PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

UK Parking Patrol Ticket, POPLA Appeal rejected
BHarris
post Wed, 8 Oct 2014 - 19:12
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 5 Oct 2014
Member No.: 73,425



I hope someone can advise me on this as I'm worried and angry at the same time. My daughter swam for the City of Manchester at the Aquatics centre on Oxford Rd, Manchester. We were given a permit to park on the Booth St car park as part of our membership. On the morning of 05/07/14 we park as normal at 05.45am and went in. As I use one of two different cars I don't have the permit in a holder but simply place it on the dash, which I did. My daughter quickly came back out to collect some kit from the back of the car, she closed the hatch and caused the permit to move over the dash and into a slot at the end of the dash. When I came out I had the ticket.
I panicked and called UK parking patrol straight away to say I was member and there had been a mistake. They sent me a demand for £60 with the option to appeal. I appealed to them which was rejected, I asked the Aquatics centre to intervene as was told that they have lots of visitors and UKPP deal with things , they don't get involved. I received the NTK paperwork from them on the 06/08/14 which was dated 05/08/14. I appealed to POPLA and this was also rejected as they say they don't accept mitigating circumstances. They gave me a deadline of this Friday to pay £100.
I maintain that I was a member who had a permit, who never tried to gain an advantage or deprive the landowner of revenue so why should I be asked to pay anything.

PLEASE HELP/ADVISE.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 18)
Advertisement
post Wed, 8 Oct 2014 - 19:12
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Gan
post Wed, 8 Oct 2014 - 19:25
Post #2


Member


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



If your appeal had said UKPPO made no loss, POPLA would have accepted it

Best move now is to ignore all the letters from UKPPO and any debt collectors

They're not known for taking court action and this would be an extremely weak case for them
Eventually they'll get the message and give up
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Salmosalaris
post Wed, 8 Oct 2014 - 19:27
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,327
Joined: 10 Jan 2013
Member No.: 59,283



Just ignore the drivel you're now going to receive unless you receive genuine court papers ( very unlikely ) in which case return here .

This post has been edited by Salmosalaris: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 - 19:28


--------------------
Note, I am not legally qualified and not offering legal advice .Liability for application of anything I say lies with the reader
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
matt285
post Wed, 8 Oct 2014 - 19:52
Post #4


Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 3,043
Joined: 16 Dec 2012
Member No.: 58,914



Was your daughter driving? If so you could nominate her as the driver and she then has a separate right to appeal?

You state that you immediately contacted UKPPO who sent you a separate notice to keeper... on that basis your daughter (if she was the driver) so far did not have any opportunity to deal with the matter... so she could then appeal and go to POPLA and get a win (using the right words).

If this is not the case then I agree, simply ignore anything that comes from them. You could have easily won at POPLA but it is too late for this now.

PS: Just out of interest, I thought parking in Booth St is only allowed for disabled and that you need to use the NCP multi storey car park down the road? Or do you mean the car park behind the Aquatics centre? Didn't know one can get permits for this...?

This post has been edited by matt285: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 - 19:54
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BHarris
post Wed, 8 Oct 2014 - 20:04
Post #5


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 5 Oct 2014
Member No.: 73,425



My daughter is too young to drive unfortunately. Sorry for the confusion matt285, the document states private parking areas at Manchester Aquatics, Booth St. You access the car park via York St and the car park is next to/side of the Aquatic centre. Permits are provided by City of Manchester swimming team for their swimmers.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
farmerboy
post Wed, 8 Oct 2014 - 20:09
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,235
Joined: 8 Nov 2013
From: an alternate dimension
Member No.: 66,580



QUOTE (BHarris @ Wed, 8 Oct 2014 - 20:12) *
They gave me a deadline of this Friday to pay £100.


Do you mean UKPP gave you a deadline of Friday? POPLAs decision is binding on the operator but not the driver/RK.

QUOTE (BHarris @ Wed, 8 Oct 2014 - 21:04) *
My daughter is too young to drive unfortunately. Sorry for the confusion matt285, the document states private parking areas at Manchester Aquatics, Booth St. You access the car park via York St and the car park is next to/side of the Aquatic centre. Permits are provided by City of Manchester swimming team for their swimmers.


