Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello dx100uk, After months of waiting for a response I finally got a reply and I must say it was the worst 4 months of my life the - fear of the unknown. So, they wrote back and said I was in the wrong BUT on this occasion they  would not take action but keep me on file for the next 12 months. It. was the biggest relief of my life a massive weight lifted -  I would like to thank you and the team for all your support
    • I have contacted the sofa shop who are sending someone out tomorrow to inspect the furniture. I suspect if anything a replacement will be offered although I would prefer a refund. Few photos of the wear in the material, this is how it was delivered.  
    • Yup, for goodness sake she needs to stop paying right now, DCA's are powerless, as .  Is it showing on their credit file? Best to use Check my file. All of the above advice is excellent, definitely SAR the loan company as soon as possible.
    • Hi all, I am wandering if this is appealable. It has already been through a challenge on the Islington website and the it was rejected. Basically there was a suspended bay sign on a post on Gee st which was obscured by a Pizza van. The suspension was for 3 bays outside 47 Gee st. I parked outside/between 47 & 55 Gee st. I paid via the phone system using a sign a few meters away from my car. When I got back to the car there was a PCN stuck to the windscreen which I had to dry out before I could read it due to rain getting into the plastic sticky holder.  I then appealed using the Islington website which was then rejected the next day. I have attached a pdf of images that I took and also which the parking officer took. There are two spaces in front of the van, one of which had a generator on it the other was a disabled space. I would count those as 3 bays? In the first image circled in red is the parking sign I read. In the 2nd image is the suspension notice obscured by the van. I would have had to stand in the middle of the road to read this, in fact that's where I was standing when I took the photo. I have pasted the appeal and rejection below. Many thanks for looking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is my appeal statement: As you can see from the image attached (image 1) I actually paid £18.50 to park my car in Gee st. I parked the car at what I thought was outside 55 Gee st as seen in image 2 attached. When I read the PCN issued it stated there was a parking suspension. There was no suspension notice on the sign that I used to call the payment service outside number 55 Gee st. I looked for a suspension notice and eventually found one which was obscured by a large van and generator parked outside 47 Gee st. As seen in images 3 and 4 attached. I am guessing the parking suspension was to allow the Van to park and sell Pizza during the Clerkenwell design week. I was not obstructing the use or parking of the van, in fact the van was obstructing the suspension notice which meant I could not read or see it without prior knowledge it was there. I would have had to stand in the road to see it endangering myself as I had to to take images to illustrate the hidden notice. As there was no intention to avoid a parking charge and the fact the sign was not easily visible I would hope this challenge can be accepted. Many thanks.   This is the text from the rejection: Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a suspended bay or space. I note from your correspondence that there was no suspension notice on the sign that you used to call the payment serve outside number 55 Gee Street. I acknowledge your comments, however, your vehicle was parked in a bay which had been suspended. The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief. The signs relating to this suspension were sited in accordance with the regulations. Upon reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO's) images and notes, I am satisfied that sufficient signage was in place and that it meets statutory requirements. Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted. I acknowledge that your vehicle possessed a RingGo session at the time, however, this does not authorize parking within a suspended bay. Suspension restrictions are established to facilitate specific activities like filming or construction, therefore, we anticipate the vehicle owner to relocate the vehicle from the suspended area until the specified date and time when the suspension concludes. Leaving a vehicle unattended for any period of time within a suspended bay, effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN. Finally, the vehicle was left parked approximately 5 metres away from the closest time plate notice. It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they park in a suitable parking place and check all signs and road markings prior to leaving their vehicle parked in contravention. It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times. With that being said, I would have to inform you, your appeal has been rejected at this stage. Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN: You should now choose one of the following options: Pay the penalty charge. We will accept the discounted amount of £65.00 in settlement of this matter, provided it is received by 10 June 2024. After that date, the full penalty charge of £130.00 will be payable. Or Wait for a Notice to Owner (NtO) to be issued to the registered keeper of the vehicle, who is legally responsible for paying the penalty charge. Any further correspondence received prior to the NtO being issued may not be responded to. The NtO gives the recipient the right to make formal representations against the penalty charge. If we reject those representations, there will be the right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.   Gee st pdf.pdf
    • Nationwide Building Society has launched an 18 month fixed-rate account paying 5.5%.View the full article
  • 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

UKPC parking invoice - tesco Faraday retail park,Coatbank Street, Coatbridge. ML5 3SQ scotland


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4794 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

No, based on what everyone else recommends going through numerous of these, they suggest that replying to them will just get them to send you more and more crap, whereas ignoring it seems to have the same outcome but quicker and far less effort on your behalf.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I have the "Final Reminder" now that looks like a utility bill..

