Excel Windscreen PCN claimform - Media City Manchester

[_Ray_]

Hi, 

 

1 Date of the infringement 18/04/2019

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 24/04/2019

3 Date received 26/04/2019

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 you appeal] No

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up Not yet appealed

7 Who is the parking company? Excel Parking

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Media City, Manchester

 

Apparently the car did overstay by about 20 minutes, but I wasn't the driver - in fact I don't drive!  So a quick question about Excel Parking, do I just ignore this invoice until I receive a notice before action?

 

Thanks

 

 

[_Ray_]

My apologies, I did read the upload page but the .pdf came out at 24mb which is too large and it says on the upload page that .jpg was a accepted file type. I've compressed the .pdf now but let me know if there are any more issues...

 

excel-pcn-media-city.pdf

[ericsbrother]

Now is the place near to you and can you get down there and take some pictures of the sigange at the entrance to the land and also any signs that are around that are different to the first ones. If there is a payemtn machine then a picture of the blurb on that as well. We need to be able to read all of the small print please.

 

You say you dont drive but are you the registered keeper of the vehicle concerned? A keeper liability can be created if certain conditions are met, Excel cant be arsed to do that most of the time but are happy to lie about if afterwards

 

DO NOT APPEAL, they are members of a trade association called the IPC and they never allow appeals so dont waste your time and more importantly you wont then say the wrong thing

[_Ray_]

No intention of appealing, I've read your advice on many other threads about the futility of appealing to the IPC.

 

This car park is about an hour away from where I live but one of my sons works in Media City, Manchester so I will get him to take some pictures of the signage next time he is there. Unfortunately he doesn't go into his office that often, but hopefully he'll be there some time next week and I can post them here.

 

I  was hoping you were going to say the onus was on Excel to prove I was the driver which would be pretty difficult for them given that I don't drive any more

 

Yes I am the registered keeper of the vehicle involved...

 

EDIT: My son is working there on Saturday so will be able to post the images then.

 

[ericsbrother]

good.

If the wording of a NTK is POFA compliant them a keeper liability is created. That was their tade off when they banned clamping.

the parking co's now want to change the law so keeper is automatically liable because too many of them cant comply with the existing regulations by sending out letters written in proper english in the correct time and that has limited their money grubbing a little.

this has been rebuffed once but it wont go away

[_Ray_]

No worries, here's the PDF...

 

The last image is from Excel Parking's web page where they post images of the "offence" - it differs from the image we took today in that it doesn't have the laminates added.

 

 

Media-City-Parking-Signs.pdf

[ericsbrother]

Ok lets pick holes in their signage.

 

refer to terms  on parking meters- well if you dont pay the money then you havent acceptedthe contract but that doesnt prohibit you from parking, you just cant owe these bandits any money.

 

none of the signage is lit so damned difficult to read. The first sign doesnt appear the be facing the public highway so how are you supposed to be able to read it and agree (or not) to its terms before you turn into the land.

 

anyway, the driver bought a ticket so the terms on the meter apply. No mention there of paying anyone £1m for overstaying your welcome, it says parking charges and that implies you will be invited to pay the tariff set by the terms on the ticket machine, not £100 for breach of contract.

 

They do go on to say that they will issue a PCN if you do the above things but that doesnt flow from the contract so they have worded the conditions on the meter badly.

 

In a way it is a shame that anyone fed the meter at all as the other sign doesnt force you to agree to anything as it is an invitation to treat.

 

 

[_Ray_]

Thanks for the reply...

 

It doesn't sound like there's much room to wriggle out of it from what you've said although I'm hoping I've misunderstood you - is that what you were saying? 

 

You mentioned in an earlier post about creating a keeper liability if the Notice to Keeper is POFA compliant, are you saying this is the case here?

 

My understanding (which admittedly is NOT based on much experience) is that if no keeper liability is created, then they have to prove I was the driver, which I wasn't.

 

 

[dx100uk]

reading it wrong ray...

