Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you both. My defence was as vague as their Claim. 1. I am the defendant in this claim and litigant in person. All allegations made by the claimant are denied. 2. The defendant does not recognise the alleged agreement xxxxxxxxxxx as mentioned in the particulars of claim therefore it is denied that any such agreement exists. 3. The defendant has requested copies of the alleged agreement under Data Subject Access Request, Consumer Credit act 1974 s.77/8 and Civil Procedure Rules 31.4 but to date the claimant has failed to provide a copy of this document. 4.The defendant has also requested copies of the default and termination notice for the alleged account xxxxxxxxx as required to legally enforce the alleged debt, but again the claimant has failed to provide either. 5. In addition the defendant has requested copies of statements for the alleged account xxxxxxx showing the amount of monies allegedly owed to the claimant. To Date these have not been provided. 6. The defendants view is that this claim is vexatious and an abuse of process as the claimant has failed to provide any documentation to support their claim and respectfully requests that the said claim be struck out.   As an aside, I noticed that the 'statement' they did provide had a different figure on it to what they are claiming, so I will hopefully be able to flesh out quite a bit in my skeleton argument.   Spam 
    • 80% refund sounds like a very good deal* as they are entitled by law to deduct an amount from the refund to reflect the use you have had of the item over the 12 months it has been working.   So you could argue that a deduction of 20% for one year indicates that they expect it to last for at least five years, and probably longer.     * Think about it this way - would you pay 80% of the value of a brand new iPad to buy a second-hand one that somebody else has been using for over a year, or would you expect to get it cheaper than that?
    • Hi WoodDD.. Neither Case was cited in the VSC WS... however, MR D form VCS threw in VCS v Ward & Idle for the Judge to consider during the hearing. The Judge did not have time to review this. I believe he may have had a quick scan but decided it wasn't relevant at the time.. By not relevant, he didn't elaborate if it was not admissible or anything else..   Hope this helps..   Regards Tom     
    • Can I  ask what you mean by "... they recommended a firm... "?   I ask because I'm a bit surprised that Social Services are even allowed to do that.  (I may be mistaken and that this is common practice, but it seems a bit odd to me).   If they did do so and the work has turned out to be sub-standard and unsatisfactory, I would have no hesitation in making a formal complaint to the council and also to my (or your friend's) local councillor(s).  You acted on the council's recommendation and you should have a reasonable expectation that the firm recommended should be reliable and professional.  I would also insist that trading standards be asked to investigate this firm.  (Where I live our local county council trading standards department runs an approved trader database).   A complaint to the council might not directly assist you but it might help to prevent others being taken in by this firm.
    • Hello Susan, welcome to CAG.   Hopefully Paul Walton will see this message and reply to you, but it would also be a good idea to start a new thread of your own so we can advise on anything else connected with your refund.   Best, HB
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • 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
      • 33 replies

SIPS parking ticket after ticket purchased - Clipper Quay, Salford M50 3BS


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 814 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

Looking for advice. Family members were visiting friends and paid and parked for 24 hours in a SIPs car park. placed the ticket on display several people could of been the driver of the said car, and then left before the 24 hour expiry.

 

Today a a letter has been sent to the household house, from SIP stating the who ever was diving the car didn't pay or display a the ticket. NO notice was placed on the car on their return so this is the first that anybody was aware. infant the section on which they were parked its not even clear if SIPs have any right on this section. However there are signs on the entrance so a ticket was purchased.

 

We are hopeful we still have the ticket in the vehicle but given its over 30+ days since the alleged "offence" took and this is the first notice of parking fine! Any advice on the next steps. As 2 of 4 potential drivers are students so £100 fine is a lot!

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

right, date of the parking event, place of the event, date the letter was issued, date it was received. What evidnece do they offer to show that no ticket was purchased as they must include pictures when NTK without a NTD Ie entry and exit phoos of car park or maybe a picture of the dashboard?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They haven't provided any proof or images at this stage just that the letter states they had no ticket displayed. On returning to the car all 4 occupants and possible drivers state NO FPN was even stuck on the vehicle.

