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

VCS ANPR PCN NTK - overstay - St Marys retail park car park, sheffield s2 4al


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 753 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

Hello, I'm in need of help and advice please.............

 

On Monday 14th January 2019 I received a parking charge notice from PCN notice to keeper NTK St Mary's Road Retail Park Car Park, Sheffield S2 4AL- DFS sofas, Ammount charge -£100 within 28 days or £60 if paid before 24.1.19

 

contravention date: 27.12.18

contravention reason: parked for longer than the maximum period permitted - 120 mins!!

Total duration stay: 199 minutes

 

I visited DFS to look at sofas, I presumed this was owned by DFS not a private company!!

 

NTK are lying because I left the car park- drove to Ikea Sheffield and Next outlet over at Meadowhall, at least a 20 minute drive over there. Looked the whole way round Ikea- and got stuck in traffic and then Next outlet, i then called at centretainment to pick family members up and then returned back to the car park to show my family a sofa I'd seen in DFS

 

I have contacted my online banking and have evidence via online chat with them the time of transaction I made at Ikea and also have printed a statement with the date I made the transaction.

 

I'm so upset about it- firstly I presumed the car park was owned by DFS and didn't see a sign. I haven't done anything about this charge notice yet- can someone please advise?? Do I appeal if so what should I reply with? Do I ignore it?

 

 

Many thanks in advance

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

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

 

please answer the following questions.

 

1 Date of the infringement 27.12.2018

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 10.01.2019

 

3 Date received : 14.01.2019

 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [y/n?] NO

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes

 

6 Have you appealed? {y/n?] post up your appeal] NO

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

 

7 Who is the parking company? PCN- NOTICE TO KEEPER NTK

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] ST MARY'S ROAD RETAIL PARK CAR PARK, SHEFFIELD S2 4AL

 

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

 

There are two official bodies, the BPA and the IAS. If you are unsure, IPC- INTERNATION PARKING COMMUNITY

please check HERE

 

If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here

Link to post
Share on other sites

no such PPC [private parking company] as NTK

what is the companies NAME?

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

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

Am I right in reading the links sent above that they have taken too long to contact me and have broken the law- timed out for keeper liability?? 14 days from the day after the parking event (for ANPR, which this is) ??

 

Please advise what I should do next??? ........- even so I'm frustrated that I left the car park and later returned so they're wrong anyways

Link to post
Share on other sites

you do nowt really

looks like they might be out of time yes.

 

so you mean this is 2 visits? we call this double dipping, so extra unlawful.

best idea is read those threads and you'll get the idea to ignore now

unless/until you get a letter of claim from one of the favourite fake/tame paper only solicitors.

 

dx

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
Am I right in reading the links sent above that they have taken too long to contact me and have broken the law- timed out for keeper liability??

Not broken the law - the old bill won't be after them, but yes, they have failed to meet the requirements of the Act so cannot hold the keeper liable (but they can still go after the driver - if they know who that is)

 

even so I'm frustrated that I left the car park and later returned so they're wrong anyways

I don't know the signs at this location, but many retail parks have a "no return within...." clause, so you'd need to be certain before you ever used that argument

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks D, you've been soo helpful. I'm just panicky about these court issues and fines

 

Yes I visited DFS to look at sofas, left the car park and travelled another side of sheffield to Ikea and then Next outlet, and then to Centretainement tp ick family up to show them a sofa to which we returned to the car park- I was not there the whole time they claim I was

Link to post
Share on other sites

fines??...where does that come from please?

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 won't be replying or appealing unless advised by people who are familiar with these sort of charges like you peeps, with clear instructions on what to write as I am petrified. hah

 

So to be clear- you all advise I ignore the letters?

Many thanks in advance for your help and guidance, it really is appreicated

 

ooh gosh, no fines at all, I'm referring to the charge notice. NO FINE AT ALL TO BE CLEAR, the letter is exactly as I uploaded

 

Appologies

Edited by dx100uk
merge
Link to post
Share on other sites

you need to read threads in this forum like post 6 link

get upto speed.

 

then you wont make silly mistakes and assumptions

on speculative invoices.

 

dx

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 don't know the signs at this location' date=' but many retail parks have a "no return within...." clause, so you'd need to be certain before you ever used that argument[/color']

 

no such enforceable rules...

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

Indeed, since only the driver and not the vehicle can form a contract, but it won't stop the PPC from having a pop at it if it's there. Just thought it might be muddying the waters if it came into play and gave them an extra argument. Since PoFA has it covered it's not really relevant anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

NTK issued too late to create keeper liability, double dipping and I bet that there are problems with planning consent and the siting and content of their signs as well.

 

So what to do?

