Jump to content
  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Just to be clear you say your last payment to Mint was 3rd October 2014.   if that is the case there are possibilities:   a). Your last payment was a normal payment as a result of receiving the normal monthly bill and paying some part of it.   If you did not then pay anything else then you would have received some debt collection letters from mint over a period of some months presumably culminating in a Default Notice probably somewhere between month three and month six.   If, following receipt of that notice you did nothing then fourteen days after the date of that notice the statutory bar clock started which means that it probably started somewhere around January to April (but check this by getting SAR sent to Mint).  In this scenario you could have perhaps eight months to go before the stat bar kicks in.   b).  You had not paid the account properly prior to 3rd October 2014 and a DN was issued.  You responded by paying and the DN became voided as you corrected the issue by paying the arrears in which case we are back to a)   c).  You had not paid the account properly prior to 3rd October 2014 and a DN was issued.  You did not correct the situation within 14 days of the DN being issued and as such it came into being.  However, you continued to make some payments but if you did not fully pay the arrears the DN stays in place in which case your Stat Bar clock starts the last time you made a payment and this account will therefore become SBed 3rd October 2020.   Hope my logic is sound but I welcome any other CAGers chipping in here.   To be clear, did you pay Mint until you stopped paying or did you start to pay a debt collector after the account was passed to them?
    • Can you not hand deliver the letter of rejection to Canalside Motors quoting the the bank transfer reference number ?
    • Thanks - I posted the letter this morning. I'll spend the next few days getting familiar with the consumer rights act and the MCOL service. 
    • Hi there, Just a query regarding Savvy. I took out a loan with them in October 2019 for £750. This would be repaid over 52 weeks at £28.27 per week. I maintained payments on a regular basis until 20th March 2020 by which time I had paid a total of £565.40 (20 repayments of £28.27. I notified Savvy by live chat that I had been furloughed on 23rd March and would struggle too make repayments. i also emailed them on 27th March with confirmation of my furlough. They asked for Income/expenditure - not unreasonable but the template they asked me to use was shocking to say the least. I then sent them my own version drafted with help from National Debtline. This is a self service budget that I can amend and save as necessary.   Long story short and I am now back in work and my wages are back to normal. However, i am required to move house for personal reasons and the current landlord wanting the house back - well notified so there is no issue there. I have also kept Savvy up to date, especially as my family have suffered mental health issues in the early part of this year. Again i have notified Savvy, filled in a new IE form. This is the response I received.   Thank you for your email.   I have updated the income and expenditure form based on the information you have provided which shows you have a minus disposable income of £66.86, we allow £50.00 emergency cash which leaves a minus disposable income of minus £116.86.   Can you please confirm how you make up the deficit each month?   When the loan was issued in October 2019 an income and expenditure form was completed with you, can you please confirm the reason the following has increased.   Rent/ Mortgage has increased by £1,162.00   Housekeeping has increased by £580.00   Household Bills has increased by £507.40   Car/ Travel has increased by £123.80   Social has increased by £150.00.   Due to the changes to your financial circumstances we would need to see a 90 day copy of your bank statement.   Please find below a link to a system we use calls open banking, please click on the link and log in your online banking details this will automatically generate a 90 day bank statement.   LINK REMOVED.   I have placed your account on hold until the 12th August to allow time for the bank statement to be sent in.   They have now issued a default notice.   Any advice would be greatly appreciated before I initiate a complaint against Savvy. I have maintained reduced monthly payments in line with what I can afford. Is it reasonable for Savvy to ask for access to my bank statements. They did not ask for them when I took out their loan.  
  • Our picks

    • Curry’s cancelled my order but took the money anyway. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/423055-curry%E2%80%99s-cancelled-my-order-but-took-the-money-anyway/
      • 11 replies
    • Father passed away - Ardent Credit Services (Vodafone) now claiming he owes money. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/423040-father-passed-away-ardent-credit-services-vodafone-now-claiming-he-owes-money/
      • 9 replies
    • Currys Refuse Refund F/Freezer 5day old. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422656-currys-refuse-refund-ffreezer-5day-old/
      • 6 replies
    • Hi,  
      I was in Sainsbury’s today and did scan and shop.
      I arrived in after a busy day at work and immediately got distracted by the clothes.
       
      I put a few things in my trolley and then did a shop.
      I paid and was about to get into my car when the security guard stopped me and asked me to come back in.
       
      I did and they took me upstairs.
      I was mortified and said I forgot to scan the clothes and a conditioner, 5 items.
      I know its unacceptable but I was distracted and Initially hadn’t really planned to use scan and shop.
       
      No excuse.
      I offered to pay for the goods but the manager said it was too late.
      He looked at the CCTV and because I didn’t try to scan the items he was phoning the police.
       
