G24 PCN - now Solicitors letter, help required

[q.q.qlp]

Hi, 

 

Unfortunately I missed the letter when it first arrived and so the 14days to pay expires Mon 8th April. 

 

It is a solicitors letter threatening civil court proceedings for a parking charge currently £160 for exceeding a stay on a major retail chains parking lot. 

 

I ignored several of the other collections letters (from Debt Recovery Plus and Zenith) but this one is from solicitors and quotes Beavis v Parking Eye 2015 and so seems more scary. 

 

The day of the "parking infraction" was a Sunday (store still open but massive carpark nearly empty so no possible loss of trade) and the driver drove into a small annex carpark (which seems seperate to use for the local shops, separated by a wall with a road entrance but no gates or barriers, and with no signage inside) and exited through a different pedestrian exit to the highstreet shops (so didn't walk back through the main carpark to see any signs, the only small one that could possibly pertain to this area was small and hidden by a bush so wouldn't have been seen in any case). I have a video, photos and a panoramic photo which is clearer but unable to upload video due to size and the rest get a -200 error. 

 

So what should our next actions be? Are they really going to take us to court? Any way to prevent this (eg with a strongly worded letter saying we are well informed and will defend vigorously?) 

 

Thanks for any and all help, really resent being bullied and extorted like this. 

[q.q.qlp]

Sorry, just re-tried and photos still failing to upload. Will try again asap but out of time now. 

[Mrs O'Frog]

This letter is from Debt Recovery Plus. Continue to ignore.

 

They have a deal with Gladrags to use their letterhead because the DriPs red ink was running out.

 

Is this relating to an existing thread?

[dx100uk]

please complete this:

 

 

[ericsbrother]

is this to do with one of your previous threads or is it a new ticket/charge?

It isnt a lba anyway so you dont need to eb in any hurry to pay anyone anything, let alone a toothless dca.

As for settling now to avoid an increase in the debt- that cant increase and they use this phrase to scare you unto paying them in the hope you dont know this.

[q.q.qlp]

Hi, I did a search of my previous threads before I posted and this is a different one. Literally zero parking problems before these! 

 

It is good to know not to worry as they threaten court action with lots of extra costs. 

 

So shall I ignore again for now? 

[ericsbrother]

you tell us all about the event and show us what you have as far as paperwork. We cnat take anyones word for the accuracy of dates and times, we need to see what it is they say you have doen wrong and to see f they have followed procedure

[q.q.qlp]

Ok, will do.

[dx100uk]

Post 4 link please

[q.q.qlp]

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

 

please answer the following questions.

 

1 Date of the infringement: 01/09/18

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date]: 06/09/18

 

3 Date received: no way to tell now unfortunately

 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?]: It mentions the POFA 2012 but not schedule 4 specifically.

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event?

They provide their time stamped photos on the letter however I don't see how it can be clear where these photos actually are (no location info or signage visible for example, just a car and a bit of road).

 

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No, just ignored. 

 

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

 

7 Who is the parking COMPANY? G24 LTD

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Homebase, 182 Old Shoreham Road, BN3 7EX

 

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under: They mention www.appealyourcharge.co.uk and the Independent Appeals Service www.theIAS.org

 

There are two official bodies, the BPA and the IAS. If you are unsure,

 

please check HERE

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I was about to try to post my photos of the scene again but says I've exceeded 4.88mb. Hopefully that is a daily limit so I can post photos tomorrow? 

[dx100uk]

can you please not post images directly to the forum.

use ONE multipage PDF only

read upload

[q.q.qlp]

Sorry, had real trouble uploading photos. 

[dx100uk]

read upload

dx

 

[q.q.qlp]

You deleted all the photos? That's a bit harsh.

Edited April 7, 2019 by q.q.qlp
Frustrated reply

[dx100uk]

if you want a secure email to send them too i'll give you one and i'll put them up in a pdf

we cant have Mb's of photos in a post as it forces people on slow data feeds or mobiles to download them by default using up time and sometimes money

[q.q.qlp]

Ok. Hope this has worked OK this time... Noticed I said it was on a Sunday. I was wrong, it was a Saturday. Today was one of the first sunny Sundays all year when I took the photos of the car park so would have been extra busy but still LOADS of spaces. 

HomebaseParkingPhotos.pdf

Edited April 7, 2019 by q.q.qlp
Updates

[dx100uk]

Bit blurred??

[Bazooka Boo]

From the very very miniscule knowledge I have of PPC's, this signage is hilarious...

 

Guarantee they have zero PP for those postage stamps they've put up.

[lookinforinfo]

The letter from Gladstones is actually from DRP -the clue is in asking you to pay them and not Gladstones. I am not quite sure how they get away with masquerading as another company.

[ericsbrother]

the images of the signage is too poor to be of any use, you need a decent close up so we can actually read all of the small print.

measure the signs and measure their height form the ground and tell us how many sigsn there are and where they are located relative to the entrance etc. The one at the front isnt obvious it applies to peopel driving in as a motorist turning left wont see it or could think that it is a sign that is to do with the footpath.

 

Also it looks like a council lampost so can you check the post out and see if it is the same as the others in the street and does it have a council plate or band that has a number or code on it so if it goes wrong you can give them that reference no?

