Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • With any benefits system which has some form of controls in place, you will see some of these reported events happening.  Obviously it is not just people that are claiming benefits that commit suicide.  I think the biggest cause of death of men between 40 to 50 is suicide.     it would be interesting how the UK compares with other similar countries.     Does the UK have worse social problems than other wealthy countries?  Are countries, particularly non English speaking, more community orientated, with family generations living close by, offering support to young and old ?   Trying to concentrate blame on one thing, without looking into all of the other relevant issues, can lead to misleading conclusions.     You would think that following a suicide death, Coroners would have obtained copies of all relevant information including DWP files.   Why is there not a requirement to properly investigate such deaths at the time they occurred and to learn something from  each case ?
    • No DWP is in denial, the Errol Graham case has caused much concern   https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/errol-graham-coroner-pledges-to-press-dwp-on-safeguarding-review/   Something is amiss with the procedures, Capita and the PIP Assessments seem to go against what a claimant's doctors say quite often, as do the UC Work Capability Assessments
    • oh don't you just love fleecers out to make a buck out of people they think are just mugs..
    • Useful link, BN.   The article mentions that the National Audit Office said that the DWP isn't learning anything from its mistakes.   HB
    • 1.     The Claimant claims £9,240.52 for monies due from the Defendant.   2.     This debt was pursuant to a regulated agreement(s) between the Defendant and The Student Loans Company Limited.  Each agreement had an individual account number as follows: 01xxxxxxxx, 00xxxxxxx, 97xxxxxxx, 96xxxxxxx.   3.     The Defendant failed to make payments as per the terms resulting in the agreement(s) being terminated.   Notice of such is served by a Default or Termination Notice subject to the terms of the agreement(s).   4.     The debt was assigned to the Claimant on 22/11/2013, with a notice provided to the Defendant.   A new master reference number xxxxxxxxxxxxx was also applied upon assignment.   5.     The Claimant has complied with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims   DEFENCE ……………...   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature.  The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR 16.5(3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1.     Paragraph 1 2 is noted and denied accepted . I have had financial dealings with The Student Loans company in the past.  I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant who has not complied with my requests for further information.   2.     Paragraph 2 is noted and accepted.  I did take out 4 student loans with the Student Loans Company.   2.     Paragraph 3 is noted and denied.  The Defendant never agreed to make payments to the Claimant, terms of the original Student Loans Agreement have been adhered to and thus repayments of loans are not due.  The Claimant is put to strict proof that an agreement(s) to make payments was made and a breach of agreement(s) occurred.   Paragraph 3 is denied as The Defendant maintains that a default notices were never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof that default notices were issued to, and received by the Defendant    3. Paragraphs1 & 4 are denied.The annual income of the Defendant has never exceeded the published limits for deferral since graduating in XXXX. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly provided by the Claimant pursuant to the LoP Act 1925.   4.      On receipt of this claim I requested (Royal Mail signed for) on 14/02/2020 a CPR 31.14 from the Claimant's solicitor and a section 77 CCA from the Claimant, to which both have failed to respond to,  It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant;  the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of credit agreement/assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31.14, and remains in default of my section 77 CCA Request, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a)   Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement(s) (b)  Show how the Defendant is in breach of agreement(s) (c)   Show why the Claimant has terminated agreement(s) show the nature of breach and service of Default Notices and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears in accordance with the Consumer  Credit Act (d)  Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and (e)   Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.     5. On receipt of this claim I requested (Royal Mail signed for) on 14/02/2020 a CPR 31.14 from the Claimant's solicitor and a section 77 CCA from the Claimant,  for copies of the documents referred to within the Claimant’s particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date the Claimant has failed to comply to my section 77 requests and their solicitors, Drydens Limited, have refused my CPR 31.14 request.    6.     The Defendant has supplied the Claimant with a deferment letter and evidence every year that their income is below the threshold for repayments, by way of Royal Mail signed for and proof of postage has been kept. As per Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.      7.     The Defendant has done everything required of them to qualify for deferment as per the original agreement(s) with The Student Loans company.  The Claimant has only once acknowledged a deferment letter on 16 September 2014 whereupon they granted their request to defer repayments for that year. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82 A of the consumer credit Act 1974.    8.The Defendant therefore fails to see how they are in breach of any agreement(s) and deny the Claimant's claim of £9,240.52 or any other sum, or relief of any kind. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief        ……………………………...   delete the red add the blue.    
  • Our picks

