PCN - LDK Security Group Ltd, De Minimus |
PCN - LDK Security Group Ltd, De Minimus |
Sun, 28 Apr 2019 - 07:55
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,074 Joined: 17 Nov 2015 Member No.: 80,686 |
Hello everyone - a regular lurker, but not posted for ages!
A pal of mine has just had a PCN from the above. He stopped on private land to use the toilet and the PCN confirms the time as 1557 - 1602. Does this constitute de Minimus or is there a 'better' approach to be followed? Never heard of these people - seemingly local with an office in a Lok n Store building!! Any/all advice welcomed. |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sun, 28 Apr 2019 - 07:55
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Wed, 12 Jun 2019 - 12:21
Post
#41
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,074 Joined: 17 Nov 2015 Member No.: 80,686 |
QUOTE My bracket comments are the core of my next step - any thoughts please? What next step are you proposing? IAS allows submitting a response or redirect to an adjudicator. Just visited site - no CCTV/ANPR or any sort of camera/recording device whatsoever............ So they're telling porkies. Tell them to sod off if they are unwilling to pass an appeal over to the adjudication service that their signs and paperwork say they are a member of. Do it nicely though, and by email so that their complete correspondence trail is available in court on a claim for vexatious and unreasonable behaviour, and for telling porkies to misrepresent their status. Would it not be best to play-out the IAS charade first? |
|
|
Thu, 13 Jun 2019 - 13:38
Post
#42
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,074 Joined: 17 Nov 2015 Member No.: 80,686 |
Any further thoughts/advice before I respond to the IAS?
|
|
|
Thu, 13 Jun 2019 - 15:00
Post
#43
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
Don't respond to the IAS. When you lose, and you probably will, then it gives them something to wave at the judge if it gets to court
|
|
|
Fri, 14 Jun 2019 - 06:59
Post
#44
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
Noone appeals to the IAS unless its to test the waters. You WILL be rejected. THey g'tee to reject 85% of all appeals, regardless of merit.
|
|
|
Fri, 14 Jun 2019 - 20:29
Post
#45
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,074 Joined: 17 Nov 2015 Member No.: 80,686 |
Understood ,but the appeal is already in and been responded to. Would using ADR (however shallow) not play well in court?
|
|
|
Sat, 15 Jun 2019 - 05:35
Post
#46
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 8,582 Joined: 9 Feb 2006 Member No.: 4,813 |
Understood ,but the appeal is already in and been responded to. Would using ADR (however shallow) not play well in court? The whole thing here is that there is no adjudication service if they aren't a member of one of BPA or IPC. The signs and paperwork all say they are a member of IPC so any contractual basis they claim you agreed to would have been on the right to make an appeal to the IAS. It stands as a core term within that contractual agreement so prevention of that gives a right of rescission of contract. Try this: Sir, ref PCN .......... I am in receipt of your refusal of appeal and cannot understand why I am not afforded the right of independent adjudication as per the conditions of membership of the IPC shown on the signs at the location and also on your paperwork. Both of these state that you are a member of the IPC. Even if your claim otherwise has any merit, and I do not accept that it does, then mebership of the IPC with a right of adjudication via their appeals committee is a core term of the alleged contract. You are unable to offer that service and therefore are in breach of your contractual arrangement. The alleged contract is now rescinded and I expect to hear no more on this matter. Furtherance of your claim will result in the accrual of evidence of vexatious and unreasonable behaviour to be laid before any court that may hear any case you bring against me in the future. -------------------- The Asda shopping trolley parking ticket enthusiast
|
|
|
Sat, 15 Jun 2019 - 06:12
Post
#47
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,074 Joined: 17 Nov 2015 Member No.: 80,686 |
Understood ,but the appeal is already in and been responded to. Would using ADR (however shallow) not play well in court? The whole thing here is that there is no adjudication service if they aren't a member of one of BPA or IPC. The signs and paperwork all say they are a member of IPC so any contractual basis they claim you agreed to would have been on the right to make an appeal to the IAS. It stands as a core term within that contractual agreement so prevention of that gives a right of rescission of contract. Try this: Sir, ref PCN .......... I am in receipt of your refusal of appeal and cannot understand why I am not afforded the right of independent adjudication as per the conditions of membership of the IPC shown on the signs at the location and also on your paperwork. Both of these state that you are a member of the IPC. Even if your claim otherwise has any merit, and I do not accept that it does, then mebership of the IPC with a right of adjudication via their appeals committee is a core term of the alleged contract. You are unable to offer that service and therefore are in breach of your contractual arrangement. The alleged contract is now rescinded and I expect to hear no more on this matter. Furtherance of your claim will result in the accrual of evidence of vexatious and unreasonable behaviour to be laid before any court that may hear any case you bring against me in the future. Sorry to be slow here - the IPC/IAS have accepted their/my/our case so - by inference - LDK either were a member or have conveninetly reinstated their membership. So, I can't claim I've been refused adjudication as that's already in train? |
|
|
Sat, 6 Jul 2019 - 10:11
Post
#48
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,074 Joined: 17 Nov 2015 Member No.: 80,686 |
Unsurprisingly, the IAS 'legally qualified' adjudicator has rejected ny appeal. Response as follows:
The Operator has provided evidence of the signs at the site, which make it clear any driver parking without clearly displaying a valid permit in the windscreen, will be issued with the parking charge notice. The Appellant claims that the Operator has written to the owner, who cannot be liable and has never requested their details from DVLA. There is no evidence to support this claim. The Appellant is incorrect to say the contract may only be with the landowner. The driver is entitled to a reasonable amount of time to read the terms and display a permit, there is no evidence the seven minutes allowed in this instance was not reasonable. There is no evidence regarding the issues raised with POPLA and the IPC. The Operator has provided photographic evidence of the Appellant's vehicle parked on the land they manage, and without a permit displayed. The appeal is dismissed. This patently ignored the basis of the appeal (of course). Advice sought and welcomed please, but I assume I can either demand a POPLA reference to make a 'real' appeal or simply ignore and await their next move. Thoughts please! |
|
|
Sat, 6 Jul 2019 - 11:38
Post
#49
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
How will you get a popla ref? They're IPC yes?
