Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • nothing you can do can product against the very rare judge lottery syndrome.
    • not sure why you added the blue line I've highlighted? that's no in the we gave you.   as for your question... PRAC's roboclaim computer knows when the account was taken out, after all it raised the claim and checked everything carefully first before issuing the request via northants bulk courts equally inept roboclaim computer... 
    • I've been researching in preparation of compiling my particularised defence/WS.    I'm none too happy that some judges still seem to be siding with DCAs and seemingly brushing aside anything that we have assumed to be "necessary" for DCAs to have a winning case.    Reading a recent "summary" from another poster (another thread with case similar to mine - very old, illegible application form, no default notice, reliance on their own software to prove it was ever sent) and the judgment made in favour of the DCA and even suggesting that there was no "agreement with the DCA, they simply owned the debt, not the agreement"  Makes me very nervous.    Especially if cases like this will be judged on "probability" - the probability that if I signed the original application form, then I must have taken out the credit card and racked up the alleged debt as shown in statements enclosed in their WS (and dated some ten years later).   Is it ok to post some "evidence" I've found from elsewhere?    This is in line with my fears that regardless of how hard one tries to rebut the "lack of evidence" produced by DCAs for chasing these very old "alleged" debts, it does appear to come down to the luck of what judge you get on the day and how much they can be swayed by the DCA solicitor.    A quick Google search produced the following - from one case - this related to a credit agreement - which resulted in someone being made bankrupt - that person appealed the bankruptcy order on the grounds of defective credit agreement and default notice and this was the appeal judge's decision:   The necessary formalities for the entry into the regulated consumer credit agreement (which related to the debt in issue) were not complied with; The default notice served in respect of that credit agreement was defective.   The First Ground The Appellant argued that she did not receive the terms and conditions when she entered into the credit agreement and, accordingly, section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (“CCA”) had not been complied with and the agreement could not be enforced. The agreement had been entered in 1995 and, whilst it had provided a microfiche copy of the front page of the application, the Respondent had been unable to provide a copy of the terms.   Despite the terms not being produced, the District Judge had found that, in the circumstances, it was very likely that such terms existed and would have been provided to the Appellant when she entered into the Agreement. Mr Justice Mann held that this was a finding that the District Judge was entitled to make.   Further, Mr Justice Mann found that it was implicit from the District Judge’s findings that she considered that the terms and conditions not only existed but had been subscribed to by the Appellant’s signature and, consequently, the requirements of section 61 CCA were fulfilled. Mr Justice Mann held that this was also a justifiable finding which should not be interfered with on appeal.   The Second Ground The Appellant also argued that the default notice upon which the Respondent relied did not comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notice) Regulations 1989 because it stated the full balance of the account rather than the total of the missed payments. The Respondent argued that, as a result of the missed payments, it was contractually entitled to the entire balance subject to the service of the appropriate notice, a requirement which was fulfilled by the default notice itself and, consequently, the sum required to remedy the breach was the entire amount.   Mr Justice Mann agreed with the Respondent and the District Judge, holding that: “If by the time the default notice is served circumstances have arisen which entitle the lender to recover not merely sums which might be regarded as arrears, by which I assume is meant accumulated minimum payments, but also the whole of the sum, then they are entitled to claim that sum, and the sum to require to remedy the breach for non-payment of that sum is the payment of the whole sum due. The bank is not confined, at that stage, to claiming merely the amount of arrears if it has an accrued contractual right to have the whole of the sum.”   Do judgments like these not mean that a lot of what you guys do on here (and for which I and many others are VERY grateful) somewhat redundant. What is happening to judges just accepting "well, the terms must have been there if you signed it" -    Feeling quite nervous now.
    • we know it wasn't done to avoid enforcement we understand completely. but that doesn't take from away the fact that it happened   you can't appeal the pcn's on the basis that 'it was not his vehicle to levy upon'. the law clearly states otherwise.          
    • here is a question for you, is yu house divided up into a retail/business area  and domestic area for business rates purposes? If not why on earth are you paying business water rates? ceertainly not for tax purposes as you can claim any legit expense without having to reclassify your home as a business premises. i would be stopping this nonsense and goping back to whatever water supplier is the domestic one for your area. there is stuff all they can do to get the £40 from you whan you do that.
  • Our picks

robod

UKCPS ANPR PCN - Bristol Abbeywood

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 206 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 this is myfirst post

This is a verysimilar situation to another on this site from mechsman on 4/10/17 so I assume a lot ofthe advice there will apply to me.