 

What is REALLY funny is that it actually says you don't have to pay on it! Ok, not directly, but if you read the first two points it makes about why they sent the "charge certificate". (Because it's like winning a prize)

 

1. This Notice to Owner has been sent to you, as the registered owner/keeper of the vehicle because a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) was issued to the vehicle as shown above and to date full payment has not been received.

 

2. The driver was allowed 14 days to pay a discounted sum. Any sum already paid, was received outsite the discount period.

 

blaa blaa blaa

 

So, they are actually admitting in black and white that the notice is sent to the owner/keeper, but the charge is for the driver ;)

 

Failure to pay the increased amount will result in UK Parking Control Ltd (yay!) forwarding the outstanding debt to a Debt Recovery Agency where you may incur additional costs.

 

I love the word "may".. it runs along side those other great words of "should", "might", and "probably not".

 

Also why does Debt Recovery Agency need Captial Letters. May Be They Want To Highlight A Threat Without Being Blatently Obvious About It?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a ticket from Parkforce "The UK parking enforcement agency" in August 2007 because my vehicle was parked in a private car park.

 

Wrote to them and did not dispute that the car was there but stated i was not the driver please contact him.

 

A month later another letter stating i had not paid and the fine was increasing from £60 to £85, i wrote back enclosing original letter telling them contact the driver.

Two weeks later they then wrote back stating "I refer to your recently issued parking ticket and subsequent appeal" with a lot more blurb on it so i wrote back enclosing a copy of my original letters and stating i was not appealing against anything please see enclosed original letters and contact the driver.

 

A month later and another "you must not ignore this notice" letter arrived and the "fine" had increased from £85 to £135 because of administration charges, again i wrote back enclosing copies of all original letters stating the same thing, contact the driver.

 

Then three months later a letter from a debt collection agency demanding payment, threatening court, bailiffs, increased costs and other such nonsense, i wrote back to them advising that the "fine" is in dispute and to refer it back to the issuer.

 

That was the last I've heard up to now, the last letter, from the collection agency was about three months ago so from August 2007 to August 2008 I've had about four letters from the parking agency and one from a debt collector.

 

If you get any of these tickets i would reply to them as this gives you proof that you have responded and not just ignored them but i would definitely not pay them a penny, and don't worry about their official looking letters, anyone can write an official looking letter.

 

It isn't worth the paper its written on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now you've replies though, you've wasted time and energy and you're a hooked fish :D

 

They know their letters are reaching somebody, so be prepared for a fair few letters yet!

 

As you've demonstrated, appeal letters are completely disregarded.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget that those Debt Collection Agencies (Note the unnecessary capitals) don't have any right to obtain money from you either. They are NOT court baliffs. Usually they are just some firm run by the parking firms brother or uncle or something.

 

You don't have to reply because there is nothing to say.

 

I'm not going to send them anything with mine. I'll keep everyone posted with anything sent through, and will finally post up a list of letters they will send others in chronicle order.

 

I'm sadly getting excited about which letter I'll get next :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that these "people" can get your name and address! For £2.50?? Interesting that the DVLA sells your details. Are they not in breach of DPA/ NEGLIGENCE! The instances when PPC will request another PPC to "electronically" check RK details with DVLA.

My view sue the f%%king DVLA for 10million for "sending" the wolf to the door, helping them harass and humiliate the RK!! And not the driver, who is responsible!

Rant over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

latest update : have recieved a NOTICE OF INTENDED LEGAL ACTION from Graham White solicitors which is the trading name of Michael Sobell solicitors.

 

The fee has now gone up tp £142.25 and they are informing me if i do not reply within 7 days they may instruct Baliffs to attend my property.

 

i have so far ignored 2 letters that i have recieved and this being the 3rd do i still ignore them or write to them? and has anyone else recieved letters from this GRAHAM WHITE SOLICITORS trading name for MICHEAL SOBELL?

Link to post
Share on other sites

We know 'Graham White' very well.

 

Expect two letters before they give up and go away.

 

Bailiffs (or more correctly, debt collectors) won't turn up. Without a court order after you've been to court, lost and refused to pay, they have no more powers than you or I and can merely knock on your door and ask for your money.

 

It's a waste of time and they know it. Unless you live a couple of streets away from the debt collectors. nobody will be coming round.

Link to post
Share on other sites

GRAHAM WHITE sounds familiar..

