UKCPM PCN - operator pix - Trinity Park, Birmingham

[squirlyline]

Hi,

It's been a long time since I've availed the services of CAG (2009, it appears), but I've finally acquired one of those speculative invoices that have been eluding me all this time, and am in need of some advice.

 

I received it unexpectedly (as in I didn't intend to contravene any private parking stipulation) on Friday just gone (26/7/19)

 

------- Using 'pinned' info request as follows---------

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

 

please answer the following questions.

 

1 Date of the infringement  -  17/07/19 18:58

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date]  -  19/07/19

 

3 Date received  -  26/07/19

 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?]  -  Y

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event?  -  Y

 

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal]  -  N

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

 

7 Who is the parking company?  -  CPM (UK Car Park Management)

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town]  -  Trinity Park, Birmingham (more a cluster of carparks and businesses around a roadway)

 

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

---------

 

I pulled over to the side of this road which I saw going round the roundabout which the road leads off, to receive an urgent phone call.

I am attaching some retrospective pics from google map and streetview to show the setup (mostly Google-captured Oct 2018). 

Incidentally the printed infringement pics are pretty dull and the number plate can not be made out

(though I'm sure the online version is probably quite clear)

 

I didn't notice anything about it being a managed car park complex on 'entering' the road and only noticed there were a number of signs that were relating to parking that seemed to be about the car parks that were scattered around, which I had no intention of using.

 

At any rate I could not read the print on these whilst driving down the road and the print was incredibly small and it was unlit (see the picture of the Google Street View of one of the signs I have screenshot).

 

I pulled over behind a couple of other cars that were milling around that turned out to be taxis; as there are no visible cameras (and none that I could see wandering down on streetview) and considering the angle of the 'infringement' photos I suspect they were captured by another taxi, waiting in the area and doubling up as an enforcer (the 2 photos are of more or less the same scene and not an entry and exit as you might have in a normal managed carpark zone).. may be I'm an eternal cynic! Other than taxis and the odd other car driving in and out, the carparks were relatively abandoned, being evening time.

 

I guess the first question is do I ignore them until I am obliged to engage, or send them a message saying

'I have no intention of paying' as there was no agreed 'contract' since the car was pulled over on the side of a roadway (not in the carparks) and there was no clear and unambiguous signage to imply that, what looks like a normal road, is otherwise?

 

Thanks in anticipation!

 

 

CPM_formal_demand.pdf

[dx100uk]

urm so not ANPR capture then

some little spy in a car .

 

[squirlyline]

I think so!

I don't like to speculatively accuse (well in certain circumstances I probably do ) but I would proffer that the taxis (assuming that the PPC is not wasting their time speculatively sending their own spy cars) are perhaps de facto agents; paying a usage fee for waiting in the zone for customers at the airport, train station and elsewhere, perhaps with monetary incentive! I might be over-thinking it at this stage!

[ericsbrother]

Now you have a choice as to how to deal with this, you owe them nothing because it isnt a cvar park, there are no signs and you were there less than the 10 minutes grace period even the bandits of the IPC have to adhere to so they have wasted their money getting your keeper details.

 

The IPC will, however support its member regardless of anythingn they do to break the law or the CoP that the IPC themselves drew up because if they didnt then there is no point joining the IPC in the first place.

 

You can appeal and lose that appeal because ther IAS will insist you prove that you werent there for 10 minutes despite the picture luiterally being a snapshot and they will also say that the signs are available tyo read if you had bothered to drive a bit further and find then even though thye dont apply to the roadway and the intention of the yellow lines is to prohibit parking, not invite you to do so.

 

Or you can let them waste their time and money chasing you and only respond to Will and John at Gladstones Solicitors (IPC owners) threatograms rather than to any of the bog paper you will receive in the interim.

[squirlyline]

2 hours ago, ericsbrother said:

...only respond to Will and John at Gladstones Solicitors (IPC owners) threatograms rather than to any of the bog paper you will receive in the interim.

Thanks for your sardonic reply ericsbrother, I like the bit about bog paper.

 

I was going to say choices aren't my strong point, but I'm wondering whether the 'third' way that I have seen mentioned (on stickies here and elsewhere round the web) would be worth pursuing; that is sending a message (not an appeal) to the company to state that there is no intention of paying and perhaps drawing attention to any flaws that would be their negotiating argument in a possible court hearing (such as a PCN for pulling over on the side of a road which is not demonstrably signposted to be part of a parking complex)[of course making no reference to being the driver]. Hoping that they may take the hint that it might not be worth the escalation!

 

Incidentally I was probably stationary there for well over 10 mins after the period of the supposed first contravention pic (and returned a little while later to the same spot for a significantly longer period, though I don't think the same car and camera were there that time, possibly a different car), but I don't know if they would have any further pics than the 2 shown on the PCN (ie online pics that you can view through their site) to argue on that point. I have not attempted to go on to look at them in case it flagged up that I was engaging in the process too.

 

Let me know what you think and whether this might be a futile approach!

[dx100uk]

not worth it

not seen it here in recent times either

probably stems from the time before the changes {POFA etc]

 

you are quite safe to ignore until /unless you get a letter of claim

esp as its under 10mins.