You will need to ignore then. Don't be fooled into thinking that any letters from debt recovery agents have any power whatsoever.
They loose their commission if the operator takes you to court so you can safely ignore unless a bona fide court letter turns up(Unlikely)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BHarris
post Wed, 8 Oct 2014 - 20:10
Post #7


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 5 Oct 2014
Member No.: 73,425



POPLA rejected my appeal and Friday is the deadline they set for payment to avoid "further action"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
matt285
post Wed, 8 Oct 2014 - 20:13
Post #8


Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 3,043
Joined: 16 Dec 2012
Member No.: 58,914



Ok no worries, in that case simply ignore this, safe in the knowledge that next time you can easily beat them at POPLA.

Playing devil's advocate one could consider getting another ticket from them for the same location and then taking it to POPLA again (but this time with the winning wording) so that, in the unlikely case of this emanating in a court claim, one could simply provide a POPLA decision to the court, for the same location, between the same parties - but this time a winning one. This may mean that a judge would be inclined to follow POPLA and also dismiss the case, once the judge understands that the difference between the winning appeal and the losing appeal is simply bringing matters of law rather than fact.

This post has been edited by matt285: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 - 20:14
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Salmosalaris
post Wed, 8 Oct 2014 - 20:14
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,327
Joined: 10 Jan 2013
Member No.: 59,283



POPLA is not a statutory body , it's decisions are not binding on you .
To avoid further action generally means avoiding numerous pseudo legal threats from the PPC and powerless debt collectors whose most powerful armament is a large pot of red ink


--------------------
Note, I am not legally qualified and not offering legal advice .Liability for application of anything I say lies with the reader
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
emanresu
post Thu, 9 Oct 2014 - 05:25
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,094
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
From: Home alone
Member No.: 13,324



The other issue with UKPPO is that it is not a limited company and they have not identified with whom you supposedly made a contract.

Come back with any paperwork you get so we can see if UKPPO have stopped being so shy.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BHarris
post Tue, 11 Nov 2014 - 16:28
Post #11


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 5 Oct 2014
Member No.: 73,425



UPDATE,

Just got a reply to the debt collection template letter from DR+, they state they are trying to settle the matter amicably without court involvement. They deny harassment quoting S1(3)© of the Harassment act 1997. They stress that use of templates obtained from the internet will not resolve the matter and recommend legal advice be sought as alternative. They end the letter by quoting the important "test case" parking eye Ltd v Bevis and Wardley 2014.
After I sent the debt collection letter I contacted the Aquatice centre and spoke to a employee who told me several colleagues have had tickets rescinded. She gave me a name and I contacted him. He agreed to get the ticket stopped but after contacting UK Parking Patrol and being told I'd appealed he said he could no longer help. This is what they said;


"Unfortunately we cannot cancel this one. The driver went to the independent appeals service (popla), regarding his ticket but unfortunately they ruled that the charge should stand

When drivers appeal to popla, we are charged for this service and cannot clear the charge the driver has got. This unfortunately lies with the driver as he went to appeal in the first instance/."


Well, what can we do now? I can't help feeling that paying the money at the beginning would have saved me feeling so stressed out. Please tell me I'm still doing the right thing as I know I made a huge mistake by not speaking to you people first.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Tue, 11 Nov 2014 - 16:35
Post #12


Member


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



Debt Recovery Plus are powerless.

There isn't any debt until such time as a court decides there is, so their continued pursuit of this IS harassment.

Did they mention that (a) PE v Beavis is actually subject to Appeal (due February) so currently sets no precedent whatsoever or that (b) the circumstances in that case are very very different to those here (the main one being that in the Beavis case, the PPC paid the landowner for the right to operate on the land)? I thought not. I wonder why....?

They can cancel a ticket anytime they like, but they're clearly upset that they are £27 out of pocket for pursuing this to POPLA. This was THEIR decision, not yours, they could have cancelled it at any time.

You can either submit a formal complaint to the DVLA that UKPP are now in breach of clause C3.1 of their KADOE agreement with the DVLA by continuing to pursue a debt which is denied, or simply ignore them.

I cannot see them wanting to put any of this in front of a judge.

This post has been edited by ManxRed: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 - 16:37


--------------------
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
kommando
post Tue, 11 Nov 2014 - 16:40
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,167
Joined: 6 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,558



Count to 10, relax and ignore.

They are lying, parking eye Ltd v Bevis and Wardley 2014 has goone to appeal and cases are being stayed until the result of the appeal is known so it cannot be used as a precedent.

