PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

incomplete location on PCN - help please !
blobbywall
post Wed, 17 Oct 2018 - 15:15
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 17 Oct 2018
Member No.: 100,446



Can you help please ?

Got sent a PCN from CPM stating Location only as 'Station Approach' .

No postcode, no town, no number, no other qualification of the location of supposed offence.

i've appealed to CPM -rejected of course - and have read that it's pointless going to the next level of appeal - iAS .
But CPM have repeated the offer of a reduced fee of £60 rather than £100 if paid by 19th Oct. ( is that a sign of weakness on their part ?).

if i ignore and get taken to court what are my chances of defence on that basis alone ?

Or just take the offer and pay up now ? Want to fight but not if it's pointless..
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 14)
Advertisement
post Wed, 17 Oct 2018 - 15:15
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Redivi
post Wed, 17 Oct 2018 - 15:28
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,029
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Sounds like Parking Control Management UK Ltd - Station Approach, Hayes and Harlington

It's a very well known honeypot
The operative lurks under the entrance to High Point Village and photographs cars dropping off passengers

The signs are very high and with small print - none at all on the left hand side of the road

They've taken a number of cases to court and lost most of them

Their original contract with the land-owner didn't allow them to enforce stops of less than ten minutes
In theory it's been updated but the letter confirming this is has no date and is on the wrong headed notepaper

The land was purchased from Network Rail and has a restrictive covenant
It would be interesting to know if it says that the owner must provide access to the station
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Wed, 17 Oct 2018 - 17:40
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,287
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



QUOTE
if i ignore and get taken to court what are my chances of defence on that basis alone ?
If it;s PCM then your defence would be much more than this alone, for a start their PCNs are almost always predatory (swooping to issue a penalty within 2 minutes flat is their usual modus operandi).

Never seen anyone manage to lose in court v PCM on any forum, so your chances are 99% likely that you would win, if you got forum help. No risk, no CCJ as long as you update the scammer firm if you move house, the avoid the horrible experience of a later secret CCJ against an old address coming back to haunt you. Happens too often, so keep the address updated if you move.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blobbywall
post Wed, 17 Oct 2018 - 21:17
Post #4


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 17 Oct 2018
Member No.: 100,446



Thanks guys but no Redivi sorry it wasn't that Station Approach.

And no SchoolRunMum it wasnt PCM I'm afraid but CPM as stated - Car Park Management - part of ICP and using IAS as an independent (ha ha !) appeal process.

I just need advice on whether the spurious location is good enough in court for them to get judgement against me ?

This post has been edited by blobbywall: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 15:18
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Wed, 17 Oct 2018 - 21:49
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,287
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



QUOTE
CPM have repeated the offer of a reduced fee of £60 rather than £100 if paid by 19th Oct. ( is that a sign of weakness on their part ?).

Normal for these firms, that's a template reply, nothing to do with your case. And clueless victims and idiots actually pay, would you believe (but that will NOT be you...will it?).


QUOTE
it wasnt PCM I'm afraid but CPM as stated - Car Park Management - part of ICP and using IAS as an independent (ha ha !) appeal process.
PCM are also in the IPC so why do you think CPM are any different?

Do you actually mean UKCPM, who are mentioned on endless threads and beaten in court regularly?

The advice is the same for any IPC firm.

Ignore them unless they try a claim. I think you have missed the fact people win on parking forums, and not on little things like the location on the PCN. On MSE I have been keeping figures and sinec 2017, 99% of hundreds of people coached on how to defend these scams, have won. You only have to pay if you lose in court, and it's as rare as hen's teeth here and with no risk, no CCJ by defending. And all cases are where there were signs up, and usually where the car was bang to rights if you believe the trash excuses the PPCs have for issuing these scam PCNs.

You are barking up the wrong tree about what your defence would hinge upon, but your chances are now very high indeed. Here I'd say the successes seen are on a par with MSE although I haven't kept records and don't think anyone else has either.

So yes your chances of wining are 99% and I say that confidently without knowing any details!

Tell us more and stop itching to FUND THE SCAM AND SPONSOR THE NEXT PCNS. People who pay after coming to these forums are IMHO guilty of joining the scammers.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blobbywall
post Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 00:57
Post #6


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 17 Oct 2018
Member No.: 100,446



Ha ha thanks SchoolRunMum.
No i'm certainly not itching to fund these scumpanies ! biggrin.gif

The reg plate of my car is also barely recognisable of my car as taken from an oblique angle . The driver had parked there regularly in the past oblivious to any signs. Not much more i can give you.

Appealed to CPM on the basis of spurious location but they have of course turned that down. it seems appealing to iAS is a waste of time so prepared to take on the debt collectors and court etc if a strong chance of winning.

i'm concerned though about you saying 'You are barking up the wrong tree about what your defence would hinge upon'.
i'd have thought that an accurate and precise location would be essential for them to prove an offence in court. No ?
So what would be my defence ?