[squirlyline]

Thanks dx100uk, so I'll just kick back until such a time that, for reasons of delusion, they put in a claim.

If I get to the solicitor stage, should I come back here, or wait for a summons before doing so?

 

PS the linked 'ignore' in your last sentence unfortunately displays the old advice about not ignoring and replying to the owner and PPC, I think it was the sticky I was referring to here.

 

[squirlyline]

 

Thanks for clarifying, never been on the receiving end of one of those!

Edited July 31, 2019 by squirlyline

[ericsbrother]

ypu write anything adn they will say your appeal has been rejected and they wil think that you are averse to a long battle over this and will want to settle up if they just push you a little harder.

 

By not responding they have to pay money to chase you and wont know what you are thinking until they have spent enough to amke it unviable to try their luck with a court hearing.

 

Often that menas thej making a court claim and then bottling out when they see you have a defence.

 

use the time to do your homework, gather evidence in the way of pictures, maps, newspaper reports, planning applications and consents etc so you dont ahve to do it all in a hurry later when the actual signs and paintwork my well have changed.

 

As for being there more than 10 minutes, if they have piccies of your car even in slightly ifferent locatiosn then that willmake them look like incompetent liars if they try and use that at court.

 

However, do not mislead us by omitting details that are important for the type of advice we give as that will be based on the facts presented and you could end up trashing all of your other evidence because your honesty is open to question.

 

If you were there ofr 10 minutes or so then that is fine, if you were there for half an hour then say so, it doesnt chaneg the lack of contract but it does take ther CoP of the IPC out of the equation

[squirlyline]

On 01/08/2019 at 12:50, ericsbrother said:

By not responding they have to pay money to chase you and wont know what you are thinking until they have spent enough to amke it unviable to try their luck with a court hearing.

 

Good point, that is the otherside of the coin, and I hadn't thought that they may treat a refusal letter as an appeal and willingness to try and make it go away!

 

Quote

Often that menas thej making a court claim and then bottling out when they see you have a defence.

use the time to do your homework, gather evidence in the way of pictures, maps, newspaper reports, planning applications and consents etc so you dont ahve to do it all in a hurry later when the actual signsa dn paintwork my well have changed

 

I guess I'm going to have to get busy now and prepare for a potential case; as it is the pictures I posted here are all Googlemap streetview (dated Oct 2018), although they would have been the very same parking signs and the area setup should have been the same as when I used it, ie no private parking zone enforcement sign on entry detailing conditions etc. The thing is I'm unlikely to be going back there anytime this side of 2020, as it is 60 miles away, so do I just rely on streetview pics?

 

I did previously look for Trinity Park and UK CPM, but did not come up with anything on a basic Google search. So I hope I might find something yet, or at least related with a similar setup. I'll try and draw down the planning applications etc, but I did notice that whilst 'walking' Googlemap's streetview, when I clicked a couple of arrows past where my car had been, the view reverted to an older scan from Aug 2009 where there appeared to be no PPC enforcement (see attached PDF).

 

In regard to the timestamped 'contravention' photos on the PCN invoice, would these be the only photos admissible at a hearing? It relates to about 5 mins, but as I was there for somewhat longer (maybe 25 mins) at that stretch and returned a little while later for considerably longer, would they likely have other photos to demonstrate a longer period and hence more leverage to their claim (there is viewing area on the CPM site; but I didn't want to access it in case it flagged up that I was engaging)

 

pic.pdf

[ericsbrother]

you get your evidence gathered and use that to rebut what they come up with.

 

If they have a wodge of pictures they havent made available with the NTK then the POFA says they arent admissible.

that wont stop them trying but we can pick holes in that when the time comes if it does indeed get that far.

 

In the meanwhile piccies of where you were parked,

the entrance to that private road from the public highway,

the entrance to the car park further on etc all needed so we can get a better picture of what is there overall.

 

If the signage is deficient then you win regardless of the interpretation of the words on the signs but we are going for hammering them for more than that

[squirlyline]

Thanks for your supportive reply eb and encouragement.

 

Are the pics from Googlemaps streetview that I put in the original-post pdf sufficient for the above requirements (they date stamped Oct '18) and show all points, though I don't have a close up of the sign from streetview close enough to read the fine print; I can perhaps zoom in and capture it and 'finally' read what it says too. I can take more screenshots to highlight any signs at various points, perhaps for your perusal if for nothing else.

 

The question remains though, as to whether I need current photos, as the place is about 1 1/2 hours away, and I have no need to return there foreseeably.. maybe the Googlemap pics without the data tags visible?

Edited August 8, 2019 by squirlyline

[ericsbrother]

Yes and no.

I would get decent images of the signs as they cant be read properly on goggleyes anyway. you wont need them for a good while as it will take  a year for this to reach a stage where they become vital but bear in mind that thigs change so your own images that are penecontemporaneous ( that means at about the same time but has more letters) with the parking event will be likely to be needed in the ling run so the sooner you get them the better.

If you know someone who lives that way ask them to do the necessaries and email the piccies to you

 

If it ever gets to a court claim you want to be able to chuck the kitchen sink at it.