      The cost of the items was about £40.
      I was crying at this point and told them I was a nurse, just coming from work and I could get struck off.
       
      They rang the police anyway and they came and issued me with a community resolution notice, which goes off my record in a year.
      I feel terrible. I have to declare this to my employer and NMC.
       
      They kept me in a room on my own with 4 staff and have banned me from all stores.
      The police said if I didn’t do the community order I would go to court and they would refer me to the PPS.
       
      I’m so stressed,
      can u appeal this or should I just accept it?
       
      Thanks for reading 
        • Like
      • 16 replies
Chipster1!

Smart Parking/CST Law ANPR PCN Letter Of Claim - Matalan Car Park - wrong reg - Medtia Square Oldham Manchester

Recommended Posts

Dear Consumer Group

 

Can anyone help me please?

 

I have received a Letter Before Claim for an outstanding amount of £185.00

 

I paid for my time in the car park but entered two of my registration digits in the wrong order. 

I appealed immediately to Smart Parking as it was blatantly obvious it was my car but I was denied. 

I appealed to POPLA but they found in Smart Parkings favour. 

 

I have received over 9 letters referring to this (each one more sinister) and each time they have addressed it to Mr and I am a Miss. 

I hoping I get the opportunity to point this out to them as we are all capable of making simple errors!

 

I read all of your responses from the Matalan PCN but it was an old thread and I'm just wondering if I should send them the same response Ericsbrother suggested or has there been a change since then?

 

They did keep quoting the Case in Law in the first few letters but not mentioned it since. 

I would be very grateful of any help please, I'm tired of their threatening letters.

 

Thank you very much

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and welcome to CAG. People should be long later to advise you.

 

I've had to remove your attachment because you haven't covered up your name, address and the vehicle reg number. Perhaps you can anonymise that and repost it.

 

The letter mentions Debt Recovery Plus who can only ever issue threats on behalf of  not so Smart Parking. I don't think you have anything to worry about apart from seeing a series of threatograms.

 

Best, 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..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 Date of the infringement 24th May 2019

 

 

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

Never received one.
 

[scan up BOTHSIDES as ONE PDF- follow the upload guide]

 

3 Date received

Never received one.
 

 

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

N/A
 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event?
Yes

 

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

Yes
 

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

Yes
 

7 Who is the parking company?

Smart Parking
 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town]

Medtia Square Oldham Manchester
 

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

POPLA
 

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

please check HERE

 

If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here

2 Letters from Debt Recovery Plus LTD.  2 letters Debt Recovery Plus (they have different letterheads & designs).  2 letters from Zenith Collections and 2 letters from CST Law.

 

I tried to attach all of the letters as one multi page PDF as you requested but it wont let me.  Says there is a limit of 4.88.  Shall I send them individually?

 

And thank you very much for your time and help :)

 

I made a compressed zip file but it wont let me attache that either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simply properly redact your org pdf..read upload

 

Shame you appealed..

Next time dont!

 

Dx


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

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks D.

 

This has got me all of a dither :(

 

I feel very naive,  I thought common sense would rule the day! 

 

docs1.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you still left your docs unredacted!!

 

anyway i've done them now.

 

what date is the letter of claim please

 

dx

 


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

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just put the redacted PDFs and we can have a look at it (NotSo) Smart parking know that wrong reg is de minimis, a legal trifle, you paid, so no loss to sue for, however they wil  bully and bluster, all appeals are automatically refused.   then have a search in this forum for wrong reg number cases where a defence was successful to get the picture.


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

Oh god, I'm sorry guys, I'm totally new to all this, I thought I'd obscured enough :(

 

The date of Letter Before Claim was 18th June but I only received it Friday 10th July.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You still have time to send a snotty letter in reply stating things the Team will suggest shortly, if you ignore it a Claimform will definitely follow, the Smart parking muppets have fewer braincells than a petrol head biker high on patrol vapour.

  • Haha 1

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

I see what you mean now 'D', I'm sorry but thank you for doing it properly X

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which Ericsbrother letter were you referring to?  He has quite a library of snotty letters 😁


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, it was Smart Parking Matalan PCN POPLA appeal rejection. It was 8th May 2017.

It was a belter!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had to cut & paste, I'm not very technical, enjoy!

 

He wrote:-

 

would respond to this.

 

Start wth dear sirs, I am in receipt of your letter dated the 31st October 2017 and have noted its contents.

 

You state that I should consider this to be a letter before action or letter before claim.

Unfortunately for you I cannot accept this shoddily thrown together piece of tripe to be a LBA as it fails miserably to come anywhere near a lba as required under the revised Civil Procedure Regulations and so would expect a court to summarily dismiss any claim later made by you or your client on that basis.