 

I have a feeling that if it is a council lamppost then that sign will be coming down, you can remove it if you want and no-one can tell you off. ( check  for council ref first though!). Then it is what sign ( new piccy will show no sign so no offer of contract)

 

I have done this before when some bandits stuck signs on lamposts near a railway station  that claimed the land was railway property. I asked council and they said it was theirs so the signs came down the same day (left neatly in a pile for their collection) and I even phoned Southern rail to taunt them. They made noises but the signs didnt reappear and it got a mention in the local paper.

 

as for letter being from drp or gladdys, they only way they can make money is by taking on each others washing so it matters not who actually sent it, it isnt a lba so it just gets filed with your other evidence.

 

next question - what were you doing there?

if on Homebase business then you kick up such a fuss with them they will have to tell G24 to crawl back in their hole.

[q.q.qlp]

Sorry if they were blurry, originals weren't so must've been the convoluted conversion/resizing process.

First time I've tried this.

Here is a closeup of a sign.

 

Good tip Re the lamppost!

Will check that out as it will be very satisfying to remove the sign hehe.

 

I completely agree that sign would be invisible for a driver entering and leaving that annex with or without a bush in the way.

 

Also even if seen it looks like it applies to the main Carpark only and there are no additional signs in the annex (that's what I was trying to show with the photos of all 4 sides of the square annex). 

 

No proof of purchase from homebase now unfortunately but will still try this avenue if I continue to get hassled. 

signCloseUp.pdf

[ericsbrother]

If you spent 4 hours in ther discussing a new kitchen the HB should be forced to make then drop their charges and actions.

 

If you merely parked up there whilst going to multiple shops then giving it the big one to Homebase isnt the way forward, use a bit of sense in your approach.

 

Hb cant be expected to do much a year down the line, the day after you got the NTK would have been the best time for that but still worth a moan to head office, esp if you have some proof of payment like a card transaction details.

 

now having a look into the modus operandi of Storeguard ( G24 in another frock)

they say by entering the land you consent to their data procerssing and sharing

- not strictly true so you could decide to opt out of that and that woudl theoretically prevent them fom passing your detaill on as their stated purpose isn't compatible with collecting money for themselves for overstaying in someone else's car park.

 

Also you agree a contract by proxy without express consent so claiming that the driver agrees to the processing of the keeper's data is untrue.

 

I would say that this is not a level playing field and so an unfair contract and not enforceable.

if they had just kept their trainee away from the keyboard they could have just relied on the POFA but by trying to be greedy and acquire your data for selling on via their sister company they have probably damaged their chances of any enforcement.

 

Have a look at the storeguard website and you will see the problem they have created for themselves by mixing the 2 activities together.

 

Look at the lampposts pronto and come back so we can compose a suitabel letter for gladstones to consider.

Copy to G24 probably needed so they get to understand that they will be wasting their money if they listen to Will at Gladstones and John at the IPC or is it John's turn to be Gladstones today whilst Will is the IPC.

[q.q.qlp]

Ok will do, thanks again! 

[q.q.qlp]

Hello, apologies for the delay. It wasn't possible to do this sooner I'm afraid. 

The lamp post has no council plaque or numbering unfortunately. 

 

The signs as shown in the PDF in my previous post are on both lamp posts and walls.

I've attached a plan in this PDF to show where they are.

 

The wall ones are approx 1.75m high from ground and lamp post ones about 2m.

They are 60cm high x 45cm wide.

The largest letters are 2cm high, the smallest 4mm high. 

 

In addition there are two different signs on entry into the Carpark.

One on each side of the Carpark as shown in the photo attached.

 

The "150 mins" sign on the left has "150" at 6.5cm high, "mins" at 5cm high and the writing about charges is 2cm high.

You can see the 150 mins part on driving in but not the small print.

 

The "ANPR" sign on the right has "ANPR" at 3cm high and text at 7mm high.

It is totally illegible from a car when driving in (or from about 6m away on foot).

 

They are both 196cm high and 60 x 45cm in size. 

All of these signs except the two entryway ones I just described are parallel to the flow of traffic and so would not be readable for anyone driving to park in the annexe. 

 

You are correct that the most relevant sign at the entrance to the annexe is at 45 degrees angle away from the direction of traffic and due to the one way traffic flow would not be visible to the driver on entry or exit whilst driving. It also appears to be for the main carpark it is facing or as you say the footpath and not for the seperate annexe, with seperate walled entrance road and no signs inside it.

 

The annexe also has a seperate footpath to exit to highstreet shops (top right corner on plan) so you wouldn't walk back past any signs at all on exiting the Carpark on foot. The annexe very much seems to be a seperate Carpark for the highstreet/local area with no restrictions. The 45° sign is placed about 5m back from the entry road and is a massive 2.6m high from the footpath and so not clearly legible at all from car or footpath. 

HBparkingUpdate.pdf

[brassnecked]

Don't think they can claim the ANPR cameras can be used to Detect and Deter criminal acts, that infers they capture more than car index numbers, and maybe even individuals as they walk on and off so would be CCTV rather than pure ANPR.  possibly very naughty and breach of GDPR.  Ericsbrother will know for sure.