Jump to content


Alliance Parking UK Ltd Windscreen PCN - Metropole Chambers Swansea


lounick
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 177 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • 8 months later...

open

 

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

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have today received a letter from Alliance Parking advising me that unless I pay the money they will start court proceedings and telling me that I should visit their site to get their defendant response pack before I then goto the Alternative Dispute Resolution Service to give my defense to settle the matter - who for this case will be The Independent Appeals Service approved by the Chartered Trading Standards Institute - it advises this will cost me £15 and is completed online. 

 

I have yet to contact Alliance Parking about anything to do with this case. 

 

I have read on a few websites that an  Independent Appeals Service will be unlikely to be on my side as it is funded by the parking companies? Should I now be contacting Alliance Parking and ask for this defendant's pack or is this then giving them contact with me, or should I be ignoring this letter and waiting for them to start court proceedings. 

 

I have recently moved house so once my redirection of mail stops in the next couple of months they will not be able to contact me.

 

The parking ticket was put on the car window screen on 21/12/19, the next correspondence was 22/04/20 reminding me to pay or face action (no photos have been provided by them), then a letter on 04/11/20 advising that I needed to pay £100 and if I didn't by 18 November they were going to forward my case to their litigation dept to start court proceedings, then todays letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

read it properly 

it doesn't say will anything...

 

i will guess this is a letter entitled letter of claim under the pre action protocol?

 

if not ignore them.

 

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

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

snotty letter time then...

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

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

thread tidied

numerous 1 page pdfs merged to one file in OP's last post

 

so search top right in our red banner

snotty Letter.

 

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

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, draft a snotty letter and post it up here please.  In the letter you also need to tell them you've moved, otherwise you could end up with a backdoor CCJ.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

You already know that the PCNs are not PoFA compliant so they are pursuing you, the keeper, as if you were the driver- it is on the bottom of the Notice to Keeper !

 

This is completely wrong- there is no assumption in Law that the driver and keeper are the same person.

Many people have more than one person nominated on the insurance and other drivers who have their car insured are able to drive your car too , albeit on a 3rd party basis.

 

You can obviously claim that you were not there for the 10 minute grace period minimum though if they are not using PoFA that might be difficult. Instead you can say that you were trespassing and only the land owner can do that and certainly not those nefarious **** bags at Alliance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The company are members of IPC only. I have drafted the following letter to reply to the Letter of Claim:

I have received your letter dated         and noted its contents.

 

Your letter has a clear heading of ‘Letter to Claim’.  Being, as I am, aware of the current Civil Procedure regulations, I cannot accept your poor attempt of a letter to be anywhere near a worthy Letter of Claim as it comes nowhere near to meeting the current Civil Procedure Regulations and I expect a court to summarily dismiss any claim later made by you or your client on that basis.

 

However, due to your reputation and history, I would expect nothing less from you.  So you fully understand I deny that any monies are owed to your client by me. The same applies to the inflated amount of the claim, the POFA and contract law are very clear on this point and again plenty of examples of dismissed claims are in the public domain.

 

Your letter stating the  misquoting the decision of PE v Beavis makes it look like you have never read the full judgement but like the other rent a threats see it as a panacea for justifying any old coddswallop you care to trot out in your correspondence

 

It would be wise if you looked at the total shambles and lack of any claim you have  and admitted  it is not in your client’s interests to continue with this matter as there is no cause for action and I shall seek a full costs recover order for any civil claim made under the unreasonableness criteria.

 

So you are aware I have moved address to               - this is my correspondence address, should you wish to confirm your decision not to bother me anymore with this.

 

I will send this off tomorrow - is this sounding like an appropriate snotty letter

Link to post
Share on other sites

What you've written is certainly high up on the snotty scale and would show you're confident in belittling their claim. 

 

However, bits need to be tweaked because the original was sent to solicitors representing a PPC, instead of directly to the PPC as in your case.  IIRC the first paragraph laughing at the Letter of Claim itself was because the solicitors said they were representing a third party debt collections agency.