 

I have not received a Notice to Keeper and this notification letter(attached) is the first I have heard of it.

Details in redas per other posts:

 

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

please answerthe following questions.

 

1 Date of theinfringement >Allegedly22 December 2018

 

2 Date on theNTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] > No NTK received; this is thenotification letter and dated 28 January 2019

 

3 Date received >29January 2019

 

4 Does the NTKmention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [y/n?] >Yes

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? >None provided or mentioned, butI'm assuming they must have entry/exit pictures from ANPR?

 

6 Have youappealed? {y/n?] post up you appeal] >No

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

 

7 Who is theparking company? >UKCPS

 

8. Where exactly[carpark name and town] Bristol Abbeywood

 

For eitheroption, does it say which appeals body they operate under. >

It says there is no chance toappeal as it is beyond the 21 day period.

I never received the NTK they claimwas sent. It mentions the IPC under complaints section.

 

There are twoofficial bodies, the BPA and the IAS. If you are unsure, >please check HERE

If you havereceived any other correspondence, please mention it here: None

 

I am minded towrite and complain that I have not had the original NTK so:

 

  • hadno chance to pay at a reduced amount.
  • Donot know the time of entry so unsure if/how long the time period was exceeded
  • Wasnot the driver (my wife was)

 

They are sayingpayment is due 14 days of this notice, so 11 February which doesn't give memuch time to talk to them (no email address so only phone or letter).

The previousexample with this company advice was do not respond and they will give up. Thisseems to have been the case and he had stopped getting letters 7 months lateralthough no further updates since to know whether this is still the case.

I would appreciate advice on what to do please.

Many thanks.

 

Apologises for the font/spacing. I tried posting a couple of times and it got rejected so I copied a post in from Word rather than type all again and the formatting has gone astray.

UKCPS 28Jan2019 redacted_Redacted.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If thats the first letter and they havent sent the NTK to you ( providing you havent changed address etc) then theyre out of luck and cant touch you. Theyll rely on you naming the driver so you lose cover under pofa.

 

Also ukcps always mess up. As you can clearly see.


Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that.

 

I guess it is possible the Royal Mail failed to deliver as it would have been in the Christmas buildup but I am certain we never received anything. You would think that they would send the NTK recorded delivery if they were serious about things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much are they saying you overstayed by?


Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How much are they saying you overstayed by?

 

I don't know as the Notice only has the exit time. Presumably the NTK would have given the entry time and photos but of course I haven't had that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a bit of a dogs breakfast the notice.

 

In the Notice it states that they are using 7 [2]a, b c, etc which relates to a Notice to Driver which would have been placed on the windscreen.

They then go on to say that they are now writing to you after the 28 days are up so this should be the Notice to Keeper and not a Notification letter.

 

This would imply that they had already sent an NTK so now it is a ANPR capture.

But the timing is wrong.

 

22nd December plus 14 days would be at least the 5th January and that's being kind to them.

Then a further 28 days after that would be 3rd February at the earliest.

 

Totally ignore them.

Erics brother might suggest writing to the DVLA to ask about when UKPC asked for your info but otherwise sit on your hands knowing you are afe from whatever they throw at you.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now this is a new version of the IPC's "this isnt a parking ticket" slapped on a vehicle where they then send out an NTK approximately within the time frame for ANPR capture.

 

Now as the wording of the POFA is a bit fuzzy being solicitors the IPC have jumped on this as a way of not spending money and trying to confuse the motorist as to what liability is being claimed and from whom.