shortwoman68

CUP PCN - no permit - Pexor Hse staffa Rd Cromwell Ind Est Walthamstow E10 7QZ - now PCS [DR+] PCN

Recommended Posts

My son received a Parking Charge Notice from the above company stating that they were writing on behalf of a creditor in relation to a parking charge. 

They stated that his details were received from the DVLA under a 'reasonable cause' request as it showed that he was the registered keeper of a vehicle. 

My son is very confused by this as he has never received a parking charge notice and I have never seen one like this either.  

 

the letter states that the Parking Charge has been issued because the vehicle was parked in a manner where the driver attracted a parking charge as brought to the drivers attention via signage and agreed to by the driver when the vehicle was parked on land managed by their client CUP Enforcement.  Furthermore, it was issued following the use of a warden operated/monitored camera system which identified the parking incident. 

 

They state the reason of issue being: 

4-Parked in a permit only parking area without clearly displaying a valid permit.

 

I am sure that this is not a valid parking violation in relation the the Parking Contravention Codes as I have never heard of this one. 

 

Please could someone assist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi.

 

I've moved your thread to the private parking forum because if the ticket says it's a parking charge, it isn't the council. People should be along to advise over the course of the evening.

 

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

please complete this:

 

 


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to the Forum.

 

Please do not worry about the ticket.

CUP appear not to go to court and only get unregulated debt collectors to write letters that are designed to scare people into paying up.

 

They often do this by putting the price up on just about every letter they send.

Please do not ever write to them ever, nor contact them in any way.

 

Eventually they run out of coloured crayons to send their letters to you and give up.

Sometimes though they do write and offer you a price reduction which isn't really that kind of them as your son had probably not broken their stupid contract anyway .

 

CUP's contract that is - not Parking Collection Services, DRP or whatever else they are calling themselves these days since they definitely do not have a contract with your son.

 

In the meantime, please fill out the questionnaire in the previous post so that we can give your son the best advice on how to legally  avoid payment.  

Share this post


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 - 28/07/2019

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] - does not officially state that it is a NTK but it was 31/07/2019

 

3 Date received - unknown as we were on holiday from 28/07/2019

 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?]  - Not applicable as it does not state it is NTK however there is no reference to this

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event?  - No

 

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?  Parking Collection Services

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town]   Cromwell Industrial Estate, Walthamstow, London E10 7QZ

 

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

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can you scan up bothsides of what he got to one multipage PDf

read upload

 

dx

 


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To avoid any confusion, I should have said in my previous post  that you fill out the questionnaire below not above, as I knew dx was writing to you at the same time as I was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so DR+ have evolved from chasing unenforceable gym debts to just as unenforceable speculative invoices..:lol:


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a strange letter. This is apparently the first one they have sent but it states " The charge has not been paid in full as at the date of issue of this notice" Well duh! There can't be many people who would send off a payment to anyone before they knew it was even owed.

It almost sounds as if the Drips have sent the letter that follows the Notice to Driver. Muppets.

Edited by lookinforinfo
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PCS arent the creditor, just another rentathreat so you need to dig a bit deeper. If no previous letter sent then this fails to create any liabilioty under POFA and no-one is owed any money by anyone

We want pictures of the place he was parked and the signage there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My son was not the driver on this day and unfortunately there were no pictures taken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

then go do some?

