Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

parking eye ANPR PCN PAPLOC NOW claimform - 14 mins overstay - Riverside Retail Park chelmsford essex


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 210 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

I got a ticket in a retail park for overstay by 14minutes.

 

It was boxing day, hardly anyone out and we genuinely spent all that time in the shops there.

 

I have had a couple of letters, which I have ignored.

 

The latest has come this morning.

This is attached.

 

Seems a little bit more serious than the normal ones I've had previously.

 

This one includes a form to fill out within 30 days.

Any advise would be helpful.

 

Thanks

20220219_130545-converted.pdf

Edited by dx100uk
added A few blank lines only..dx
Link to post
Share on other sites

For PCN's received through the post [ANPR camera capture]

(must be received within 14 days from the Incident)

 

Please answer the following questions.

 

1 Date of the infringement

26th Dec 2021
 

 

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

I can't seem to find this at the minute. I'm sure it was quite soon after the supposed offence
 

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

please do not put JPG Picture files into your post

 

3 Date received

Give answer here
 

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

Give answer here
 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event?

It did have photos of the car on entry and exit
 

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

No
 

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

Na
 

7 Who is the parking company?

Parking eye

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town]

Riverside Retail Park chelmsford
 

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

I do recall something said about popla.

 

 

Sorry, I can't find the original notice. My wife is away and deals with paperwork here. I've sent her a message and if she knows I'll upload asap

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to parking eye ANPR PCN Letter of claim - 14 mins overstay - Riverside Retail Park chelmsford essex

It's important we see the fleecers' original invoice to see if they've respected the times their letters must be delivered by to establish keeper liability. 

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

Hello again all,

 

The sensible one of the couple stored this away! She's an organised lady!

I've attached the original, they also sent a reminder. This is exactly the same but dated 08/01/22.

I've also uploaded the reverse if that's helpful?

 

Thanks again

 

 

 

 

PCN.pdf

Edited by dx100uk
pcn pdf redacted properly
Link to post
Share on other sites

Parking Eye are usually pretty good at getting the details on their PCNs pretty near correct. however they have slipped up now because of the new CoP which though some of it has not come into force other things do.

 

The new CoP insists that the entrance and leaving times are not considered a period of parking. This is because PE have to take into consideration the time driving around looking for a parking spot, reading the T&Cs, paying the tariff and getting out of the car park.

 

Other things like getting kids in and out of the car as well as disabled people getting wheelchairs in and out.

 

Most of the time there is a 5 minute consideration time plus 10 minute grace period in the new CoP so I wouldn't worry too much.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Who would've thought! Having a child has saved me money! Haha

We didn't have to buy a ticket here but we did have to load stuff and a 2 year into a car seat.

So just ignore this letter with the lengthy details/earnings form etc?

Thanks for the help and thanks for the Eagle eye who redacted the reverse side, didn't even notice that.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Any update here?

 

We have a new Cagger today who is being pursued for "overstaying" here, so it would be useful to know how your case has gone/is going.

  • 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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hello all,

Apologies for not replying earlier. I didnt have my more frequently used email assigned to the account. Have since changed it on here.

I didnt hear anything until today and got this in the mail. Is this a legitimate summons?

 

jpg2pdf.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Afraid so.

 

You have to acknowledge service, send off a CPR request, then later defend the claim.

 

Did you send the snotty 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

please complete the above

 

dx

 

 

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to parking eye ANPR PCN PAPLOC NOW claimform - 14 mins overstay - Riverside Retail Park chelmsford essex

Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business centre. NOrthampton. NN1 2LH

 

Name of the Claimant : parking eye ltd

 

Claimants Solicitors: (if one is stated) Jayne Leonard ( claimants legal rep )

 

Date of issue – 20 June 2022

 

I havent yet. Will do so probably tomorrow night

 

What is the claim for

Particulars of the claim

 

1.Claim for monies outstanding from the Defendant in relation to a parking charge (ref withheld by me for posting here ) issued on 30/12/2021.

 

2.The signage clearly displayed throughout Riverside Retail Park, Chelmsford, Victoria Road, chelmsford, essex CM1 1AN states that this is private land, managed by Parking Eye Ltd, and that it is subject to terms and conditions, including a max stay period, by which those who park agree to be bound ( the contract ).

 

3.ParkingEye's ANPR system captured vehicle ( reg plate withheld by me ) entering and leaving the site on 26/12/21, and overstaying the max stay period.

 

4.Persuant to Sch 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, notice has been given to the registered keeper, making them liable for the Parking Charge payable upon breach.

 

What is the value of the claim? £170

 

 

Amount Claimed 85.00

court fees 35.00

legal rep fees 50.00

Total Amount 170.00

 

On another note, I didn't send any mail to them at all. No snotty letters or acknowledgement of any kind.

Haven't heard anything for months so figured it had gone away.

 

Thanks for your help all

Link to post
Share on other sites

thats why, they think you'll ignore a claimform too and get an easy win default judgement.

 

a reply to the LOC via a snotty letter was important!.

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

pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform

.

register as an individual on the Gov't Gateway Site
Go to HMRC's login page.


Click the GREEN sign in button.
Click “Create sign in details”
Enter your email address where asked.
You will now be emailed a confirmation code. ...


You will now be issued with a User ID for your government gateway account.
 note down your details inc the long gateway number given, you might need it later.
 

then log in to the MCOL Website

.

select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box.

.

then using the details required from the claimform

.

defend all

leave jurisdiction unticked.

click thru to the end

confirm and exit MCOL.

.

get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim


type your name ONLY


no need to sign anything

.

you DO NOT await the return of paperwork.

you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.

………….
 

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

  • 2 weeks later...

 

 

Hello all,

I have sent this by recorded, signed for mail. I reworded it, hopefully including the important stuff.

I wondered if you have any tips on the defense please?

Was going to include the fact i wasn't driving, the length of overstay with the reason behind it. ( the boy was with us and needed a nappy change )

Also the fact I spent money in all of the shops that were open that day and the massive surplus of spaces as it was boxing day and most stuff was closed anyway.

Or is this sort of case hinged more on the legal issues of them not really being within your rights to do what they do.

 

Thanks all and have a good weekend

 

 

Edited by dx100uk
Pdf unredacted
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pdf of our template removed as unredacted and we know what it says.

 

Defence will be std 3-5 line generic one

.

go back to the Q&A sticky and scroll down to how to defend.

 

Dx

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

Sorry to drive you mad but this is what I'd planned to use as the defence.

Is this suitable? Spent the entire night reading and the Poole Thistle overstay post seems to be along the same lines as my issue, so have leaned on that heavily.

It's been struggle but I feel what i've read, whilst not all directly relevant, has taken the surprise element away from what will follow.

Thanks and have a good weekend.

 

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4.  The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

1.           The registered Keeper of the motor vehicle (XXXXXXX) is the Defendant.

 

2.           The Defendant denies that they entered into any contract with the Claimant.

 

3.           As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance.  The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner.  Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 

 

4.           In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant.

 

5.           The Claim is denied in its entirety.  It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.

Edited by dx100uk
removed unintended link
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

looks about fine ....the more you read the stronger we become.

just dont forget this is not the only stage you'll go through too. so further upon the whole process is wise too.

 

lets the masters confirm..

 

well done dx

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

Defence entered and thanks.

The volume of stuff that goes into the WS looks a bit daunting but I guess it's all here. Seems like key is seeing it through, entering docs on time and being available for the case. 

I'm hoping common sense will prevail here first, 14 mins isn't a massive issue, especially on a quiet day with a million spaces available.

 

Thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...