CPS ANPR PCN - overstay - Spring St, Hull HU2 8RA

[miley_b ob]

My Brother has received a parking charge notice from CPS (Complete Parking Services), for an overstay. Details etc below.

 

1 Date of the infringement 2/11/2019

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 18/11/2019 (Letter says that it is considered served 2 days after this date)

 

3 Date received 20/11/2019

 

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? None provided or offered

 

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No

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

 

7 Who is the parking company? Complete Parking Services

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Spring Street, Hull, HU2 8RA

 

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

 

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

please check HERE

 

He was about to pay the charge until I enlightened him to the fact that its a speculative invoice and not a fine as he thought.

 

I have explained to him about the parking cowboys.

I have explained that as the letter arrived (and was posted more than 14 days after the incident, that POFA does not apply and that they cannot go after the registered keeper and only the driver (is this still correct?).

 

 I have told him to never mention who the driver is.

 

How do I got about appealing this charge for him.

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

PCN.pdf

[dx100uk]

I wouldn't both

 

await to see if they get one of their fake/tame solicitors to send a letter of claim

 

any chance photo can be obtained?

[miley_b ob]

I thought the advice was not to ignore, or is that only when they fall within the timeframe for POFA?

 

They haven't offered any pictures. Does that make any difference?

[brassnecked]

Not quite, you ignore up until a Letter of Claim, you gather evidence in the meantime to undermine any spurious claim, you lose important protections under POFA, by appealing as you often then identify the driver, that's not a good idea.

[miley_b ob]

Ok, I will advise him to ignore it for now.

What sort of evidence do we need to gather?

Will they be able to identify the driver via their photo's as he is panicking that they will.

How likely is it that they will issue the letter of claim?

Does anybody know if this company have a track record for this?

[dx100uk]

They are not allowed under various data protection laws to take any photos to specifically identify a driver.

never once has nor can a PPC hold up a photo in court and say look judge it's him - jail him!!

 

all your other questions can be answered by simply using our search top right CPS PCN

 

[ericsbrother]

not a legal NTK,

they say they have photographic evidence but fail to include it and also they dont have a correct service address,

companies cannot use a PO Box No when sending out NTK's so that means they have failed to create ANY liability,

let alone a keeper liability.

 

You are right about the lack of keeper liability as it was sent too late for that.

 

Do not appeal this but keep the letter safe and in the meanwhle get us some pictures of the site entrance and any signage present there and in the car park if possible. If there is a payment meter then pictures of that and any associated blurb.

 

From what I see on google noseyparker there is just a sign saying terms and conditions apply see notice around for details with no info on who the signs belong to or indication that you may be asked to pay any a million quid if you dont agree with them.

 

At the moment your brother holds all of the chips but dont let him panic and hand them victory on a plate just to make this go away.

 

They will bother him for quite a while but if you read a good bundle of the threads you will see that IPC memebrs generally chuck the towel in because they are poorly served by the solicitors who own the IPC

[miley_b ob]

Thanks for the detailed reply.

I live near the car park, so will pop over there in the next few days to get some pictures.

Up until about 18 months ago the car park was used as a yard for a business.

 

I have searched the Hull City Council's website regarding planning applications for this site and can find no change of use application to change it to a public car park, or applications etc to erect signage and pay/display machines etc.

 

I have advised my brother to ignore any letters other than a letter before claim, but to keep them and scan copies so he has a record of everything if needed.

 

For those interested, this is the car park.

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.7469253,-0.3493335,3a,75y,122.64h,76.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syY4J4MrLWQVsYrGUmaPuLw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[miley_b ob]

I popped over to the car park this morning and took the pictures in the attached PDF. The terms and conditions they lay down seem very vague and make no mention of keeper liability or Overstaying.

1-merged (1).pdf

[lookinforinfo]

The signage is very strangely worded.

 

On the T&Cs the motorist must pay for the duration of their stay but it does not say that if you break the terms you are liable to pay a charge. So they did not have the right to ask the DVLA for details. A breach of GDPR.

 

As you rightly also state their is no mention of keeper liability on the PCN but there would have been little point as their notice  was sent out too late to be able to claim it as EB pointed out earlier.

 

Normally we advise not to contact any of the crooks who run these car parks but in this case it could be justified since they have got nothing right. 

 

Simply state

"Your signage fails to create a valid reason for issuing a ticket which puts you in breach of GDPR.

Please confirm that this PCN has been quashed otherwise a strong complaint will be sent to the ICO". 

 

Hopefully they will not comply and continue demanding payment.

Puts your friend then in a good place to claim a decent sum for their data  breach .

[ericsbrother]

Indeed very odd wording, it appears to say that you pay £100 for parking as a condition of entering the land but no mention of any terms for a breach of contract. Confusing at best, esp if they have payment machines as then you shouldnt get a receipt until you have fed £100 into the machine. No such thing as an overstay, nothing about parking over the limes or the use of disabled bays.