 

 

The letter today states the date, the time of issue which was in the VERY VERY early hours and the location, both possible drivers said it took several attempts to pay as the machine kept rejecting payment and one said they are sure that they actually didn't have to pay after a certain time but they didn't want to risk not! how ironic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The date the PCN incident took place was over 30+ days ago before this letter was issued, it states on the letter that the notice was affixed to car and the driver had 21 days to appeal , but nothing was affixed and the letter today is in excess of 30 days so even they had considered this, the date do so had elapsed and they only state in the letter you can complain to IPC which isn't independent so no-one is going to waste a stamp ! There is information on the about appealing to IAS but im not even sure they would agree to the appeal as the letter states

 

"the independent appeals service .theIAS.org ) provides an Alternative Dispute Resolution scheme for disputes of this type. We may engage with the IAS non standard appeals service at their discretion should a dispute arise over this charge in the future.

 

NOW given the IAS as "is the parking operator willing to take part in the IAS scheme? and if they say NO .... they state Sorry, unfortunately you are NOT able to use the Independent Appeals Service. plus the 21days has elapsed as this was the first anyone was aware of the PCN .

 

.Im also now pursuing DVLA in relation to GDPR breaches as the household want to know under what legimate legal request they have issued the registered keepers details to this company on and on what need to know requirement. Its my understanding that no-one in this household or any registered keepers have given the DVLA since MAY 2018 in this household ANY permission to share anyones details without their permission. Especially a company with such a **** poor reputation and im looking forward to Gladstones writing as I will have a field day with GDPR

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou Honey B

 

I didn't want to put too much info on date or location incase the company reads it as I was advised to avoid this.

 

 

the answers to the questions are

The date of infringement? October 2018

 

2 Have you yet appealed to the parking company yet? [Y/N?] NO please see above message.

 

 

 

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 the end of Nov 2018

Did the NTK provide photographic evidence? NO

 

3 Did the NTK mention Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) NO

 

4 If you appealed after receiving the NTK,

did the parking company give you any information regarding the further appeals process?

[it is well known that parking companies will reject any appeal whatever the circumstances] I already saw this in another thread ... plus see my above comments about the IAS

 

5 Who is the parking company? SIP

 

6. where exactly [Carpark name and town] did you park Clipper Quay Salford

Link to post
Share on other sites

With GDPR you would have needed to write to the DVLA refusing them permission to divulge Your data before the incident. Where you might get them is if there was no reasonab!e cause to send your data.

 

At the moment we do not know why the ticket was issue d. Was it

a) the ticket wasn't visible

b) the ticket has the wrong time in it

c) the Car overstayed the time allowed or

d) SIPS Are total rogues and want your money any way they can.c

 

Until we know what offence was alleged we cannot determine if there was reasonable cause except if it was reason d). Although the reasonable cause charge may be easier to prove against SIPS than the DVLA.

Edited by honeybee13
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

A further irony (see post 4) is that had no ticket been purchased then no contract could have been formed . Yes, your family would have been trespassing but only the landowner could have sued for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With GDPR you would have needed to write to the DVLA refusing them permission to divulge

Your data before the incident. Where you might get them is if there was no reasonab!e cause to send your

data.

 

Thats what I've done. I spoke with the ICO its currently a grey area but they were really helpful as the company are NOT a local authority or police so I may have grounds to pursue on this basis I was told.

 

At the moment we do not know why the ticket was issue d. Was it a) the ticket wasn't visible they are saying it wasnt displayed ... the drivers are saying it was clearly visable

 

SIPS Are total rogues and want your money any way they can I have read and given a ticket was purchased, displayed and the time it was issued in the morning I can tell and there WAS definitely no ticket affixed on anyones return.

