Notice to Owner from Indigo |
Notice to Owner from Indigo |
Mon, 20 May 2019 - 08:24
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 5 May 2011 Member No.: 46,402 |
Hi,
Indigo have sent this lovely letter.... They claim the vehicle was parked at Berkhamsted station. The driver confirms that the vehicle was not parked there at the time and date shown, and that it was parked elsewhere, for which a valid online ticket had been purchased. Therefore no ticket was displayed on the vehicle. The driver confirms that no penalty ticket / pcn was attached to the vehicle on the day. The letter arrived sometime between 8th and 17th May. What would be a suitable response? Simply that the vehicle wasn't parked at the location specified at the date/time? What timeframes are there for responding to such a letter ? Thanks This post has been edited by jonty4: Mon, 20 May 2019 - 08:45 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Mon, 20 May 2019 - 08:24
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sun, 7 Jul 2019 - 10:25
Post
#21
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 488 Joined: 21 Aug 2016 Member No.: 86,563 |
You can ignore this letter.
It is very very unlikely that they will start a criminal prosecution - because it would cost them hundred of pounds and any eventual fine would be paid to the government. So there is no financial incentive for them to this. There is a slight possibility that they might try a "complaint" to a Magistrate for an unpaid "debt" - this is a new tactic they have just started to try out. It is thought that (i) there is no debt because the "penalty" was actually an offer to avoid prosecution, and (ii) the Mags have no jurisdiction here since recovery of penalty notices via this method is not mentioned in any of the relevant legislation. Hopefully there will be more clarity on this when the case resumes after its current adjournment - September possibly? Another thread is currently discussing this here. I far as I'm aware nobody has ever been clamped by Indigo / SABA since they put the clamping signs up a couple of years ago. There is very good reason to believe that clamping at railway station car parks was made illegal by the POFA on 1 October 2012. Even though clamping is mentioned in the Byelaws, there is no mention of it in the underlying legislation, Transport Act 2000. So the clamping Byelaw was made up by someone else. The POFA says clamping is only legal where there is specific lawful authority which permits it. The Byelaws themselves don't appear to provide this - because they are not detailed enough, have not been passed by Parliament and were written 7 years before POFA came into force. Detailed discussion about clamping is here. This post has been edited by Gary Bloke: Sun, 7 Jul 2019 - 10:45 |
|
|
Sun, 11 Aug 2019 - 19:26
Post
#22
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 5 May 2011 Member No.: 46,402 |
Hi All
Another letter has arrived - this time from a firm of solicitors, threatening COUNTY COURT action (and the usual blurb) if the "DEBT" isn't paid. I am concerned that they are now trying to claim the "debt" even though the "Debt" doesn't exist and has not been proven. Should they be reminded by letter that: - Vehicle was not parked in the location stated - Valid online ticket was purchased for the vehicle for the location it was parked at - etc etc At no stage has any correspondence from "Indigo Parking" (or Saba) been received directly - although they have a photo of a PCN attached to the windscreen, no such item was ever seen by the driver. Although it's unlikely the "solicitors" would care - they are just trying to revover a debt... and probably don't care if the debt doesn't really exist. I can see why they do this - most people would cave in and just pay up! Not a penny is owed, in fact they should be paying out to compensate people for unwanted harassment ! Advice please - reply or ignore ? Thanks |
|
|
Sun, 11 Aug 2019 - 19:35
Post
#23
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,510 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
Strange, all that talk of a criminal prosecution and now a threat of county court...
-------------------- RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it. |
|
|
Sun, 11 Aug 2019 - 19:45
Post
#24
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,124 Joined: 8 Feb 2013 Member No.: 59,842 |
It can be ignored - a debt collector notice, using their 'solicitor' connections to Wright Hassall LLP to add the 'frightener'. If you want to be arsey, tell them that rather than their client 'may consider Court Proceedings', that you actively encourage them to do so, rather than issuing all the empty threat nonsense in which they are currently engaging, so that a Judge can determine the validity of their client's claim.
