PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Station PCN (Saba Park Solutions/ZZPS)
AppyNappy2
post Tue, 23 Apr 2019 - 09:24
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 21 Mar 2018
Member No.: 97,169



Hi all,

Great work to all who work on these forums.

A PCN from Saba Park Solutions/ZZPS was recently recieved for 'failing to obtain a valid ticket our voucher'. The vehicle was captured on camera at point of entry and exit at a Station car park (Govia Thameslink).

Payment for parkingis usually made on the Cashless Connect app. On this occasion a ticket purchase was forgotten for the day (mistake). The attached notice has been sent through to the vehicle owner (who was not driving on that day).

Is there any valid reason for refusing payment? Its a mistake (albeit an honest one). Its anticipated the same vehicle will be using the car park in future.

Or am I due to pay with with a view to 'lessons learned'?



The mistake was not realised until the notice arrived in the post. If it was realised do these companies have a general history of waving the 'fine' if contact is made about the missed ticket before the notice is sent through?

Thanks in advance for any assistance
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 39)
Advertisement
post Tue, 23 Apr 2019 - 09:24
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Dave65
post Mon, 20 May 2019 - 21:51
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,887
Joined: 16 Jul 2015
Member No.: 78,368



ZZPS letters show the "Investors in people" logo, they must use the money they get from the motorists to invest in them!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AppyNappy2
post Tue, 21 May 2019 - 12:24
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 21 Mar 2018
Member No.: 97,169



QUOTE (Redivi @ Mon, 20 May 2019 - 22:26) *
Where in the letter does it give a reason you don't owe a payment ?

The answer is nowhere which is why it's not an appeal

No appeal, no code


Does this mean I'm now screwed and have to pay?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Tue, 21 May 2019 - 16:49
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,126
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



No

It just means that you move straight to "ignore" without the inconvenience of the second appeal to ITAL
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AppyNappy2
post Tue, 4 Jun 2019 - 17:35
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 21 Mar 2018
Member No.: 97,169





The latest letter from ZZPS.

Is there really nothing I should be doing here? No communication? Is it just ignore until they stop sending letters? I take there is a pattern to these letters that have been seen elsewhere on this forum?

Thanks again all for the support on this
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gary Bloke
post Tue, 4 Jun 2019 - 20:40
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 488
Joined: 21 Aug 2016
Member No.: 86,563



Ignore.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HappyHarry
post Tue, 4 Jun 2019 - 21:42
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 162
Joined: 14 Dec 2018
From: Sussex
Member No.: 101,446



You can look forward to more, but ignore them all.


--------------------
“Nobody leaves their house because they want to go and do some parking; parking is simply a means to an end, and it should be as easy as possible.” Rishi Sunak, MP
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MacDomhnaill
post Fri, 7 Jun 2019 - 07:38
Post #27


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 3 Jun 2019
Member No.: 104,122



QUOTE (HappyHarry @ Tue, 4 Jun 2019 - 22:42) *
You can look forward to more, but ignore them all.



In view of the case that appears on MSE (forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=6009102&page=4#topofpage) is ignoring still the option or should we be engaging?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sat, 8 Jun 2019 - 03:55
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Two options
1/ Pay
2/ Ignore
There is no third option now.

I wouldn't advocate paying, most people are of the opinion that the Govia court action would fail if defended.


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Foobott
post Sat, 8 Jun 2019 - 13:56
Post #29


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 8 Jun 2019
Member No.: 104,208



I am in the exact same position as the original poster. Same companies involved - SABA and ZZPS.

I appealed based on this thread and have now received this letter below. Can someone tell me what to do, if anything? And what to expect next?

Attached Image
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sheffield Dave
post Sat, 8 Jun 2019 - 14:11
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,053
Joined: 20 May 2013
Member No.: 62,052



QUOTE (Foobott @ Sat, 8 Jun 2019 - 14:56) *
I am in the exact same position as the original poster.


Please start your own thread. The site's rules are one thread per ticket - otherwise threads become very confusing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Foobott
post Sat, 8 Jun 2019 - 15:20
Post #31


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 8 Jun 2019
Member No.: 104,208



Apologies
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AppyNappy2
post Mon, 10 Jun 2019 - 12:25
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 21 Mar 2018
Member No.: 97,169



Worrying developments in the link a few posts above about getting a court summons (to a court nowhere near the alleged offence) but I note it is for more than one ticket if that make a difference.