Until we know what offence was alleged we cannot determine if there was reasonable cause except if it was reason d). Although the reasonable cause charge may be easier to prove against SIPS than the DVLA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the location near to you? if so pictures of the signage and the payment meter would be very useful.

Now has any contact been made with the parking co yet? If not have a very good look for that ticket because it would be better to knock this on the head by direct contact but if you do that and dont have the ticket it gives them the impression you might be tempted to accept their chicanery and that asking for evidence is an admission it was you who parked.

It is not uncommon for parking co's to photograph the front of a car at a very odd angle so the ticket cant eb seen and then argue that it doesnt matter the ticet was bough and dispalyed, their attendant couldnt see it so you have to pay up. Also the " dissapearing ticket" con is well known and SIP are one of the more frequent companies where ths is a problem. Basically they issue a ticket, place it on the car and photograph it and the remove it so the first you know is the NTK a month later. this means the discount period has expired and it is more likely you have binned the actual receipt.

 

as for not putting the date and location then how are we supposed to advise you if they have followed the protocols of the POFA if we dont know?

sometimes we do see a result of the parking co's reading the threads here, they often drop their ridiculous claims once they see they have been rumbled as then it is obvious to others in the same boat that theirs isnt a unique situation and they have a presuasive argument of delberate action rather than just incompetence. One parking co many years ago liked to try and say that the person they were suing was x from an advice group and therefore that is an admission of guilt. the judge told them that anyone can take any advice and it doest change things and unless they could absolutely prove not onlly was the person the same as on the forum but they were making statements of truth rather than asking for advice then whetever they confessed to had no weight as anyone can tell lies on a public forum for any reason they like. Now in that case I think the judge was just fed up with the parking co as they could just decide that on the balance of probability it was the same person but basically they are supposed to prove their claim and not force you to disprove it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank-you for your reply.

No we don't live near the location, so we don't have pictures of the signage yet, but someone is getting those for us.

 

I did put the location up yesterday, It was Clipper Quay Salford, 2 of the possible drivers of this car are currently away, so until they return I don't yet have the ticket, they seem to think its in the car still along with half the empty contents of a BP garage !

Link to post
Share on other sites

from waht can be seen on googlespyonyourneighbour the SIP signs are so lacking in detail they cant be an offer of terms that include a consideration for a breach of contract because there is no mention of it on the 3 signs around their meter and you dont have to consider the signs they refer you to from the entrance to make a contract, the meter does that for you and no mention of anything other than hiourly tariff there. Basically no contract offered to breach.

 

Still they are advised on the content of their signs by Will and John at the IPC who know more than the judges on this point but for some strange reason the judges enforce their decisions based on actual law instead.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

you do nothing at all, let the parking co decide what they want to do as whatever that is will cost them and not you.

Gte some decent pictures of the signage as you ahve someone going there all of the time

Link to post
Share on other sites
you do nothing at all, let the parking co decide what they want to do as whatever that is will cost them and not you.

Gte some decent pictures of the signage as you ahve someone going there all of the time

 

 

We have someone to get them.... would you not advise appealing? just wait to Gladstones write or whoever they use?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would help you to read other parking threads to understand how these companies work. Unless you've been reading them when not signed in, you've only viewed one other thread.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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
We have someone to get them.... would you not advise appealing?

 

To the fleecers who are demanding 100 quid although the original ticket was paid for and they didn't even leave a NTD on the car so that they can get out of avoiding the discount the law provides for? What would be the point of that? You're dealing with conmen, there's no point appealing to them. You wouldn't write a polite appeal to someone you saw walking out of your house with a nicked TV, not far off being the same thing.

 

On the positive side, these conmen never follow the law when sending out their demands for money, so EB and the other experts here have a great record in seeing off their demands. There are no guarantees of course. But if you look at the PPCs Successes sticky, they do have a brilliant record over many years :madgrin:

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

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...