Company details are PO Box as already said so no clarity on who is offering you anything.

 

However, I dont agree that sending a letter at this stage will do any good, anyone this stupid isnt going to accept the truth is at variance with their greed. Also Will and John at the IPC claim they vet every sign so their trade association as just as thick as they are.

Let them waste their time and money a bit longer, when you get to a proper threat of court from Will and John at Gladstones

[miley_b ob]

My brother received a 2nd letter (see attachment) today regarding the PCN. This time the letter is from Ultimate Customer Solutions who appear to be a debt collecting agency and the fee has gone up to £160, presumably to pay for their unicorn food. I have advised him to ignore the letter again, but keep it for reference. I have also advised him under POFA they cannot add anything extra onto the original charge. Is this correct?

2nd letter.pdf

[brassnecked]

They can't add anything extra in the NTK only the driver, the £60 is known here as Unicorn Feed tax, as it is an unlawful addition, the Keeper is only liable if for anything the original Charge, so if it was 70, that's all they can have, but they will still try it on.

[dx100uk]

cant see they are registered with the FCA for debt collection either.

 

dx

 

[ericsbrother]

they hope that you think they have some powers or authority and are scared into apying them this amount before it goes up again.  they stick to under £200 as they know peopel will query any amount above that and the find out that nothing can be added at all!

[miley_b ob]

My brother received the attached letter on Saturday. I have told him that its just the next stage of the threatening letters and that its nothing to be worried about.

Am I right in thinking that this is just another attempt at them to send a scary letter rather than a proper Letter Before Action.

 

If they are stupid enough to issue a LBA or even a claim, I have done some research and can find no evidence of any planning permission for the land to even be a car park, let alone have any signage or pay machines etc.

 

There is no keeper liability as the NTK doesnt comply with POFA and my brother will not be naming the driver for them. They have also failed to provide any pictures of the alleged overstay from their ANPR system in their NTK and are using a PO Box adress in their NTK.

 

I have been and photographed the signage which is terrible and doesn't mention anything about overstaying etc. The signage on the entrance to the car park is pretty vague as well. 

 

There are actually 3 car parks on Spring Street in Hull all next to each other, and nowhere on this car park is there any sign giving its name etc.

 

Is there anything else we should be doing to prepare for in case they are stupid enough to issue a LBA or a claim?

CSB letter.pdf

[ericsbrother]

so they are telling you to pay a third party rather than them or their client.

Spreading the jam a bit thin arent they?

No it isnt a LBA so sit tight for the moment

 

As for multiple car parks, you need to be able to show where your car was parked and find out who owns the land for each of the three. There will be different contracts for each even if the signs are the same they wont apply to  separate patches of land and identifiable as a single place so postcode of place is critical.

 

according to royalmail it covers 35-39 spring st so go and check who owns the properties by asking the council business rates people or the Valuations Agency. They are sometimes very helpful and sometimes as awkward as civil servants can get so dont be put off if you are rebuffed first time.

 

[miley_b ob]

My brother has had a three more threatening letters. However this time from another Debt collection mob. The tone of these latest 3 (2 of which are identical and arrived on the same day) is even more threatening. I have told him to keep ignoring until he recieves a Letter before action or letter of claim.

Letter (2 of 2).pdfLetter (1 of 2).pdf

Edited April 8, 2020 by miley_b ob

[brassnecked]

A threatogram, reccommend  to their clientthey can't do anything themselves, they are not can't Pay Bailiff or HCEO here, so what they threaten is if the PPC managed to get a CCJ, and it wasn't paid only then could bailiffs get involved.

[dx100uk]

and NOT DCBL, as the sum is less than £600

 

dx

 

[ericsbrother]

the wording of the second letter may get them into trouble as it fails to explain HOW all of the threats could result in any of the actions being taken.

 

they fail to mention that they have to go to court and win for starters

so heading it a pre enforcement letter is utterly wrong and stating that "after applications have been granted" and a list of impacts is an abuse of the civil procedure as the application is for issuing a summons.

 

they make a big thing out of their infamy of being on the telly when it is entirely irrelevant

[brassnecked]

Even if the fleecers won a court case, unlikely if defended, they would not be allowed to attend to enforce as is as DX says below £600 , so cannot be enforced by HCEO and a grands worth of  fees added,

[ericsbrother]

we may have to create a new category of threatogram just for them, the w***ergram

[miley_b ob]

Thanks for the replies. I thought the 2nd letter looked a wrong and like they were over hyping their imaginary powers. 

[lookinforinfo]

Miley

-was there not a third sheet from DCBL explaining that they were acting as debt collectors only?

If not, a complaint should be made to the FCA querying whether they are fit and proper to retain their licence. 

 

Many people will be frightened that they have bailiffs about to knock on their door when there is no way that it could happen unless one had lost at Court and then been unable to pay the fine within an allotted time at the very least.

And had the fine been paid within one month there would be no  record of the CCJ on their credit report.