 

dx

 


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they may well be needed so better have them and not use them than need them and not have them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I did not manage to get the pictures as yet but just following on from the letters, my son received a few more requesting payment from Debt Recovery Plus Ltd.

 

One dated 20th September and

the other 7th October. 

 

As my son does not stay here often he only opened these recently. 

They are now requesting payment of £160 in the first letter

 

in the second, they state they will appoint a solicitor to commence court action if he does not pay the £160. 

 

He is getting a bit worried about the threat

 

I have told him that there is no such traffic contravention that they have stated, therefore he should not worry. 

 

The letters are attached. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ask yourself when did he sign a  credit agreement with DR+ that allows them to add the charges and if he did indeed do that how enforceable is that charge when they dont hold a consumer credit licence?

 

Now this may make little sense to you but that is the law surrounding their add ons so you can now reread that at "unlawful charges" or put simply in this forum's context, "unicorn food tax"

 

These threatograms arent worth the paper they are written on and can be ignored

 

he will need to pull his finger out and get the pictures of the signage because they arent going to give up on a free meal.

 

now as they mention a code number then the site should have signs where the clauses or terms of the contract match the supposed breach

 

id for example the 4th condition on the sign is do not let your dog foul the pavement then there has been no breach of contract.

 

pay attention to the smallest of detail and he will see of this charge but not without a fight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ericsbrother - many thanks for this information.  I will pass it on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After thinking that they CUP had left well alone, they have now passed the fine to a debt collector.  My son is becoming increasingly worried but I have informed him that he should do nothing unless he receives an official letter from court regarding this.  I am correct?

Zenith Collections - CUP.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi.

 

You're right about Zenith, they usually start writing towards the end of the letter chain. If your son receives a Letter Before Claim/Action from one of the tame PPC solicitors, then you need to come back here for advice on what to send back to them.

 

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before dx jumps on this, please do not give this speculative invoice the authority of a 'fine'. Only a court can fine anyone. Even the police can only issue a fixed penalty notice and the council a penalty charge notice.

 

You have been here long enough to realize the difference.


My time as a Police Officer and subsequently time working within the Motor Trade gives me certain insights into the problems that consumers may encounter.

I have no legal qualifications.

If you have found my post helpful, please enhance my reputation by clicking on the Heart. Thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, shortwoman68 said:

I have informed him that he should do nothing unless he receives an official letter from court regarding this.  I am correct?

Not quite.

As HB says, he needs to respond to a LBC/LBA (whatever wording they use) if they send one. That will either come directly from CUP or from their solicitor if they use one and is sent before you receive anything from a court. Come back here for advice if he receives one.

 

But before that as EB said:

On 19/10/2019 at 17:04, ericsbrother said:

he will need to pull his finger out and get the pictures of the signage because they arent going to give up on a free meal.

then post them here for us to look at. Lets get all the ammo together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/11/2019 at 20:34, shortwoman68 said:

After thinking that they CUP had left well alone, they have now passed the fine to a debt collector.  My son is becoming increasingly worried but I have informed him that he should do nothing unless he receives an official letter from court regarding this.  I am correct?

Zenith Collections - CUP.pdf 1.26 MB · 0 downloads

 

Slight correction on this - he should act upon receiving a Letter of Claim from the parking company's solicitors, not wait for the claim form from the court. In the meantime, read up on similar threads on here and also gather as much detail about the site as possible. Other threads will tell you what you should be trying to gather up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zenith cant and wont do anything other tha send out threatograms that have no substance.

The LBA will come from the parking co or a pet solicitor, usually Gladstones or BW Legal. Both  show the same lazy incompetence when it comes to actual claims so a snotty response to the LBA usually makes them shut up. Best to gather as much evidence regarding signage, lighting raod markings and so on now rather than leaving it to the last minute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I located this on the internet, can anyone tell me whether it is true and has any bearing on my sons parking charge situation. 