 

However as you are the parking world third worst firm of solicitors I am not surprised you failed to put any effort into this taradiddle

 

so to make sure that there is no misunderstanding

I deny that any monies are owed to your client by myself as there is precedent case law that your clients greed has blindeed them to.

 

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 fondness for 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

 

It would be wise if you took your obligations you signed up to when being entered onto the SRA roll and advised your clients it is not in their interests to continue with this matter as they have no cause for action and I shall seek a full costs recover order for any civil claim made under the unreasonableness criteria.

 

Do not be polite to these bandits.

Dont forget, you can use the letter you send as evidence should they then continue

Edited November 20, 2017 by honeybee13
Paras
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cutting & pasting is fine!  We just need to tweak the bits that don't apply.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brilliant, thank you very much 😊

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes POFA won't apply as you appealed, and likely ID'd yourself as driver, but no claim due to de minimis and you paid will.


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

I see the letter was in response to a wrong reg. case very similar to yours, so well done on doing all the research to find it.

 

I've tweaked a bit below, adding two sentences due to a recent legal case and the BPA becoming a tiny bit decent.

 

The solicitors were different so I've cut out the bit insulting them - although fresh insults could be added 😉

 

See what others think.

 

dear sirs, I am in receipt of your letter dated the 18th June 2020 and have noted its contents.

 

so to make sure that there is no misunderstanding

I deny that any monies are owed to your client by myself as there is precedent case law that your clients' greed has blinded them to.  Even the British Parking Association have given in and changed their stance.

 

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.  Remember DJ Harvey at Lewes in May?

 

It would be wise if you took your obligations you signed up to when being entered onto the SRA roll and advised your clients it is not in their interests to continue with this matter as they have no cause for action and I shall seek a full costs recover order for any civil claim made under the unreasonableness criteria.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ooooh sounds fantastic to me but as we know, I know nowt!!

 

Thank you so much for your efforts and I'll hang fire until you tell me to go for it. 👍🥳

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good idea, in particular wait in case Ericsbrother comes onto the forum this afternoon.

  • Like 1

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes get it exactly correct as you have to show that POPLA were wrong also, finding against you

  • Sad 1

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

I wouldn't say you "know nowt" given you found an appropriate reply to an LBA for the right company for the right "offence" - well done!

 

The good news is that legally you're in the clear.  The wrong reg. nonsense is a case of "de minimis" AKA "the law does not deal with trivialities".  They got paid - end of.  A judge would laugh them at them in court.

 

Unfortunately most people don't know the law so these con merchants send out demands for money they well know is not owed, hoping motorists will wet themselves at the thought of court & cough up.  Sadly a lot do.

 

I added the bit about the BPA because even their own trade body has recently told them to accept appeals in cases like this, but hey, all they're interested in is £££.  I added the bit about Lewes because recently a PPC got a right kicking from a judge, also for making up all the fictitious "Unicorn Food Tax" (copyright EB).  Have a laugh at the following.

 

Hang fire for 24 hours to see if EB advises to change the letter, then give them both barrels.

 

 


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As POPLA put this in their rejection decision:

 

"By entering the incorrect vehicle registration, the parking ticket is invalid for the appellant's vehicle to park."

 

Might be worth stating alongside the fact in law is de minimis,  you have safe possession of the actual ticket you paid for,  proving payment,  so was made  if they do try  their luck court the de minimis can be highlighted with caselaw.  Time POPLA had a refresher at law school the Term they use to justify rejection of Appeal, due to De Minimis rule, as payment was made, could be construed as an Unfair Term.

 

 

Just needs ericsbrother to give it the once over and you are good to go.


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
Posted (edited)

the BPA code has changed since then so a parking co cant calim for such an error. now the change came about because there was a problem and your case being prior to the chnage in terms for operators doesnt make it enforceable as if they go to court they will have to explain why a defective term is better than the condition that replaces it in the  code they have to abide by.

 

As brassnecked says, there is no loss because you paid the prescrobed fee and that is more importnat in law than this error. in pracice the parking co's were losing claims and govt was getting twitchy hence the change. The IPC dont agree with the law and dont enforce their Code of Pracitce so a longer haul with one of their members befiore they get a salutory lesson.

So what to say? well, the 2 points mentioned, that the current CoP prevents operators from using such a reason to screw the public and there has been no loss because the  prescribed fee was paid and that crystallises the contract, not the inputting of a car reg as the contract is with the driver, not a piece of metal so the licence to park would apply to any vehicle under the control of the driver at the time.

Edited by ericsbrother
  • Like 1

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...