 

BTW I became aware of another IPC Code of Conduct that NPM have been breaching. It is Part C 2.1 regarding the issuing of tickets on non ANPR sites like this one. They are supposed to attach the ticket to the vehicle or hand it to the driver, but they don't. They sneakily take their photos when the driver goes out of sight, then afterwards the office get the keeper details from the DVLA, then send the PCN in the post to the keeper. This is also breaching POFA 2012. Here is the exact wording in the IPS Code of Practice V6 amended 14th June 2017:

 

2. Notice to Driver (Non-ANPR cases)

Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 prescribes the steps you must follow to

pursue the registered keeper of a vehicle for an unpaid parking charge. You should fully appraise

yourself and those within your organisation with the Act and the processes therein

to make sure that you are compliant with the legislation. Below is a short summary of the

requirements. However, it is you that has the responsibility for ensuring compliance with the

Act.

 

 

2.1 The Notice to the Driver must;

(a) Be in writing.

(b) Either be affixed to the vehicle or given to a person who appears to the

Operator to have control of that vehicle.

© Specify the vehicle and the land on which it was parked.

(d) Identify the period of parking to which the charge relates and the

circumstances by which the charge became payable.

(e) Describe the means by which the contract was brought to the attention of the

driver.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TBH I think the chances of them wanting to try their luck at court are diminishing and they probably decided to crawl away from that when they had to invent lies for your MP to read.

they rely a lot on ignorance and once their behaviour reached the public domain they find it harder to convince people the world is flat.

 

Anyway, keep all your stuff safe and let us know if you do hear any more.

other than that just keep your ears open for other peoples coplains about the same and point them to here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You would have thought they would have crawled away by now and if they had it would have been less damaging to them to have done so.

 

My Father went through all their lies in detail for our MP and she forwarded this to the NPM MD about a month ago and so far no rely.

 

However, they sent the LBC 10 days after, so that was a sort of response!

 

Now waiting for a response to my rejection of their LBC.

 

Will keep you updated.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sometimes the parking co believe the garbage they are told by their trade associations and the only way they learn is to lose a few quid on a hopeless claim.

 

unfortunately this gives you the headache of being the one to give them a spanking but from what you have done so far that shouldn't be too difficult for you to handle.

 

Keep us informed and if you do get a claim then post up exactly what they say it is for as often they use the wrong reason such as a contractual sum when they mean breach of contract.

 

Any judge who is on the ball will kick out their claim but only if this point is raised by the defendant so make sure you go through it with a fine toothed comb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for the delay in posting this update.

Your website was down whilst being re-designed.

The website is looking good,

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I received a Claim form from the court and have 13 days to reply .

NPM have gone ahead and issued this without following the Pre-Action Protocol.

 

I had no response to my reply to their LBC which requested certain information (SAR request).

 

They are still claiming against me despite having a case dismissed for a claim they made recently for another unpaid PCN for the same location.

 

NB. I am still limited to what files I can upload.

Admin stated this was an issue your end after the website was given a face lift.

I did suggest a solution was to delete some old files, but was told this was not required and to to be patient.

a small jpg of the Claim form was just about small enough.

 

Any advice for my defense would be appreciated. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

please complete this:

 

 


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what exactly are the Particulars of Claim?

 

 first of all you need to acknowledge the claim by setting up an account at money claim online.

They have 2 versions currently running, the beta version is more user friendly but they lead to the same thing.

 

once you have acknowledged the claim you get an extra  12 days to submit an outline defence so 28 days in total.

 

Your defence can be quite simple at this stage so something like there was no lawful contract offered for you to consider so ther can be no breach to give a cause for action. 

 

( that allows you to attack the lack of PP and the content of the signage as well as their failure to follow procedure)

 

if you go for this simple approach you can also rip into their POC and any procedural errors with the claim itself but I would never rely on that as a stand alone defence.

 

Later on you can refer to the other case as being persuasive as well as going into detail on the no contract defence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Parking Charge Notice (PCN) for unauthorised parking on private land. PCN passed to debt recovery team and additional charges applied. Claim is for a total of £160, plus court cost and interest up to judgement date or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.08.

 

I will set up the Money Claim online to acknowledge the claim as you have suggested. I will also look at the link in post 153.

 

What is lack of PP and rip into their POC (link for POC does not work)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Planning permission & Particulars of claim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for explaining, although I am not sure where Planning Permission comes into the equation. PP for what? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In order for us to help you we require the following information:-

 

Name of the Claimant  National Parking Management

claimants Solicitors: None

 

Date of issue 11 April 2019

 

What is the claim for –

 

1.???? parked her vehicle on private land at St Edmunds Road, Northampton. Northamptonshire. NN1 5DY and was issued with 1 parking charge notice (PCN) for Unauthorised Parking.

 

2.Photographic evidence of contravention was taken which is dated and time stamped.

 

3.The matter has tried to be resolved out of court, unfortunately this has been unsuccessful.

 

4.The PCN was passed to our dept recovery team and additional charges were applied.

 

5.We would like to claim a total of 1 PCN at £160.

We would like to claim for court cost.

The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from 28/01/2019 to 10/04/2019 on £160 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgement or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.08. 

 

What a cheek wanting interest on the full £160 from the date of the alleged offence!!!!!  

 

What is the value of the claim? £160 plus £25 court fee = Total £185. No legal representative cost being claimed.

 

Has the claim been issued by the Private parking Company or was the PCN assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim ? Claim issued by the private Parking Company.

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not applicable as not assigned.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You really need to read other threads on the subject of Private Parking so that you understand the process . 

 

They require planning permission for their signs. If they are small enough to not require PP, they are too small for the POFA.


My time as a Police Officer and subsequently time working within the Motor Trade gives me certain insights into the problems that consumers may encounter.

I have no legal qualifications.

If you have found my post helpful, please enhance my reputation by clicking on the Heart. Thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read may threads on many websites/groups but never heard of that one before. What is the max size that PP not required and isn't it the size of the fonts that is key? I was not aware that POFA 2012 had a condition about size of the signs. I will read further. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on those POCs, they're not relying on POFA anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can't advise you properly without the information in the link in post #153 please.

 

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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...