UKCPS 2xMNPR PCN - LBC - No Stopping - Manchester Piccadilly Gateway House

[Spannerz]

Hello folks,

 

Just thought I'd throw my hat in the ring here after reading all the Forum posts and most excellent advice.

 

1 Date of the infringement

10/11/2019

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

9/12/2019 - 29 Days after, if my calculation is correct.
 

I can scan if requested, but I'm sure you've seen one before.

 

3 Date received

Unsure now, but possibly 11th/12th Dec 2019, since I've appealed and got a reply on 13th Dec 2019
 

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

Top of the letter says (NON POFA MNPR - Manual Number Plate Recognition)
 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event?

Yes - a single side on view, cropped to show just headlights and numberplate. No context of actual location.
 

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

Y - and I did it wrong. 
 

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

13/12/2019
 

7 Who is the parking company?

UKCPS

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town]

Piccadilly Railway Station - Gateway House - Manchester 
 

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

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

Oooooh....lots!

 

We've had two of these things, both at the same place, one for Sunday 10th November 2019 (details above) and the second on Friday 15th November 2019, which has a sending date of 11/12/2019 which we appealed on 23/12/2019, refusal reply dated 27/12/2019.

We've heard less about the second one, since I got the appeal wording correct & they realise they'll have a harder job with that one, but I may be wrong.

 

They both were addressed to my OH, as the RK of the car.

 

I appealed both online, using their web portal to do so. The first one I put my name on it but stated I was not the driver (which I wasn't both times)

The second I put her name on it, since I'd read up on how to actually do it by then.

All further correspondence for the first one has been addressed to me, though I stated I was not the driver. They've obviously done a DVLA query to get our address, so they know I'm not the RK either.

 

Timeline so far : 

UKCPS NTK, Appeal & Reply - between 10/11/19 and 13/12/19 - as above

UKCPS Final Notice Letter - 13/1/2020 - ignored

Debt Recovery Plus - First letter - now £160 - dated 29/01/2020 - ignored

Debt Recovery Plus - Second Letter - still £160 - dated 24/02/2020 - ignored

Debt Recovery Plus - Third Letter - now £144 - dated 11/03/2020 - ignored

 

Approximately 29/01/2021 I receive two letters on the same day from CST Law, addressed to me, both dated 22/01/2021.

One is a "Unpaid Debt - Reminder Notice" and the second is a Letter Before Claim.

 

I am sending an email to DVLA regarding access to our data, as per Dragonfly1967''s template.

 

I am about to reply to the LBC, using info from other wonderful people on here, namely folks like Ericsbrother, crashlanding21, FTMDave and dx100uk to write a snotty letter.

 

I would like to send this:

 

Dear CST Law, 

 

I write in response to your so-called “Letter Before Claim”, received in relation to PCN Number GCL XXXXX, issued by UKCPS for alleged parking breaches.

 

I am writing to confirm that I have no intention of paying these ridiculous and made-up sums of money for allegedly breaking some imaginary contract with your client.

 

Aside from the fact that I was not the driver of the vehicle, this whole claim is nonsense and I’m sure any Magistrate would agree.

I also think that any Magistrate would resent your waste of the Court's time, considering there are holes in your procedures, processes and basic understanding of the Law

that I could drive a bus through, never mind the car you spuriously & vexatiously claim has breached this imaginary contract with your client.

 

Should your client wish to proceed with this farcical claim, I’ll be seeking recovery of costs based on unreasonable behaviour, as well as damages for breach of the DPA 2018.

I am taking time out of my professional day to deal with this issue & I assure you my daily rate is far higher than the amount you could possibly hope to extort from me.0

 

Regards,

 

My typed name here

 

COPIED TO UKCPS

 

 

 

But will probably send this:

 

Dear CST Law, 

 

I write in response to your so-called “Letter Before Claim”, received in relation to PCN Number GCL XXXXX, issued by UKCPS for alleged parking breaches.

 

I am writing to confirm that I have no intention of paying these ridiculous and made-up sums of money for allegedly breaking some imaginary contract with your client.

 

Aside from the fact that I was not the driver of the vehicle, this whole claim is nonsense and I’m sure any Magistrate would agree.

 

Should your client wish to proceed with this farcical claim, I’ll be seeking recovery of costs based on unreasonable behaviour, as well as damages for breach of the DPA 2018.

 

Regards,

 

My typed name here

 

COPIED TO UKCPS

 

I know I made mistakes in the early days and like a few others, would relish destroying these idiots in Court, but I'll be happy if I can just make them go away.

 

Any thoughts or comments gratefully appreciated.

 

Regards,

Spannerz :-)

 

 

 

[FTMDave]

You have done a lot of research before coming on the forum - well done.  I wish everyone new would do the same!

 

You're right about "there are holes in your procedures, processes and basic understanding of the Law that I could drive a bus through".

 

I get it that you have denied being the driver, that's fine.  But in either of the appeals did either of you admit to them who was driving?

[Spannerz]

Hi Dave,

No, I didn't, as far as I remember.

I had done some reading on MSE about this very company, but this new letter made me look again and coming across this forum

Appeal for the 2nd one was done in her name, so letters are being sent to her.

