Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
  • 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

UKCPS Piccadilly gateway house parking charge


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 375 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

Hi all

I'm aware that there are quite a few posts about this already, just wanting to be thorough in getting advice.

 

I have received a parking charge notice form UKCPS for stopping briefly outside gateway house, this was because my GF and I were lost and trying to figure out where we needed to go.

 

We had both attended a concert at the Ritz on 9th of Feb, she had parked 'somewhere near the back of Piccadilly' and couldn't remember exactly where, while I had parked behind the Ritz. When we left the venue I drove her back to her car and we ended up stopping at Gateway house shortly before finding her car. I don't recall seeing any signs that said no stopping, though they could well be there.

We were there for no more than 5 minutes, the NTK doesn't give an end time for the infraction, just a time issued of 11:30.

 

On the 21st of Feb enterprise notified me that they had received a 'fine' and that the issuer had been informed of my details to reissue it to my address.

 

I followed up with them for details, and received scanned images of the 'fine', which was dated on the 15th of Feb.

 

The notice to hirer has arrived on the 9th of march, usual stuff offering reduced bill of £60 if paid within 14 days. 

 

I have not contacted them or appealed. 

 

Is the recommended course of action still to ignore, ignore, ignore

 

Have they started taking people to court yet?

 

I saw a number of threads stating that was the case, but the most recent I saw was from 6 months ago, I accept that could be due to poor searching on my part.  

 

I am a little concerned about taking this route as I tried that strategy over a Parking eye fine 10 or 12 years ago and they did actually take me to court and I was forced to pay over twice the original amount. 

 

Thanks in advance for your help. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

there are no court cases here for ukpc ever.for that location

 

it is not a fine and never can be.

 

shame you got caught by PE all those years ago, esp as they were even more unenforceable before pofa 2012 came in.

 

until or unless you ever get a letter of claim... you ignore everyone.

 

it would be nice if you fill in our sticky and scan uo bothsides of every letter to date

one mass pdf only please ]read upload

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

1 Date of the infringement 9th Feb

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] Sent to Enterprise on 15th Feb, reissued to my address on 9th march. 
 

[scan up BOTH SIDES as ONE PDF- follow the upload guide] please LEAVE IN LOCATION AND ALL DATES/TIMES/£'s

 

3 Date received Emailed by enterprise on 21st feb, Physical copy received on 13th march. 

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

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes, a single picture.
 

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] no
 

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up no
 

7 Who is the parking company? UKCPS

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Piccadilly gateway house, Did not enter car park, performed U turn and stopped near the doors for approximately 5 minutes.
 

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

IAS

Notice to keeper march 23.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

page 3 pdf has citation number

i hope enterprise havent charged you a fee either as it is NOT a traffic offence!

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

Well, it looks like Enterprise haven't supplied the fleecers with a copy of your hire agreement or your signed statement of liability because of "commercial or confidential reasons".

 

I believe the fleecers MUST supply these to you.

 

i don't know whether the letter supplied by Enterprise is enough for them to take action.

 

Any comment guys?

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 The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

which is why we asked for everything.

 

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

On 17/03/2023 at 15:07, Goddamnninjas said:

They have, twice actually as I apparently also found myself in a bus lane at some point in the evening, due to not knowing the area. £35 each. 

Well, presuming payment has been made via your card, go and do a chargeback.  As dx says, you have not committed  a traffic offence, you have received an invoice from a private company.

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

YES FOR BOTH.

 

chargeback to your Bank.

 

start a new thread for the bus lane offence, spill the beans

 

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

Yes Chargeback those two fees should have not been charged.

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

Thanks for the advice folks, I will be ignoring the UKCPS bill, and sending the appropriate letters imminently.

 

Regarding the chargeback, is it still my right to do this if my signed rental agreement covers any charges associated with my use of the vehicle? the charges were for admin in processing the letters from the two issuing bodies. 