For the moment ignore them but gather some evidence together for the future so go there and take pictures of the signage at BOTH locations and also show us what signs there are at the entrance to the land from the public highway.

 

If there are no signs then all the better, take pictures of the roadway so you can tell there are no signs.

 

If there is more than one entrance then we want piccies of them all

 

From what I can see on goggleyes there is a sign some way in from Suffolk Lane that says max 2 hours stay but no mention of anyone offering you terms for parking that would include paying them a small fortune for overstaying.

 

Now this is very important as that sign is the first thing you see so that is all you ahve to take notice of. The other signs are take it or leave it regardless of their content.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ericsbrother

- Thank you very much for your helpful reply.

 

I can't begin to thank people in this forum for helping me.

I've been fretting over it.

 

No signs on main roads etc only inside the car park

 

Please see attached photos- I visited today to take photos.

 

The first image is what all of the signs around the car park say- I din't see the cameras when I visited DFS that day at all.

 

The image with just the cameras is the sign and the cameras on entry and the image with the DFS in is the exit cameras- no sign on exit- I had to figure out where to exit.

 

Please advise what I should do next? Thanks in advance

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

we want pictures of evey entrance as seen from the public highway.

Also we want a picture of the sign I referred to if it is still there.

 

Understand this, if there are no signs to read as you enter the site then you havent been offered anything.

It has been decided that you dont have to spend all day wandering around looking for signs that may or may not apply so please, when we ask for somehting read what is requested carefully rather than making assumptions that because there is no sign we dont need a picture.

The lack of sign is more damning than the signs.

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

Please see attached photos of all entrances and exits to the car park.

 

The first tow images are entrance and one exit, the second photos is the second exit only which is the one I used.

 

I really had to stand close and zoom in to read the small terms and conditions sign- you can't read this inside your car and driving at the same time.

 

The exit only that I used, the cameras faced behind you as as did the sign so again I couldn't see or read it.

 

The way I read the charge notice is that even though it doesn't state it on the letter I received- I left the car park and later returned within 4hrs- I did not stay the whole duration of time they state I did in one visit that day.

 

They are asking for reduced payment of £60 I think if paid on or before 24/01/19 or £100 after.

 

Hope I managed to get all photos requested- apologies if I haven't - I am totally clueless when it comes to anything like this- I feel out of my depth with it all.

 

Thanks again to anyone who can or has helped me so far

Link to post
Share on other sites

we still need to see the entrance as you would see it if entering from the public highway.

You have shown us the exit.

 

So to reiterate, stand in the road and take a picture of the entrance as you would see it when entering driving a car.

 

the point of this is to see if one can read the signs from the driver's seat passing through from the public road.

If there isnt a sign there then you arent obliged to go looking for one elsewhere.

 

VCS still havent got their heads around this fact despite being spanked in court on numerous occasions for the very same thing

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please see attached photo.

This is the only entrance to the car park.

 

The photo is taken in between the entrance on the left and one of the two exits.

This is the first sign you see as you enter via car and no it isn’t readable whilst driving.

I had to zoom in to the terms and conditions section as previous photos show.

 

Hope this makes a bit more sense?

 

The charge notice have asked for early payment by tomorrow 24.1.19.

Am I still advised to ignore it?

 

Thanks again

pix.pdf

Edited by dx100uk
merge
Link to post
Share on other sites

no you don't need to pay.

 

all photos merged to one PDF file so we can zoom them in above post

 

dx

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

sorry to be a pain but there is no corresponding background, I want to see a picture of the entrance from the public highway so stand on the other side of the road and take a picture of the entrance so we can see how everything ties together from the motorists pint of view. It doesnt matter if you cant see the sign from that position as that is the entire point of the exercise, to show what can and cant be seen. We need the context of the signage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If signage is not present or clearly visible from the entrance as a vehicle enters then they are stuffed.

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

Here are the photos requested.

Attached is;

 

The one way system that you have to go through to get get to DFS, the side road and then the entrance and one of the exits. The sign for the car park also is attached

 

Please let me know your thoughts??

 

This is is the entrance only and one of the exits that lead back on to the one way system and main roads

53885D84-95A4-43DF-9990-627B44602493.jpeg

60F3130A-D0BF-4F9D-9E25-E93A70BE2F28.jpeg

5B8E5599-318A-493F-80A6-BB7A8543B898.jpeg

6C65017E-F32B-481E-AD25-97D9F3E4E100.jpeg

E9FFB9CF-79D9-485A-8794-3EEE1E7EAC39.jpeg

6BF9D329-22F9-41C2-AC98-BDB589C69E22.jpeg

Edited by dx100uk
merge to one pdf
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...