 

Now if you asked for clarification of what they mean I'm sure that wil be read as admitting liability of some sort but if the 14 days for s9 of the POFA counts then they have sent this 28 day letter out too soon

 

so

it is either

 

a badly drafted NTK

or

 

it is just a rubbish reminder of some other letter that doesnt exist.

 

What is certain though is that no keeper liability has been created by this and the use of the wording "beyond a stipulated time limit" is incomprehensible as far as a cause for action goes. they cant expect this statement to be taken seriously as either a contractual clause or a breach.

Also they use the standard blurb you would expect on a NTK.

 

Also a lack of photographic evidence meanss they must have at least claimed to send out a proper NTK back in Dec but as they are the most crooked parking co you cant depend on it

 

I would let this run and see what else they come up with for the moment but if possible ghet some pictures of the sigange at the site and any camera system there

Edited by dx100uk
spacing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply. It is reassuring to hear how dodgy they all are.

 

The signs on site are pretty small and you cannot read them from your car. There are plenty dotted around the site and luckily Google has Streetviewed the whole car park!

 

I went back and took a photo of one of the signs. They all seem to be the same, but I didn't get a picture of the cameras as I had not seen your post unfortunately.

 

 

I don't think I can use hyperlinks yet so will put together another post with all the positions of signs and cameras.

 

Thank you.

Abbeywood car park sign.jpg

Edited by dx100uk
quote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was hoping to load photos inline so I could comment on each but it is not letting me so have had to upload as a PDF. I will reference my comments by page number.

 

Page 1 - This is the only camera I can see, mounted on a post on the nearside as you enter the car park (note comments on page 6 about previous camera/sign arrangement).

 

Page 2 - As you enter there is only one small sign on the offside of the main access road. Whilst it does have a blue "P" it doesn't really draw your attention to the fact that this is a time restricted/camera monitored car park

 

Page 3 - When you turn left into the car park, there are 3 signs on consecutive lamp columns. The fact that you never walk in front of them and cannot read them from your car may be a factor.

 

Page 4 - The aisle between the end of parking rows and the shops has 2 signs along it so it is entirely possible to walk from a parking space to the shops without passing a sign.

 

Page 5 - The other end only has one sign between the bays and the shops.

 

Page 6 - Going back in time on Google, they used to have different cameras and a nice sign highlighting that this was a time restricted car park, prominently pointing out that they had collected your number plate and telling you when you had to leave by. Presumably this either led to too many motorists complying and therefore a lack of income, or GDPR said that displaying the number plate was invading privacy(?!!)

Abbeywood Bristol - car park signs and camera.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

now to me the bif clock telling you that your 4 hours free parking tells you waht you ned to know about aprking there. I doednt offer any method of paying for staying beyound that time and it doesnt say that you are subject to furhte conditions whe parking so that is the contract and the signage nothing or the clock offers an invitation to treat and you dont have to consider the other signs as they are up for negotiation ( read about invitation to treat)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have now received a 'Reminder Letter' and the cost has gone up to £130 (see attached).

 

The previous letter of 28/1/19 stated payment of £100 due within 14 days which would have been by 11/2/19.

 

This reminder has been issued on 12/2/19 and they are giving me another 14 days which takes it to 26/2/19. "Failure to pay this charge may result in enforcement action which could include County Court proceedings and which may incur additional costs'.

 

They also mention in Appeals, that a Notice to Keeper was sent (it wasn't) and my right of appeal has ended.

 

I assume it is best just to sit tight and see what happens next? No point in appealing or any other form of challenge?

 

Thanks

 

Rob.

UKCPS Reminder 12Feb2019_Redacted.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct. Just sit tight. They know they cant add anything on.

 

And for it to go to court involves a lengthy procedure which you can nip in the bud fast if they start it.


Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they know they are ij the wrong by not sending out the NTK in the first place and you have evidence that this is not an isolated case. let them do their worst regarding adding unicorn food tax to the imaginary bill and wasting money on getting a useless dca to bother you as it makes no difference to the final outcome.