 

I will upload it as soon as I can, which I now realise I should have done initially.  

 

As for the bus lane contravention, i had assumed this was not something readily challenged, as I probably did drive through one due to being unfamiliar with the area. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

speculative invoices are NOT A TRAFFIC or Parking Offence.

its contract law arguments on private land.

 

the bus lane PCN so be it, but NEVER confuse a private parking charge as the same.

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

This is the first time I have seen a parking company provide the documents necessary to satisfy PoFA when the car is on hire.

 

In addition to the Notice to Hirer that you obviously received, did you also receive

1] a copy of the original PCN that was sent to Enterprise

2] a copy of the hire agreement

3] a copy of the statement of liability signed by the hirer under hat agreement

The statement of liability required by sub-paragraph (2)(c) must—

(a)contain a statement by the hirer to the effect that the hirer acknowledges responsibility for any parking charges that may be incurred with respect to the vehicle while it is hired to the hirer;

(b)include an address given by the hirer (whether a residential, business or other address) as one at which documents may be given to the hirer;I

 

It is interesting that  on the original PCN to Enterprise that say that the PCN was issued because of a parking offence and yet the reason they tell Enterprise for the ticket was because of a No Stopping event.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi All

I've had my first follow up letter from UKCPS, which I will upload along with everything else I've had from them across this post and the next due to the file size limit. 

I have also drafted letters to send to the owner of Gateway house and UKCPS, Which I know I should have done sooner, there's been a lot of things going on the last few weeks and it slipped by me. 

 

For the owners

To whom It may concern

In relation to PCN GCL81975, issued by UKCPS acting on behalf of yourselves, for an alleged parking breach at Piccadilly gateway house. I am writing to confirm that I have no intention of paying this frankly exorbitant and made-up sum for breaking an imaginary parking contract.

Aside from the fact I parked for no longer than 5 minutes to get my bearings, due to being lost, the whole claim is a nonsense, which any judge would agree with.

Should your client wish to proceed with this farcical claim, it will be resisted robustly, and I’ll be seeking recovery of costs on the basis of unreasonable behaviour.

Yours sincerely

 

and UKCPS, essentially the same letter

 

 

To whom It may concern

In relation to PCN GCL81975, for an alleged parking breach Piccadilly gateway house. I am writing to confirm that I have no intention of paying this frankly exorbitant and made-up sum for breaking an imaginary contract with your client.

Aside from the fact I parked for no longer than 5 minutes to get my bearings, due to being lost, the whole claim is a nonsense, which any judge would agree with.

Should your client wish to proceed with this farcical claim, it will be resisted robustly, and I’ll be seeking recovery of costs on the basis of unreasonable behaviour.

Yours sincerely

 

Does this seem reasonable to you?

 

Thanks again for your help. 

 

 

UKPCS.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't send anything.

 

Read DX's advice in post number 2 again....

 

And start reading up on other threads, so you know what to expect.

 

AND, you've left the PCN number showing on the upload!

Edited by Nicky Boy

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 The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you do the chargeback??

 

You should not blindly be clicking anything nor sending anything!!!

 

Radio silence!!

 

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

DX,

 

To be fair, the hotlink on the word "ignore" in post 2 does seem to take you to some outdated advice?

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 The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

the ignore link is the forum software doing it not my advice.

 

if you go ready a few of the 50+ gateway Piccadilly threads here you would not be asking such questions.

youve been here more than a month ...cag isself help too not individual nursemaiding.

 

 

 

and go do that chargeback!

 

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

I did read several, and a number of times they had letters like the ones I posted, which were ones that you linked people to.

 

They may not have been the most recent, but that was what I saw people doing, hence I asked before sending anything.

 

I’m not just being stupid here, I followed something simple that you posted on several previous threads as advice for people to follow.

 

Also, if that ignore link is not your advice, then something needs changing on the forum so it doesn’t get added to your posts. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...