 

[ericsbrother]

the big signs give you the choice of parking without paying and ignoring any other notice, the wording on the meter is confusing as it seems to offer 2 separate deals

[_Ray_]

dx100uk/ericsbrother

- sorry to be a pain,

it must be agonising having to deal with numpties like me every day,

but I'm still not 100% sure where to go with this.

 

I think from what you said that I shouldn't think of paying these robbers?

 

So do I just ignore anything they send me until I receive a letter before action?

Then what?

I'm assuming there's a form letter somewhere that I would then send off to there legal team?

 

If any of that is wrong let me know...

 

Ray

[ericsbrother]

that is your choice, we are saying that their signage is not a contract so you dont owe them money under a contract or for breach of contract as none properly exists.

 

No you dotn write to them if you want to fight this, they will see that as knowing that you care deeply about them and will pay them if they just use the right fib or threaten you enough.

 

nw find out about the planning permission

[_Ray_]

I've search Salford Council planning portal and there are 52 registered historic planning applications for the sector where this car park is. Been through them all and NONE of them relate to Excel Parking, VCS, or signage for this car park.

 

Quick question - is that enough to be satisfied that they don't have permission for any signage, or are there other steps I should take to make sure?

 

I've Googled this question and every piece of advice says that if planning permission exists it will be in the portal, but want to check what the advice on here is...

 

Ray

[lookinforinfo]

Most parking companies don't bother with the niceties of complying with the Law which makes life easier for the motorist.

 

If it gets as far as them threatening Court action part of your defence would be to say that you do not believe they have the legal permission to erect signs etc.

 

That means the signs are illegal [not  unlawful] and you cannot be held to an illegal contract.

 

In the highly unlikely event that they can present proof we always recommend that you have more than one argument to beat them over the head.

[ericsbrother]

as the building is too modern to have any ancient approvals hidden away in drawers in the basement you can be certain they donn have PP

[_Ray_]

Just wanted to pick up this thread again as I think I've received their letter before action (letter attached). They're calling it a 'Letter Before Claim' but they state that if I don't pay by 16th Aug they will commence legal action without further notice so I'm assuming it's the same as the LBA.

 

So...

 

1. Am I right in thinking that this is the LBA?

 

2. If it is, my next step is to write to them  outlining why I am not going to pay them. Reason being their signage is illegal and the wording on said illegal signs is not a contract so I don't owe them money under a contract or for breach of contract as none properly exists?

 

3. Is there a template letter anywhere that I can use as a starting point for my letter or any suggested wording to use?

 

I'll post anything up here before I send it.

 

Many thanks

 

Ray

 

 

 

xlp (1).pdf

[dx100uk]

time for one of EB's snotty insulting letter

100's of examples here already

[_Ray_]

 

Haha thanks... Hopefully he'll drop by and suggest the best one to use

 

[_Ray_]

On 22/07/2019 at 17:19, dx100uk said:

time for one of EB's snotty insulting letter

100's of examples here already

 

Looks like he might be all out of snotty replies

 

I've read scores of threads on the forum but can't find anything specifically relating to Excel Parking at Media City, so have  'borrowed' snippets from a few different threads on here. So how about something like this...

 

Dear Excel Parking,

 

Re: Invoice Number xxxxxxxx (Vehicle Reg: xxxxxxxx)

Site: Media City, Salford

Contravention Date: xx/xx/2019

 

As the keeper of the vehicle I have no liability for any breach of contract you may claim against the driver at the time as I don't drive and you have failed to create a keeper liability under the POFA 2012.

 

Should you decide to take this matter further, I will expect you to provide STRICT PROOF as to who the driver was at the time and also explain the lawful reason why the sum of £60 has been added to the contractual charge when, as we both know, the POFA expressly forbids it and there is no allowance in contract law for such a demand.

 

Additionally, I do not believe you have the legal permission to erect signs on this land, and again will expect you to provide proof that you have.

 

Regards

 

I should probably add something about their confusing signage as well, but not sure what it should say. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

 

Ray

 

 

[lookinforinfo]

My 5 year old grand daughter could do a snottier letter than that.

