PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Euro Car Park Letter received this week, Do I still ignore invoice that has been clearly displayed?
emma84
post Fri, 18 Mar 2011 - 16:02
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Member No.: 45,226



I recieved a letter from Euro Car Parks asking me to pay a charge of £70 for overstaying at a Morrisons Car Park in Northampton. The letter is dated 14-03-11 but arrived on the 16th. they say if I do not pay the charge within 7 days of the date on the letter it will increase to £90. And if this is ignored further action will be taken. I basically have until Monday to pay the £70 charge.

I've never received a letter like this, and find it rather unfair and reasonable that they are demanding such a large sum of money and that they are trying to scare me into paying it. I am a student and only earn £60 a week, so I cannot afford to pay this.

I have read in many places on this forum to just ignore the letters. However, I knew the time limit when I parked and didn't get back to my car in time. So that is totally my fault.

I've heard that they do not prosecute and have very little authority on demanding people to pay these charges, is this true?

Even though I overstayed on the parking time, should I still ignore the letter?

I'm sorry if this issue has come up before, I did try to search for it but could ot find the anwer I was looking for.


Thanks for any help.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 8)
Advertisement
post Fri, 18 Mar 2011 - 16:02
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
axeman
post Fri, 18 Mar 2011 - 16:09
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,332
Joined: 10 Mar 2007
From: Midlands
Member No.: 11,071



QUOTE (emma84 @ Fri, 18 Mar 2011 - 16:02) *
I recieved a letter from Euro Car Parks asking me to pay a charge of £70 for overstaying at a Morrisons Car Park in Northampton. The letter is dated 14-03-11 but arrived on the 16th. they say if I do not pay the charge within 7 days of the date on the letter it will increase to £90. And if this is ignored further action will be taken. I basically have until Monday to pay the £70 charge.

I've never received a letter like this, and find it rather unfair and reasonable that they are demanding such a large sum of money and that they are trying to scare me into paying it. I am a student and only earn £60 a week, so I cannot afford to pay this.

I have read in many places on this forum to just ignore the letters. However, I knew the time limit when I parked and didn't get back to my car in time. So that is totally my fault.

I've heard that they do not prosecute and have very little authority on demanding people to pay these charges, is this true?

Even though I overstayed on the parking time, should I still ignore the letter?

I'm sorry if this issue has come up before, I did try to search for it but could ot find the anwer I was looking for.


Thanks for any help.


ok no problem, our advice is to ignore any PPC (Euro Carparks) letters and do not contact them.

Euro are a tame bunch and will send threatening letters then go away, relax and forget them


--------------------
NOTICE The content of this post and of any replies to it may assist in or relate to the formulation of strategy tactics etcetera in a legal action. This post and any replies to it should therefore be assumed to be legally privileged and therefore must not be disclosed, copied, quoted, discussed, used or referred to outside of the PePiPoo forum on which it was originally posted additionally it must not be disclosed, copied, quoted, discussed, used or referred to by any person or organisation other than a member of PePiPoo appropriately paid up and in full compliance with the PePiPoo terms of use for the forum on which it was originally posted. The PePiPoo terms of use can be found at http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?act=boardrules. For the avoidance of doubt, if you are reading this material in any form other than an on-line HTML resource directly and legitimately accessed via a URL commencing "http://forums.pepipoo.com" then it has been obtained by improper means and you are probably reading it in breach of legal privilege. If the material you are reading does not include this notice then it has been obtained improperly and you are probably reading it in breach of legal privilege. Your attention is drawn to the Written Standards for the Conduct of Professional Work issued by the Bar Standards Board particularly under heading 7, "Documents".

Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved" and do not constitute legal advice. Liability for application lies with the reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
emma84
post Fri, 18 Mar 2011 - 16:19
Post #3


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Member No.: 45,226



I was hoping this would be the answer.


In that case I will do as you advise and ignore the letter and not contact them.

Thanks for your help.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gan
post Fri, 18 Mar 2011 - 16:46
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,678
Joined: 23 Mar 2009
Member No.: 27,239



Euro's MD recently admitted in The Times that they have never taken anyone to court. Ignore them.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mister Ross
post Fri, 18 Mar 2011 - 19:23
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 418
Joined: 14 Dec 2009
From: SO14
Member No.: 34,415



Just because you admit you overstayed the time you were permitted, doesn't mean you're in the wrong. Certainly not to the extent that you owe someone £70 when you have not caused them any losses whatsoever. Euro are in the wrong for thinking they are allowed to impose such charges, and for demanding payment in such a menacing way when they have absolutely no intention of enforcing it in court.

I can tell you're a little uneasy about the situation, but there really is nothing to worry about. See the thread here: http://www.violetmount.com/scam.jpg and compare each letter you receive to the next step in the chain - soon you'll be laughing!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
emma84
post Fri, 27 May 2011 - 10:27
Post #6


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Member No.: 45,226



I know it's been while, but since this letter I have had three further letters. The third arrived today from a company called Debt Recovery Plus, now asking for £150. Saying failure to respond may end up with a ccj. This is different to what I was expecting. At the end of the letter it states "you can view a selection of ccj's we have successfully obtained against people who have ignored our correspondence on our website..."

Is this an empty threat?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Fri, 27 May 2011 - 10:34
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,985
Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Member No.: 21,992



QUOTE (emma84 @ Fri, 27 May 2011 - 11:27) *
I know it's been while, but since this letter I have had three further letters. The third arrived today from a company called Debt Recovery Plus, now asking for £150. Saying failure to respond may end up with a ccj. This is different to what I was expecting. At the end of the letter it states "you can view a selection of ccj's we have successfully obtained against people who have ignored our correspondence on our website..."

Is this an empty threat?


You cannot possibly get a CCJ for failing to respond to a letter.

The only way you can get a CCJ in this instance is if they take you to court (no chance), you lose (even less than no chance), and then you still refuse to pay up after 28 days of the judgement. THEN they can apply for a CCJ against you.

I suspect they fail to mention all that in their letter. I wonder why.

Ignore these clowns.

The CCJs on their website are not for victories against properly defended parking claims in court. They are either defaults or they are for different 'offences'

They are juts trying to scare you.


--------------------
Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DBC
post Fri, 27 May 2011 - 10:37
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,769
Joined: 7 Nov 2009
Member No.: 33,505



That letter is well known. What they fail to mention that it's very, very unlikely that these CCJs are to do with private parking tickets. They are more than likely to do with "proper" debts, such a unpaid utility and council tax bills.




Of course "failing to respond" will not result in a CCJ. The case would have to go to court (very unlikely) you lose (very, very unlikely) and then you fail to pay whatever the judge orders within 28 days. Then a CCJ would be granted.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gan
post Fri, 27 May 2011 - 10:38
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,678
Joined: 23 Mar 2009
Member No.: 27,239



Yes it is.

DR+ are particularly well known for their misleading letters. If they're not solicitors they can't take you to court anyway so it's rubbish to threaten you with a CCJ.

A lot of companies like DR+ will buy up old debts for pennies and try to recover them. They sometimes issue claims in the hope that their target has moved addresses, doesn't defend and they get a default judgement. The victim will often pay rather than try to over-turn it. The cases on their website will usually be examples.

Continue to ignore everything.
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: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 01:14
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.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here