They should note, that in the event of a court claim and the likelihood of you prevailing, you will be claiming maximum costs against their client. |
|
|
Sun, 11 Aug 2019 - 19:51
Post
#25
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 153 Joined: 24 May 2015 Member No.: 77,413 |
It's also magically changed from a Penalty Notice to a Parking Charge Notice.
-------------------- |
|
|
Sun, 11 Aug 2019 - 20:16
Post
#26
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 49 Joined: 8 May 2014 Member No.: 70,507 |
Jonty4
This is very similar to my situation .... same sequence from ZZPS and tehn QDR sending out threat of CCJ by trayying to turn a Penalty Notice into a Parking Charge Notice which they cannot do. See my thread: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=125339 and look at Post #68 (from Gray Bloke) and you will see that there are a few examples of the same thing. I have reported QDR to the Solicitors Regulation Authority for Misrepresentation of the Penalty Notice which is subject to Criminal Law and action cannot be via a threat of CCJ by magically turning it into a Parking Charge. I also believe they are breaching GDPR regulations as they are processing personal data for a purpose other than that for which your data has been obtained which is a breach of Railway Byelaws so I think a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office is also in order. |
|
|
Mon, 12 Aug 2019 - 11:12
Post
#27
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 334 Joined: 1 Jul 2014 From: east sussex Member No.: 71,587 |
Halfway down that letter (post 22) QDR asserts:
“If a County Court Judgement (“CCJ”) is obtained against you, its details will be entered on the Register of Judgements, Orders and Fines. It will remain on the Register for 6 years. Please note this may impact on your ability to obtain future credit as this information is available to lenders and finance companies.” I guess this is an extremely effective way of making people – even those like you with a good defence – think: “Sh*t, I can’t risk the damage to my credit rating. I’d better pay up.” It’s also a monumental lie. There is no risk at all to a Defendant’s credit rating as long as he satisfies the CCJ within 28 days. Coming from solicitors, whom people are entitled to expect to apply the law correctly, this is a really serious misrepresentation, clearly designed to put people off exercising their right to a fair trial - quite literally, obstructing the course of justice. Have a look at section 2, Fraud Act 2006. QDR and Wright Hassall (who own QDR) have been sending out these letters for years. I’ve got a copy of one from Wright Hassall from 2 years ago. Sadly, like most busy motorists the recipient didn’t have the time or appetite to take it further. That’s how they get away with it. So you’ve not just got a harassment case against them: you’ve got significant breaches of the Data Protection Act/GDPR as well, in particular Article 5(1)(a), here: https://gdpr-info.eu/art-5-gdpr/ The ICO’s guidance to the GDPR points out that: “Where processing involves committing a criminal offence it will obviously be unlawful”. - see top of p19, here https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/...on-gdpr-1-0.pdf Quite a choice of things you can do: 1. Complain to SRA. Add this point to the others. Actually this is a MUST DO. 2. Complain to Trading Standards. Probably a waste of time, but you never know – they might decide to prosecute because of the evidence of fraud. 3. Sue for harassment and breach of GDPR. |
|
|
Mon, 12 Aug 2019 - 13:47
Post
#28
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 488 Joined: 21 Aug 2016 Member No.: 86,563 |
Please write to the Solicitors Regulation Authority and inform them that QDR Solicitors are deliberately trying to deceive you by sending you letters threatening County Court action relating to a non existent Parking Charge Notice.
I am reliably informed that the SRA are currently investigating QDR for other examples of this disgraceful behaviour. If you write to SRA it will reinforce the fact that this is happening to multiple people - it is a deliberate and repeated violation. The address is: Solicitors Regulation Authority The Cube 199 Wharfside Street Birmingham B1 1RN Here is the link where you can download the complaint form: https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/r...-solicitor.page Best of luck - let us know how it goes. |
|
|
Mon, 12 Aug 2019 - 17:38
Post
#29
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 5 May 2011 Member No.: 46,402 |
Thanks All - some very useful info there - and I shall follow up on those recommendations over the next few days.
I hadn't noticed their name "Wright Hassall" funny really... they certainly are ! This post has been edited by jonty4: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 - 17:41 |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 10:51 |