This post has been edited by blobbywall: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 15:59
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 08:46
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,681
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



And edit your posts so that the identity of the driver cannot be inferred. Use "the driver....." etc.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Churchmouse
post Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 09:57
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,006
Joined: 30 Jun 2008
From: Landan
Member No.: 20,731



QUOTE (blobbywall @ Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 01:57) *
i'm concerned though about you saying 'You are barking up the wrong tree about what your defence would hinge upon'.
i'd have thought that an accurate and precise location would be essential for them to prove an offence in court. No ?
So what would be my defence ?

The location the vehicle was parked must be specified on a POFA 2012-compliant NtK, but if the PPC knows who was driving the PPC does not need to rely on POFA. (Have you appealed as the driver, or as the keeper?) If they know the name and address of the driver, in court the PPC would only have to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the driver parked in a location under their control and breached that contract--and they probably have photos showing this. It isn't necessary to provide a precise location where that alleged breach of contract occurred--at least not now. If you request, they will probably provide that information (and you seem to already know where it was).

So, no "get out of jail free", but you can still fight this conventionally.

--Churchmouse

[Edit: multi-tasking error...]

This post has been edited by Churchmouse: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 17:26
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blobbywall
post Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 13:29
Post #9


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 17 Oct 2018
Member No.: 100,446



Thanks Churchmouse and Ostel

i have made no inference as to the driver in my appeal (worded below) nor shall i.
Still curious what the defence would be though ? (if not the location).

"I am writing to formally challenge the above Parking Charge Notice.
On 4th September 2018 my vehicle was issued with a Parking Charge Notice for the
reason of 'parked in a manner whereby the driver became liable for a parking charge'
In accordance with the Road Traffic Act 1991, my challenge is on the basis that the
contravention did not occur. The notice does not clearly state the address where
this purported offence took place nor does the photograph within the notice
clearly indicate the position of the car with respect to such offence if any.
Evidence to this effect is within the notice itself.
For this reason I look forward to receiving notification within 28 days that the Parking
Charge Notice has been cancelled.
This appeal will also be sent by post."
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 13:34
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,425
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Excep-t, of course, you have told the entire world who drove

REpeatedly, on here.

So, EDIT YOUR DAMNED POSTs. NOW. If youre not sure what to do, read other threads.

So as pointed out

1) If they dont know the driver, tehn POFA2012 no keeper liability as *at least* no locationspecified

2) you then add in signage, authority to operate, etc.

No idea why you mentioen RTA. Pointless. PRivate land doesnt care about it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 13:34
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,029
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



What does the Road Traffic Act 1991 have to do with anything ?

The right of a private parking company to recover payment from the keeper is provided by the ironically named Protection of Freedoms Act 2012
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blobbywall
post Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 16:10
Post #12


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 17 Oct 2018
Member No.: 100,446



Ok thanks Nosferatu/Redivi

Yes i used the wrong template - should refer to POFA not RTA.

Difficult though to add reference to signage when i don't know the location ! laugh.gif laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 16:17
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,425
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



The driver does, and you know who that is...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Churchmouse
post Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 17:43
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,006
Joined: 30 Jun 2008
From: Landan
Member No.: 20,731



QUOTE (blobbywall @ Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 14:29) *
Thanks Churchmouse and Ostel

i have made no inference as to the driver in my appeal (worded below) nor shall i.
Still curious what the defence would be though ? (if not the location).

"I am writing to formally challenge the above Parking Charge Notice.
On 4th September 2018 my vehicle was issued with a Parking Charge Notice for the
reason of 'parked in a manner whereby the driver became liable for a parking charge'
In accordance with the Road Traffic Act 1991, my challenge is on the basis that the
contravention did not occur. The notice does not clearly state the address where
this purported offence took place nor does the photograph within the notice
clearly indicate the position of the car with respect to such offence if any.
Evidence to this effect is within the notice itself.
For this reason I look forward to receiving notification within 28 days that the Parking
Charge Notice has been cancelled.
This appeal will also be sent by post."

Okay, then. If you have not identified or implied the identification of the driver, then yes, the "vague locus" in the NtK may not be in compliance with POFA 2012 (the spurious grounds you used in your appeal are irrelevant if this gets to court). It is impossible to predict with certainty what a court might say (and we don't know how vague/erroneous this is), but there is a chance that a court could decide that POFA had not been complied with. You should probably collect the evidence now, such as photos of the signs at the location where the vehicle was parked (assuming you can find it!), and keep copies of all of the PPC correspondence.

As this is IPC, there is nothing for you to do unless and until you receive court papers or a "letter before claim" from the Claimant or their lawyers. Retain copies of all debt collector letters, but do not respond to them. They have six years to file a court claim...

--Churchmouse
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 20:44
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,287
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



Edit your other thread too. They need merging:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=123509

Though it looked familiar when I saw the other one!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Saturday, 17th November 2018 - 14:08
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.