 

You state they stated PE v Beavis.  Is this true?  I can't find a mention in their letter. 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply - I will have a look at the first paragraph again. They do mention the Beavis case in a 'frequently asked questions' paragraph on the reverse of the letter - it is quoted in reply to a printed question of 'I have read online that charges of this nature are not enforceable in law, is this correct?' their reply was 'There is zero merit in this statement, indeed parking operators have successfully enforced Parking Charge debts via the County Courts for a number of years; the most famous case being in the Supreme Court of Appeal (Baevis v ParkingEye 2015)'

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, understood about Beavis.  How about this after some tweaking -

 

 

Dear MPS Alliance Parking,

 

cheers for your ‘Letter of Claim’.  By happy coincidence it turned up the same day that my local supermarket ran out of toilet paper, so it was most welcome.

 

So you fully understand, I deny that any monies are owed to you.  Your signage is pants and that is just one of a hundred ways you've got it wrong, all of which I have in a nice tidy list ready to show to a judge.

 

The same applies to the inflated amount of the claim, the POFA and contract law are very clear on this point and again plenty of examples of dismissed claims are in the public domain.

 

Your letter misquoting the decision of PE v Beavis makes it look like you have never read the full judgement but like the other rent-a-threats see it as a panacea for justifying any old codswallop you care to trot out in your correspondence.

 

It would be wise if you looked at the total shambles and lack of any claim that you have.  You can either drop this foolishness now or get a good hiding in court where I shall seek a full costs recovery order for any civil claim made under the unreasonableness criteria.

 

So you are aware, I have moved address from XXXXX to XXXXX.

 

I look forward to your deafening silence.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha - thanks yes I like this - coincidentally I have just been looking at my photos of the signage and thinking how bad it was and did not comply with any of the guidance listed even by ipc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The site experts always emphasise to not play your cards too early, so learning from that I thought to mention the signage (even Alliance must know it's pants and they must do it deliberately to entrap drivers) but shut up about POFA/grace period/no contract with landowner/no planning permission/etc.  Those reasons can be blasted at them if they are daft enough to do court.  Hopefully not.

 

If no-one objects to what I've written, send it off on Monday with a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Might be worth mentioning that even if PoFa satisfied and it isn't here, any additions to the original sum allegedly owed to driver cannot be demanded from a Keeper, and as was found at Leres County Court by HHJ harvey, demanding the extra Unicorn Feed tax of £60 is sbuse of process, so will bite them if they are silly.   might be worth a mention  or maybe saved for a devastating witness statement if they are silly enough to send a claimform What do your reckon FTMDave?

 

 

Either way send a cc copy to the fleecers to let them know they and their rentathreats have been rumbled.

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, good idea Brassnecked, might as well emphasise judges' dislike for the Unicorn Food Tax.  I've also now put the change of address right at the start, if the fleecers are stupid enough to do court the last thing the OP wants is for the papers to go to the wrong address.

 

 

Dear MPS Alliance Parking,

 

firstly, I have moved from XXXXX to XXXXX.  Please note my new address.

 

Next - cheers for your ‘Letter of Claim’.  By happy coincidence it turned up the same day that my local supermarket ran out of toilet paper, so it was most welcome.

 

So you fully understand, I deny that any monies are owed to you.  Your signage is pants and that is just one of a hundred ways you've got it wrong, all of which I have in a nice tidy list ready to show to a judge.

 

The same applies to the Unicorn Food Tax that you've added to the claim, the POFA and contract law are very clear on this point.  Remember DDJ Harvey's judgement at Lewes on 5 February 2020 (claim number F0HM9E9Z)?  Not very happy about these made-up amounts, was he?

 

Your letter misquoting the decision of PE v Beavis makes it look like you have never read the full judgement but like the other rent-a-threats see it as a panacea for justifying any old codswallop you care to trot out in your correspondence.

 

It would be wise if you looked at the total shambles and lack of any claim that you have.  You can either drop this foolishness now or get a good hiding in court where I shall seek a full costs recovery order for any civil claim under the unreasonableness criteria (CPR 27.14(2)(g)).

 

I look forward to your deafening silence.

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much for helping me with this - I was looking through the photos I had of the signage and it is awful. And your mention of the Unicorn Food Tax added on every time they write. Your amended reply is certainly a lot snottier than I would normally dare to do but it certainly tells them clearly!

 

I will prepare the letter and get it sent off tomorrow making sure I get the proof of posting

 

Thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they were silly enough to try a backdoor to the old address, they would be in big bother as that letter also indicates they had the correct address, and a Set Aside application would be a big problem for them as the claim would be tantamount to fraud.

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...