Should this be a new trend is it reasonable to think the owner would have to engage legal support for the summons (if called) or would it be a straightforward defence using some of the previous answers on various message boards here?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Mon, 10 Jun 2019 - 14:47
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Right now, its nothing for you to worry about. the thread youve linked to shows how laughable a summons it is.

Incompetent is one word that can be used.

If you wish you could engage them in letter ping pong, and that will get you closer to the 6 months. its not tricky - ask sensible questions about hte charge. Loads of examples.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AppyNappy2
post Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 19:24
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 21 Mar 2018
Member No.: 97,169





The latest letter, this time from QDR Solicitors. Is this still and ignore or time to to respond?

Previously not noted here (I only just picked up on it reviewing all the letters) the initial PCN is dated more than 14 days after the alleged offence. This is a camera issued PCN.

From this post http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=128481&hl=

QUOTE (ostell @ Mon, 17 Jun 2019 - 12:11) *
If no windscreen ticket then NTK has to arrive within 14 day, windscreen ticket the between day 28 and 56. Wrong for either


and also

QUOTE (ManxRed @ Mon, 17 Jun 2019 - 12:25) *
Note that missing the dates doesn't invalidate the ticket as such, it just means they haven't complied with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, and they cannot transfer liability to the Registered Keeper. You would suggest that they take the matter up with the driver, who you are under no legal obligation to name, and won't be doing so.

That pretty much stuffs them, but they can be a dogged lot, these private parking companies.


Should I pen a letter highlighting the date of the PCN?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sheffield Dave
post Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 20:10
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,053
Joined: 20 May 2013
Member No.: 62,052



The date of the PCN is mostly irrelevant - that would just mean that the keeper liability part of POFA won't apply, but in your case it's railway byelaw land, so that section of POFA doesn't apply anyway.

I would be tempted to write to QDR pointing out that since driver paid in full for parking, under what clause of Bylaws section 14 are you, the keeper, guilty of an offence?

You won't get a sensible answer (or even an answer at all), but it might add a delay if they have have an automatic schedule of if/when they escalate.

This post has been edited by Sheffield Dave: Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 20:10
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AppyNappy2
post Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 20:27
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 21 Mar 2018
Member No.: 97,169



QUOTE (Sheffield Dave @ Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 21:10) *
The date of the PCN is mostly irrelevant - that would just mean that the keeper liability part of POFA won't apply, but in your case it's railway byelaw land, so that section of POFA doesn't apply anyway.

I would be tempted to write to QDR pointing out that since driver paid in full for parking, under what clause of Bylaws section 14 are you, the keeper, guilty of an offence?

You won't get a sensible answer (or even an answer at all), but it might add a delay if they have have an automatic schedule of if/when they escalate.


Thanks Dave. What would the response be if the driver didn't pay in full? On this occasion a ticket purchase was forgotten for the day (mistake).

In a previous post I thought a ticket had been bought for the day in question (for another car, there is more than one registered to the parking app used) but got my dates mixed up.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sheffield Dave
post Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 21:39
Post #37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,053
Joined: 20 May 2013
Member No.: 62,052



in that case, just shorten it to " under what clause of Bylaws section 14 are you, the keeper, guilty of an offence?".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gary Bloke
post Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 22:09
Post #38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 488
Joined: 21 Aug 2016
Member No.: 86,563



The 14 day limit for delivery of NTO letters for ANPR Byelaws tickets is only relevant if POPLA is dealing with the second stage appeal. If ITAL is dealing with the second appeal, they don't recognise this limit and use 7 months instead. Bonkers I agree. ITAL is paid by SABA so their claim to be independent is an obvious charade.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AppyNappy2
post Fri, 21 Jun 2019 - 08:07
Post #39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 21 Mar 2018
Member No.: 97,169



QUOTE (Sheffield Dave @ Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 22:39) *
in that case, just shorten it to " under what clause of Bylaws section 14 are you, the keeper, guilty of an offence?".


Thanks. Is the suggestion as short and literal as that? Is there any additional wording you'd advise to support?

Thanks call for continued help, this forum has been a calming influence in the face of letters that can be alarming to read
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sheffield Dave
post Fri, 21 Jun 2019 - 09:55
Post #40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,053
Joined: 20 May 2013
Member No.: 62,052



The question is mostly irrelevant - you'll never get a sensible reply, but it might delay things. Also, not including all possible questions at once gives more opportunity to string things out with follow-up questions. But bear in mind that QDR as just acting as the scary arm of debt collectors - they are not the slightest bit interested in whether you're at fault or not, they're being paid to scare people into paying up.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
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: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 19:42
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