 

I love the letter count :D

 

"INTENDED" - They love to, but can't.. ..Also a bailiff must be legally authorised to collect the debt on behalf of the creditor. The authority is normally known as a 'warrant', or 'warrant of execution' if the bailiff is recovering money owed under a county court judgment. They can't take you to court without a legal reason to do so, and they don't have one, so they won't!

 

If you are in arrears (which this company is pretending you are), creditors will sometimes send representatives to your home to try and negotiate repayments with you. These people might be called 'counsellors', 'collectors' or 'advisers'. They do not have powers to enter your home and seize your goods.

Edited by Yay4UKPC
Link to post
Share on other sites

ok so basically i should just carry on ignoring them and keep the letters they send, if anyone comes over just say the fine is in dispute!

 

 

god i hope no one comes round :(

 

It's highly unlikely you'll see anyone. They can't afford to send people to houses when they can't collect money. The "collector" will usually get a percentage of the collected funds, and they won't want to waste their time chasing cases that would result in nothing to collect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok so basically i should just carry on ignoring them and keep the letters they send, if anyone comes over just say the fine is in dispute!

 

 

god i hope no one comes round :(

 

It's not a 'fine' - don't call it a fine, only courts issue 'fines', it is a penalty charge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

latest update : have recieved a NOTICE OF INTENDED LEGAL ACTION from Graham White solicitors which is the trading name of Michael Sobell solicitors.

 

The fee has now gone up tp £142.25 and they are informing me if i do not reply within 7 days they may instruct Baliffs to attend my property.

 

i have so far ignored 2 letters that i have recieved and this being the 3rd do i still ignore them or write to them? and has anyone else recieved letters from this GRAHAM WHITE SOLICITORS trading name for MICHEAL SOBELL?

let us see a picture of the letter - suitably washed of your personal details.

sounds like excellent grounds for a stiff complaint to the Solicitors Regulation Authority. I can help with the text after seeing the letter. probably many statutes broken plus the solicitor's code.

Link to post
Share on other sites

UKPC what a [problem], I also received a ticket reason = Vehicle parked in unauthorised area!

 

I followed the information on the sneeky sign, including the information printed in black with a handy blood red background "All Patrons Must Display A Parking Ticket" but still received a fine of £80 reduced to £40 if paid within 14 days. Nothing was on my Windscreen to say I had been ticketed it just arrived in the post.

 

After looking into my case and sourcing some expert advice from a friendly county court Judge whom I happen to know, I have decided NOT TO PAY, but instead I have informed Welwyn Hatfield Times, the Local council and also an local MP to investigate the the situation. DONT PAY THEM, THEY CANT DO ANYTHING, THEY CAN ONLY DO THE DRIVER, THEY HAVE TO PROVE WHO WAS DRIVING, the resigistered keeper dosn't have to give the details of the driver. NO Baliffs can come round without an COURT ORDER its all tatics to make you pay. I had a ticket, I was legally Parked there photo evidence shows nothing just my number plate. Today I have sent them a letter stating that I do not intend to pay and to bypass the baliff action and proceed directly to court. I'll let you know.

 

Don't feel intimated by these thugs, Stand your ground! Any Elderly person would feel scared into paying, it's up to us younger ones to protect others less able to fight them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Everybody,

 

Just joined the forum and have read many of the posts regarding UKPC, so firstly thanks to everyone I don't feel alone anymore! I have been in dispute with UKPC and have sent them letters stating the usual, I have now recieved a letter from 'Rossendales Collect' which states the following...

Dear...

We have today been instructed by Uk Parking Control Limited to take action against you for the recovery of the Penalty Charge Notice issued to you for unauthorised parking. Failure to make payment within SEVEN days from the date on this letter may result in Uk Parking Control Limited applying to the County Court for a judgement against you, which you may incur further costs increasing the balance owed.

Any Court judgment/decree lasts for 6 years and will severely affect your ability to obtain credit in the future.

It is in your interest to make full payment immediately or contact us with your proposals for payment.

 

YOU ARE ADVISED NOT TO IGNORE THIS LETTER

 

Signed by Sue Bridge 'legal Department'

 

So there it is, I'm not going to pay and I'll let you all know if I get any more letters.

 

Cheers

 

Finefight

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Everybody,

 

We have today been instructed by Uk Parking Control Limited to take action against you for the recovery of the Penalty Charge Notice issued to you for unauthorised parking.

 

 

Recovery???

 

Recovery means 'to get back', they never had it in the first place so how can they get it back :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4794 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...