There are no more steps. |
|
|
Sat, 6 Jul 2019 - 13:17
Post
#50
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,074 Joined: 17 Nov 2015 Member No.: 80,686 |
How will you get a popla ref? They're IPC yes? There are no more steps. According to their website, they are: http://www.ldkgroup.co.uk/appeals-procedure.php |
|
|
Sat, 6 Jul 2019 - 15:56
Post
#51
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
As said they are IPC and cannot offer POPLA. Out of interest take a copy of that web page, send it to them and ask when you can gave your chance to appeal to POPA, as advertised on the enclosed page.
|
|
|
Sun, 7 Jul 2019 - 07:33
Post
#52
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,074 Joined: 17 Nov 2015 Member No.: 80,686 |
As said they are IPC and cannot offer POPLA. Out of interest take a copy of that web page, send it to them and ask when you can gave your chance to appeal to POPA, as advertised on the enclosed page. My thoughts entirely - shuold they be daft enough to pursue through the CC, I can then show all ADR options have been (attempted to be) followed. I can guess the response though!!.............. Will keep you posted. |
|
|
Sun, 7 Jul 2019 - 10:33
Post
#53
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 8,582 Joined: 9 Feb 2006 Member No.: 4,813 |
As said they are IPC and cannot offer POPLA. Out of interest take a copy of that web page, send it to them and ask when you can gave your chance to appeal to POPA, as advertised on the enclosed page. My thoughts entirely - should they be daft enough to pursue through the CC, I can then show all ADR options have been (attempted to be) followed. I can guess the response though!!.............. Will keep you posted. The formation of a contract is done at the location where a "meeting of minds" is. That is for instance, when you enter a car park and the sign offers you to park on payment of a sum of money subject to conditions that you either accept by continuing to park, or leaving the site. It won't matter a toss what their website says. The wording on it cannot form part of the offer as the driver knew nothing about it prior to visiting the site. So, using the POPLA argument won't be well accepted, unless the signs had similar wording. -------------------- The Asda shopping trolley parking ticket enthusiast
|
|
|
Thu, 11 Jul 2019 - 13:28
Post
#54
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,074 Joined: 17 Nov 2015 Member No.: 80,686 |
As said they are IPC and cannot offer POPLA. Out of interest take a copy of that web page, send it to them and ask when you can gave your chance to appeal to POPA, as advertised on the enclosed page. E-mail reply received as follows: 'As previously advised we do not work with the BPA therefore you cannot appeal with POPLA. As you appeal has now been rejected by both us and the IPC (IAS) we cannot look into this matter any further. ' I've gone back asking whay their website says otherwise (for no reason than bloody-mindedness). Unless anyone suggests otherwise I'll leave the ball in their court? |
|
|
Thu, 11 Jul 2019 - 19:41
Post
#55
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,124 Joined: 8 Feb 2013 Member No.: 59,842 |
QUOTE Unless anyone suggests otherwise I'll leave the ball in their court? That's all you can do. Given their removal from the IPC AOS, their foundation for mounting a court claim is weakened. Plus, I can't see Gladstones wanting to get involved on their behalf, given their inextricable links with the IPC/IAS. |
|
|
Wed, 13 Nov 2019 - 11:18
Post
#56
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,074 Joined: 17 Nov 2015 Member No.: 80,686 |
Old news now, but 6 months down the road, we've heard nothing from these people. OK, they have in theory 6 years to chase the debt, but given the incompetence exhibited in this case, I reckon it's unlikely.
Sorry it's not very interesting, but I know how frustrating it can ben when folk seek advice and don't close out the issue!! Thanks to everyone who contributed. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 00:00 |