Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


miley_b ob

CPS ANPR PCN - overstay - Spring St, Hull

Recommended Posts

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?


..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 


..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

dx

 


..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

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...