 

Just for completeness - 2nd Case:

Date of Infringement -  15/11/2019

UKCPS NTK - dated 11/12/2019, so possibly received 19th/20th? I may not have appealed on the day I received it. 

Appeal 23/12/2019 - Rejection reply via email - 27/12/2019 - This one contains 4 x photos, whereas prior rejection doesn't.

UKCPS Final Notice - dated 01/05/2020

DRP First Letter - dated 20/05/2020

DRP Second Letter - dated 11/06/2020

DRP Third Letter - dated 07/08/2020

No other correspondence regarding this one yet.

 

 

Oh yes, I meant to add an addendum to the post regarding pictures of Notices.

 I went back to Manchester and took pics of the signage on 19th December.

I have copies of the ones of the big sign at the entrance, along with it's shiney new Jubilee clips, which wasn't there in November.

 

Google Streetview doesn't show the new signage either, but thats back from July 2019

[dx100uk]

one multipage pdf only

read upload carefully

 

dx

 

[Gick]

Where did you get the idea that Magistrates could be involved? The court any of their threats refer to is a County Court (civil matters - not criminal) .

The point is that if you refer to Magistrates in any correspondence, the fleecers will rub their hands together because you will show yourself as naive/ignorant of the subject and likely to fall down in your defence etc.

[Spannerz]

Hi Gick,

Thanks for your input. The original post did say Judge, so is that correct?

I thought that it being a civil matter it would be a Magistrate and I am obviously incorrect.

Would it be a JP?

This is the reason I posted my intention, to make sure I don't make a mistake, which I thank everyone for!

Regards,

S

Edited: Have just Googled County Court and I of course stand corrected. It is a Judge.

Every day is a school day!

 

Edited February 5, 2021 by Spannerz
Addition

[dx100uk]

magistrates court - criminal cases

county court - civil cases

both have judges.

 

its a speculative invoice issued because the driver entered into some imaginary civil contract that might or might not exist between the land owner and the private parking company they might have employed..by driving onto the private land.

[lookinforinfo]

we would like to see at least one of the PCNs if they are both worded the same since there are a couple of variations-front and back please.

[FTMDave]

We're well used to the arrogance and stupidity of the parking companies here, and their presuming the keeper was also the driver.  However, this is a first - them chasing someone who was neither keeper nor driver!  They would get an absolute thrashing if they did try court.

 

The experienced regulars here have always emphasised to not play your cards too early.  If you told them you were neither keeper nor driver they could then correct their mistake and pursue your OH, so don't let on.  They can have that nasty surprise further on.  So as a snotty letter I would tweak what you've prepared and write

 

 

Dear CST Law, 

 

I write in response to your so-called “Letter Before Claim”, received in relation to PCN Number GCL XXXXX, issued by UKCPS for alleged parking breaches.

 

I am writing to confirm that I have no intention of paying this ridiculous and made-up sum of money for allegedly breaking some imaginary contract with your client.

 

Aside from the fact your client's signage is utter pants, this whole claim is nonsense and I’m sure any judge would agree.  I also think that any judge would resent their waste of the Court's time, considering there are holes in their procedures, processes and basic understanding of the Law that I could drive a bus through, never mind the car they spuriously & vexatiously claim has breached this imaginary contract.

 

Should your client wish to proceed with this farcical claim, I’ll be seeking recovery of costs based on unreasonable behaviour, as well as damages for breach of GDPR.

 

Regards,

 

My typed name here

 

COPIED TO UKCPS

 

 

I've put in one reason their claim is utter rubbish (the signage) but all the other reasons you know but they don't know that you know can be kept for later if they are daft enough to continue.

 

Any pix of signage would be immensely helpful both to you and others in the same position.  If you could post them up, that'd be great.  Flusterer has already found out that sometime between 02.01.20 and 04.03.20 UKCPS put up loads of new signs.  It's good to know that wasn't the only time.  Are you referring to the period 16.11.2019 to 18.12.2019?

[Spannerz]

Documents as requested.

One is NTK and Final Notice letters for case of 10.11.19, the one I now have a LBC for. Please not the names - NTK addressed to Miss ...., everything else addressed to Mr.....

 

Second are the images I have gathered regarding the location if they can be of assistance to anyone else as well.

 Our NTK's were issued in Nov 2019, by Dec 19th 2019 they had added the large one at the foot of the roadway.

 

NTK+Final-10.11.19.pdf Rear of Gateway House Images.pdf

[Spannerz]

Thanks for the rewrite Dave, I likes it a lot!

 

I completely agree with that comment about signage, since maybe they've already had cases thrown out because of it & if they know that's one line I'll be attacking it might pull their claws.

I also understand about not putting everything out there to start with. I did read a comment somewhere about Disclosure - (was it Section 31.14 or similar?)

Would that be applicable in this sort of case?

Just thinking ahead here, if it does go further - would a line like "I'm already preparing my Section 31 Disclosure request for you" also indicate to them that they're dealing with someone prepared to put up a fight rather than just roll over?

 

Many thanks for everyones' comments, much appreciated.

 

If there's nothing much more said by Monday, I'll go with FTMDave's wording in post #9 and send 'em off with Proof of Posting

 

[FTMDave]

Many thanks for the photos, they will be very useful also for other Caggers in the same position.

 

Love them quoting POFA on their letters and then right at the top putting "NON POFA"!!!