 

Start off with something like "I have received your letter of the  [whenever]  obviously written by the teaboy" or  " It would be better were you to let your teaboy write your letters as they undoubtedly have more legal knowledge that your current author"

 

Normally that would be insulting but only if the recipient has a brain.

However  collectively when all the amoebas  in their office work it out together they realise that they are not going to get paid by you. Hopefully they will then jog on to someone else and leave you in peace.

 

Your letter does not indicate that you don't give a flying fig for their threats which is the whole point of a snotty letter.

Your letter  goes way over their heads and they believe that you are ripe for getting a frightening letter that will force you into paying.

 

The other thing about the letter is not to tell them why their paperwork, signs, permissions are crap.

They already know that but if you tell them what is wrong they will amend them and come back at you.

 

No locus standi, not capable of forming a contract are the sorts of things you should be saying.

So they know you know but keep that part brief. Insults are good though, the more there are the more they realise you are not afraid of them and thus no chance of you paying.

[_Ray_]

56 minutes ago, lookinforinfo said:

My 5 year old grand daughter could do a snottier letter than that.

 

Ha, didn't realise that snotty was the essence of what we were meant to do, but point taken - dealing with these companies is confusing sometimes for a newb like me...

 

Is this any better (stolen, and slightly amended, from one of EB's posts)?

 

Dearest Excel Parking,

 

Re: Speculative Invoice Number xxxxxxxx

Vehicle Reg: xxxxxxxx

Site: Media City, Salford

Event Date: xx/xx/2019

 

I have received your letter of the 17th threatening legal proceedings, however you know damned well that you have no cause for action.

 

I'm sure though that your recorded and ridiculed belief that you know better than judges do will no doubt cloud your judgement on this matter and you will more than likely start a civil claim against me anyway.

 

That is fine by me, I look forward to a day out at your expense and am minded to counterclaim for breach of the GDPR just to ensure you don't drop the claim when it becomes obvious that I am not going to wet myself and pay up.

 

I will remind you that VCS v Phillip is the persuasive case for quantum of damages and Vidal Hall and others v Google for the case law to allow me to bite you back in the first place.

 

I look forward to common sense overriding your avarice and that this is now the last that will ever need to be said on the matter.

 

Regards

 

 

 

[lookinforinfo]

You're getting there but still a bit too deferential. Go on, have a go, you can be as rude and sarcastic as you want. Think of it as an exercise in mind over matter. You don't mind and they don't matter.

[ericsbrother]

read a load of threads in this forum and I mean loads, not just a couple on this particular car park.

A simple one is

Dear Simple Simon,

I note that your signs are illegal and as much as I would like to take them seriously I cannot enter into a criminal compact with you so no contract to breach. Now as you have breached the GDPR in collecting and processing my keeper details you should go an report yourself to the ICO and explain that you arent merely incompetent but a serial offender who is just greedy so doesnt care about the law.

[_Ray_]

I've sent the letter and will update here when I hear anything or, hopefully, don't hear anything 

[_Ray_]

COURT FORMS RECEIVED FROM SIMPLE SIMON

 

Quick Recap...

 

I received a Notice to Keeper from Excel Parking for overstaying in a car park in Media City, Manchester in April this year. I ignored all their letters until they sent me a Letter Before Claim in July. At that stage I sent them the snotty reply but they have now issued court papers for said event.

 

I wasn't driving the car as I don't drive due to a brain condition that affects my eyesight but they are obviously assuming, or hoping to convince the court, that I was the driver.

 

Back to Today - a couple of questions if that's OK...

 

1. What do I need to do to fight this - I assume there is quite a strict time limit? I am more than happy to take them on in court and read on another thread about submitting a counter claim for breach of GDPR. I told them I would do this in my snotty letter so it would be rude not to - is this something you would recommend or should I let that aspect drop?

 

2. As mentioned above I have a brain condition and while it doesn't affect my thinking in any way, it can affect my memory and thought process sometimes - would the court make allowances for this?

 

BTW...

 

There is no mention of POFA on their original invoice and I was under the impression (maybe mistakenly) that for keeper liability to apply, any NTK had to be POFA compliant.  

 

Many thanks