 

now keep an eye on other threads about the same site and even the same parking co to look for similarities as they will apply to your case.

 

You cant appeal anyway and that is why they didnt send out the NTK so you cnat waste their time and money by appealing.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras, typos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just received a letter from Debt Recovery Plus Ltd dated 28/2/19.

They have upped the parking charge to £160 and say that I am liable for it. As no NTK was issued and I have not responded to say who was driving can they do that?

They also quote a Supreme Court case that upheld private parking charges. www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2015-0116.html - I have had a look but it is very long and technical and I cannot spot any salient points that would indicate whether this was similar.

Copy of the letter here:

DRP - 280219 redact.pdf

They say I have until 14/3/19 to pay or they will 'recommend to our client that they take court action against you'.

Any advice appreciated.

Thanks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi.

Don't do anything until one of the experts replies please. DRP normally turn up at the end of the process and have no power over you at all. £160 is the standard amount that these people inflate the 'charge' to, they can't do that.

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you NEVER engage with DR+ or any other debt collection agency. that is made clear on every post in the parking forum and in the debt advice ones as well. tyhe4y have no interest in this and can do diddly squat, either good or bad. tyhey get paid to write letters and hope you are dumb enoigh to think they are the same as bailiffs and then pay them. ak yourself when di you sign a credit agreement with them? Look at the list of licenced credit brokers and you wont find them so they cant handle money on anyone's behalf anyway and that meas if you pay them and they dont pay the parking co you still owe the money, not them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next letter received. Another one from DRP (Debt Recovery Plus Ltd) threatening 'intended court action' and again referring to a Supreme Court ruling in November 2015.

 

Next deadline is 03/04/2019.

 

WIll wait and see what comes next! 

DRP 20Mar19_Redacted.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore them.

The supreme ruling has absolutely nothing to do with your issue, and they know it doesnt.


Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

take time to read up on how this curcus rolls on, you know by now that the dca has no locus or agency so they cant do anything other then write the letters they are paid to send out. The bill of £160 is ficticious as well, but all of the IPC members add this to the amount they demand because 85% of people pay it and out ofthose who dont the majority just bury their heads in the sand rather than doing as you have done and take advice on what is what so the cowboys make money by acting unlawfully.

Let us know when you get the next missive and file these away with all of your other stuff as you can use it to bite them back. The disappearing ticket/first letter will be produced but by showing every bit of correspondence you can convince a judge that you didnt receive it and  thsi company has previous form for behaving like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Latest letter from DRP just arrived. They are "kindly" offering me a discount if I pay up now before their client 'considers taking legal action'...

 

I have until 18/4/19 to consider, so await the next letter with interest!

 

 

DRP 04Apr19_Redacted.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well if they send you another letter then they are doing so out of the kindness of their own hearts as they only get paid to send 3. Note they still want some money for unicorn food, this is what gives it away that their demands are just made up rubbish.

I suspect the next step will be Gladstones or one of the other dead in the water solicitors will write and the bill will go back up to £160

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a bad guess!

 

This time it is Zenith Collections - with a deadline of 07 May to pay before they 'consider taking legal action'.

 

Zenith 23Apr19_Redacted.pdf

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a dca cant take legal action..they don't own the debt


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

they will recommend their friends take legal action.

I recommend you use DAZ because it washes whiter. Does this mean that I can charge you £60 for telling you this?

Poor sods are now about £40 down in chasing you for this, i wonder when they realise it is just money thrown away. Good thing they dont have to pay anyone for the right to demand free money from motorists who ar the paying customers at the places they lurk or they would never make any money and then they would all have to sit exams to become doormen instead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Second letter from Zenith offering to settle out of court....an 'extra time to pay' and 'the chance to pay by instalments'....how generous of them!

 

I have until 22 May before they 'discuss starting legal action'.

 

 

Zenith 08May19_Redacted.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...