They can cancel if they want to and they work for the Aquatice centre who should not accept their refusal.

Your appeal cost them £27+, I would park there again and offer to not appeal if they cancel the old one and the new one wink.gif, so saving them £27.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Tue, 11 Nov 2014 - 16:47
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,510
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



Remember they'll say all sorts of things to get you to pay - especially as reverting it back to their client means they probably get nothing (no pay/no fee basis).

I don't remember this PPC being litigious so they are unlikely to issue a claim but they do have 6 years to do so.

QUOTE (BHarris @ Tue, 11 Nov 2014 - 16:28) *
They stress that use of templates obtained from the internet will not resolve the matter

Templates sent blindly can be dangerous if one doesn't understand the content. But generally they don't like it because it hurts their business...

QUOTE (kommando @ Tue, 11 Nov 2014 - 16:40) *
They are lying, parking eye Ltd v Bevis and Wardley 2014 has goone to appeal and cases are being stayed until the result of the appeal is known so it cannot be used as a precedent.

That's not strictly true - the Judge can place whatever weight they feel appropriate to this ruling (even with a pending appeal) or could stay the case until after the appeal.


--------------------
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.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Tue, 11 Nov 2014 - 16:47
Post #15


Member


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



Not to mention the number of PPC templates that are in circulation stating that PE v Beavis sets a precedent for these charges.


--------------------
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
Jlc
post Tue, 11 Nov 2014 - 17:02
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,510
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (ManxRed @ Tue, 11 Nov 2014 - 16:47) *
Not to mention the number of PPC templates that are in circulation stating that PE v Beavis sets a precedent for these charges.

It's ok for them to use templates - come on you know the rules wink.gif


--------------------
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.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dandyman
post Tue, 11 Nov 2014 - 18:25
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,323
Joined: 29 Jun 2013
Member No.: 63,179



The following factoids might help you calm down:

1. There is no such company as UK Parking Patrol Office (or rather there is, but it's dormant).

2. UKPPO is Mr. Steven Cheetham (yes, it's a one-man-band) who appears to be operating as a sole trader.

4. Does the signage at the site mention UKPPO Ltd.? If so, naughty naughty, the company is dormant and shouldn't be trading by offering contracts to park.

5. If not, does the signage at the site mention Steven Cheetham? Of course it doesn't, in which case the signage fails to create a contract. You can't enter into a contract with a trading name, the contract (if any) would be with the sole trader in his real name. Contracting party not clear = no contract.

6. Does his paperwork mention UKPPO Ltd.? If so, naughty naughty again, company is dormant.

7. If not, does his paperwork mention Steven Cheetham? Of course it doesn't, in which case he's broken the law: sole traders are required by law to show their real name on all their official paperwork.

8. His entry on the Data Protection Register is invalid because he's registered in his trading name, which is not permitted: sole traders must register in their real name.

9. His domain registration is invalid because he's registered as an individual but given his trading name, which is not permitted: individuals must register in their real name.

So do you really think someone who has flouted the law in so many ways is going to parade his own misdeeds in a court of law? Just ignore the moron and his toothless knuckle-dragging debt collectors.

You might also lay the above factoids in front of Manchester Sport and Leisure Trust and ask them how they feel about doing business with such a cowboy - and also how they feel this reflects on their charitable status. You've come to a fightback forum so...fight!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Tue, 11 Nov 2014 - 19:25
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,751
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



I bet the DRP reply had headings such as 'my findings' didn't it? Template reply, easy to Google and find lots of times! Search t'internet for 'DRP my findings' and laugh at it! Try this:

DRP my findings site:forums.pepipoo.com

and this

DRP my findings site:forums.moneysavingexpert.com

popping them into Google. Or if there's a different phrase, pop that in instead.

This is silly, you are getting worked up about junk mail template letters. We've ignored these for a decade - what do you think we all did BEFORE POPLA just 2 years ago?!



This post has been edited by SchoolRunMum: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 - 19:26
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BHarris
post Wed, 12 Nov 2014 - 05:52
Post #19


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 5 Oct 2014
Member No.: 73,425



A massive "Thank You" to every one who's taken the time to reply. Although to some this may seem straight forward or trivial to me and many others its a big deal, so your advice and words of reassurance really do make the difference.

Thanks everyone.
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 - 05:08
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.
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