[squirlyline]

Hi again,

Thanks for your previous reply eb,

Back after a bit of a hiatus (been overrun with obligations), and thought I'd just update where things are at.

I've since received a 'formal demand' from CPM (see attachment) 19 Aug '19 for £100

and

Day before yesterday a 'debt recovery' letter from TRACE for £160 dated 24 Aug '19 - pay by  08 Oct '19 (attached)

 

I have tried looking for planning consents for 'car parking' and 'signage' through Solihull Council website (under the term "Trinity Park") but did not drag up any such document only requests for overall business development plans and sundry advertising signage. Couldn't find any other newspaper reports on parking there, just a thoroughfare development proposal of recent times for footpath access in and around the business park to access the train station on one side to something on the other side.

 

I did notice after enlarging the time stamps on the 2nd, 'formal demand' letter that the time period only relates to less than 1:30 mins (not the 5 mins suggested above) [not that that is any more significant in regard to 'no contract']

 

I haven't managed to get any pics of the zone as I really have not been able to afford to do the 3 hour round trip, and don't have any friends out that way unfortunately. I do have one friend that does come in through Birmingham airport quite often, but I'm not sure he will be able or willing to do the favour as it will be a detour for him (he'll possibly risk getting penalty invoice whilst out of the car photographing the signs etc!). Still don't know what they say! (other than something about parking in chicken scratch)

 

I had been trying to contrive an opportunity, possibly if I make a trip over to London and do large detour up there en route, but that hasn't happened yet, but may do in a few weeks.

Otherwise I just took some more perspective view satellite google pics and map.

 

One other thing I noticed in the debt recovery letter was that it stated that "should take we this action it will result in ... County Court Judgement"; would this not be fallacious as, before any ruling, there surely can be no contention that that is definitely the case, and could be read as unduly coercive?

CPM_formal_demand.pdf Trace_debt_recovery.pdf

[dx100uk]

read it  properly.

not just one sentence.

 

a dca can do stuff and all.

 

 

 

[squirlyline]

Thanks for getting back to me dx100uk,

I'm not sure I follow what you mean; is that the bit about: "should take we this action it will result in ... County Court Judgement"  being read as one sentence out of context?

I was just observing what I thought might be an impropriety to pick at. It does go on to elaborate on the outcome of such a thing and that they would suggest not going down that route, as well, so perhaps countering the statement.

 

Sounds like the dcas have got long reaching tentacles!

[dx100uk]

a dca cannot do court unless they OWN the debt

they dont

PPC's never sell them

 

the letter says our client..the PPC.

 

dx

 

[squirlyline]

I see so the fact that they state that they,

the dca "will be forced to take further recovery action which could include an appointed solicitor being instructed to take your case to court" is not fellatious, as they previously stated that they area acting on behalf of their PPC client?

[dx100uk]

stuff and all they can do or recommend..end of..

as post 9

 

dx

 

 

[squirlyline]

Ok, where does that leave me then at this stage?

[dx100uk]

as post 9

 

dx

[squirlyline]

OK

thanks

[The Great Soprendo]

Hi there

 

How are you getting on with the above??

 

I just got a similar letter from PCM for exactly the same misdemeanour. 

 

Stopped at the side of the road to let the dog have a pee on our journey from Lincolnshire to Shropshire via Birmingham

 

From what I can gather, I was there for about 15 mins. Like you I took a phonecall whilst I was there.

 

I didn't notice any signage relating to parking restrictions.

 

I'd be interested to know what you plan to do next ...

 

Kind regards

 

TGS

 

 

[squirlyline]

Hi TGS,

 

Sorry to get back to you so late in the day, somehow missed these emails (finally picked up from PC as opposed to phone!).

I guess you will have already started your own thread by now!

 

I thought it would be useful to reiterate that I never even saw the wording of any of the signs which as they appeard to be referencing the car parks (besides the writing was too small on them anyway without getting out of the car and going up close to one of them). So I don't know if you got to look at any or have taken any photos?

I am assuming you were on the same parking site, but I guess it may be a another one of theirs, possibly with the same signage.

 

On that note I plan to go there this weekend, possibly tomorrow evening if the light permits as I will be heading down to London and will take photos (it's still a bit of a detour as, like you [I think, if you were on your way home], I am in Herefordshire/ Shopshire borderlands).

 

If you were in Trinity Park we could try and pool resources if you like in regard to photos, planning applications etc (not sure how that may be seen at court if it gets that far and there is any similarity noticed; it might not have any meaning still).

 

Will check if I can find a thread for you now!

[squirlyline]

Hi,

Just been there now (not yesterday), and am stopped at services en route to London. Just got in before the light faded, though tbh it would probably give a better demonstration of the inadequacy of the signage with the light gone.

 

I'm not sure whether to post up anything yet, as I haven't processed it as per site requests. But I might try one of the so-called parking conditions signs (which I still haven't read) I have a full video of it too now.

 

You may find my pics adequate if you're going to have to travel a large distance just to take photos, unless you really want of course. If you do it will be interesting if you can spot any of the 'cam cars', I'm thinking they are the taxis that go there to await customers for airport and train station.