 

Offline The Bald Eagle

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • index.php?action=dlattach;attach=3493;ty
  • Posts: 4371
  • THE lowest common denominator
The timing of this announcement is significant in my opinion.  :idea:

The new General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) come in on 25th May 2018. Under this legislation anyone caught breaching it can receive a hefty fine.

Looks like the DVLA are finally getting their house in order as a result.  <dancingbanana2>

========================================================


DVLA clarify that parking companies cannot sell on debt to debt collectors.

Parking companies obtain keeper data from the DVLA by way of the KADOE contract. Copies are available under FOI, such as here ( https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/kadoe_system#incoming-882991 ).

This contract allows parking companies to engage debt collectors to pursue debts, but it does not allow them to sell the debt on to another party.

Despite this a number of parking companies have ignored their contract with the DVLA and have been selling their data to rogue debt collector MIL Collections for as little as £1 per parking charge.

MIL are well known for their aggressive practices which include blatantly lying on the telephone, using false and misleading information in letters, and pursuing debts despite not having in any known case a valid letter of assignment (MIL use an undated 'deed' which has no references to any actual parking charge and in some cases has provably been in existence before the assignment occurred as a recycled deed has been used).

The DVLA initially took no action to protect motorists despite being informed of this practice many years ago, when MIL first started to buy up parking charges. Since then, MIL have caused misery and essentially 'robbed' large numbers of motorists by claiming charges which are not valid.

The DVLA has now finally taken action.

DVLA Statement

The DVLA has issued a statement to the Trade Associations on the matter of Debt Assignment

You will be aware that DVLA has been considering whether to permit private parking companies passing on DVLA vehicle keeper data to third parties as part of the assignment of unpaid alleged private parking charges. The term used in this context to describe this activity is "debt assignment."

The KADOE contract does not provide for the onward disclosure of vehicle keeper data by parking companies for debt assignment, and any proposals to do so require the parking company to seek written authorisation from DVLA. However, following representations from the sector, DVLA agreed to consider its position further.

I can now advise that the Agency has concluded that it will not be changing its position on this matter. As was the case with previous requests from parking companies, DVLA will not allow vehicle keeper data originating from DVLA records to be provided to third parties as part of a debt assignment arrangement. The Agency will consider disclosure of data obtained from DVLA to third parties as part of a debt assignment arrangement as a breach of contract which could result in suspension.


British Parking Association Statement

The British Parking Association has stated they will fully support the DVLA in this matter, and that this is a serious breach which could result in the award of 10 sanction points.

12 sanction points results in an immediate ban.


The International Parking Community

The IPC have not made any public statement on this matter. However, their code of practice states:

5.2 You must not pass any Personal Data to any third party company who is not a member of an Accredited Operator Scheme (or similar scheme of a different name) with an Accredited Trade Association or a firm entitled to carry on reserved legal activities

According to their sanction scheme, misuse of personal data can result in 6-12 sanction points, with a starting point of 10.

Factors indicating higher degree of harm
1. Personal Keeper’s Data compromised or used or obtained inappropriately.

MIL Collections

MIL Collections are run by failed businessman Alan Davies. Any motorists whose keeper data was purchased from the DVLA by a parking company and then sold on to MIL should raise a complaint with the DVLA and the appropriate trade association, the BPA or IPC.

Misuse of personal data is an offence against the Data Protection Act 1999, so you may also have a valid claim against MIL Collections and the parking company. As the DVLA allowed this practice to carry on for some considerable time despite being notified, you may also have a claim against the DVLA, as they have a legal responsibility to keep keeper data free from misuse.

If you provided your data directly to the parking company, without the DVLA being involved, then this does not apply.

Happy Parking

The Parking Prankster

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2018/04/dvla-clarify-that-parking-companies.html

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the only places we recommend here and allow

 

However your sons' speculative invoice pcn has not been sold as youve never received a notice of asignment which is required under the law of properties act 1925 should anyone bar the PPC issue a court claimform

 


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...