Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • regarding 5. do I mention the CCA 1974 act or just leave is as 'section 78 request'  ?   Thanks you.
    • ive just received this reply this morning, no mention of the disability discrimination? should i reply and ask them why they are ignoring it?:   Thank you for your email.   I would like to clarify some details for you and reassure you that the fine has been looked into thoroughly from our side, from this it was confirmed that as the fine appeal has been denied and it was raised to IAS who also denied the appeal, as a result of this we would be unable to over turn this decision.   I understand this may not be the outcome you had hoped for, and I am sorry for any inconvenience caused.    Kind regards, Lauren
    • Well the PH, although lengthy, (3 hrs) went well. Claim in time and only dropped one of the seven claims as it was unnecessary. The Judge gave great advice and commended us on our presentation of the claim, have to thank Valla for that one. Now for a bit of a breather before the 5 day hearing later this year. Thanks for all the advice and steers to date. 
    • to note: the claimant has given a 'reference' number. It is 11 digits long. Regarding 2 - do I even say I have had dealings with Barclays Bank UK PLC ?   Also the 'particulars of claim' are not in paragraphs on the claim form. It is just one chunk of text. With sentences. Do I refer to these as paragraphs ? As I have in the above defence.
    • 1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The claimant even fails to refer to an agreement number. Therefore 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.   2. Paragraph 2 is noted. Whilst I have had dealings with Barclays Bank UK PLC given that claimant fails to refer to an account number I am unaware what agreement the claimant wishes to rely upon.   3.Paragraph 3 is noted although without knowledge of which account the claimant refers to I can neither admit or deny the receipt of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87(1) CCA1974 being received.   4. Paragraph 4 is noted but again as above I am not aware of what agreement the assignment refers to.   5. On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim from PRA group (UK) Limited by way of a CPR 31:14 request sent via 1st class recorded post on 06/06/2024 and further to the above I sent PRA group UK Portfolios Ltd a section 78 request via 1st class recorded post on 06/06/2024.   To date, PRA Group Uk Portfolios Ltd or PRA group (UK) Limited are yet to furnish me with the requested information  and therefore prevented from enforcing the alleged agreement.   6.Therefore with the court’s permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to evidence and :   a) show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; b) show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for; c) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice pursuant to Sec 87 (1) CCA1974. d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   8. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

MET ANPR PCN - occupants left carpark - Appealed - Starbucks (closed) 346 SouthGate Park, Stansted, CM24 1PY

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 167 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


Start your own new thread

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



Recommended Posts

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

(must be received within 14 days from the Incident)

 1. Date of the infringement 21st October 2023

2. Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 12th December 2023

3. Date received 13th or 14th December 2023

4. Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] Not that I can see

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? MET Parking Services

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Stanstead Southgate Park

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



Hi all, 

I submitted an appeal shortly after receiving the PCN, and did not confirm that it was myself who was driving. I used the standard template to reply to these notices I found on this site. 

I have today received the attached reply (Appeal 1-5). 

How would you suggest I now proceed? 



NTK+Appeal reply+photos.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

moved to the private parking forum.

 a private parking company are not s local authority and cannot issue fines only pointless speculative invoices

please read upload and merge all those files into one mass pdf in date order using pdf merge site.

next time never ever appeal..:frusty:

thread title updated

the NTK is WAY!!!!!!!!! out of time.


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 MET ANPR PCN - occupants left carpark - Appealed - Starbucks (closed) 346 SouthGate Park, Stansted, CM24 1PY

Hey, thanks for the quick reply, and apologies for posting in the wrong place. 

I can't see how to edit my original post, but I've merged the files as you requested in this comment. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a car park well known to us.  To be blunt - it is a scam site.  It has been exposed as a scam site on national television.

MET don't know who the driver is.  They can only go after the keeper by law if the invoice arrives within 14 days, which it hasn't.  So they have no-one to pursue ...

... that's unless you outed the driver in your appeal.  Did you?

It's an own goal, but not fatal, if you did, but we still need to know.

From what you wrote you didn't.  Can we see a copy of what you wrote in your appeal please?

We could do with some help from you.


 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

The PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 which governs the private parking companies because it was sent out late. 

All that means is that the charge cannot be transferred from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now responsible to pay the PCN and as thousands of motorists are legally allowed to drive your car they will have a difficult job proving who the driver was. So well done for not revealing who was driving.

I notice that you did not post your appeal to Met. it would help if we could see what you said.

The sign they showed looks as if the font size is too small plus there appears to be too much information on the sign.  Font size is important as it is the basis of forming a contract between the motorist and the rogues.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies. 

I had to submit the appeal through an online portal, so don't have a copy of what I sent to hand. I used a template appeal letter for parking charges that I found on this site, but I can't find it! 

Again, following advise on this site, I did not name myself as the driver, only the keeper. 

So at this point, what do I need to do, if anything? Would the advice be to no longer communicate with MET, and ignore any correspondence? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't think we had a template appeal letter, as we don't think it's the way to go. But you did the right thing by not outing yourself.

The advice is to keep correspondence but if you get a Letter of/before Claim, then you need to put together a snotty letter that we will help you to refine. If you're not sure if a letter that you get is a LOC, come back and check with us.

And if you move, then you probably need to let Met know in case they try to go behind your back.


Illegitimi non carborundum




Link to post
Share on other sites

This Cagger got on to the organ grinder and got the charge cancelled.  Have a read of the whole thread.  This is the road to go down  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/462450-met-anpr-pcn-occupants-left-southgate-premises-appeal-refused-starbucksmcdonalds-southgate-park-stansted-airport-cm24-1py-cancelled-by-euro-garages/

We could do with some help from you.


 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

Posted (edited)

for now, I'll stop contact with MET, and if they send another letter I can take things further. 

In the meantime, I'll try reaching out to Euro Garages like another user did to try and get the ticket cancelled. 

Edited by dx100uk
unnecessary previous post quote removed
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...