PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

UK Car Park Management
aaa123456
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 09:35
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 22 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,519



Hello

I received a letter from UK CPM regarding "unauthorised parking". The original notice I ignored (and misplaced and I can't find it). I received a second letter:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/21zldxi07nw42fe/c...Page_1.jpg?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/6gon0zhh26bxey0/c...Page_2.jpg?dl=0

There is a sign at this location:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2276crm0uwfq7hx/IMAG1458.jpg?dl=0

The driver had parked the vehicle at this location. Do I need to pay £100 or £149?

Any help is much appreciated.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 09:35
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 09:42
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,084
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



What does your research on other UKCPM cases tell you to do?



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
aaa123456
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:04
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 22 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,519



I didn't park my car at the location and therefore don't feel I owe them anything. How should I respond to this letter?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:21
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,084
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



That isnt the question I asked

What other UKCPM threads have you found? What do they tell you to do?
For getting on SIX YEARS now "not being the driver" isnt always enough.

This post has been edited by nosferatu1001: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:22
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
aaa123456
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:23
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 22 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,519



Is this draft letter sufficient?

QUOTE
Dear Sir/Madam,
Ref ****

I have received your letter dated 28 August 2018.

I deny any debt to your client as I was not the driver. In addition, I deny the overdue charge on the same basis. There is no legal requirement to identify the driver at this time and I will not be doing so.

Any further communication with me on this matter, apart from confirmation of no further action and my details being removed from your records, will be considered vexatious and harassment. This includes communication from any Debt Collection companies you care to instruct.

Yours Faithfully,
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:27
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,182
Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Member No.: 21,992



QUOTE (aaa123456 @ Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 11:04) *
I didn't park my car at the location and therefore don't feel I owe them anything. How should I respond to this letter?


Yet the letter states clearly that under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, they can hold you liable for the charge.

Your two best courses of action are:

1. Check if they complied with the timeframes and information they are required to provide you under schedule 4 of the protection of freedoms act. This might be tough given that you cannot find the original Notice to Keeper.

2. Attack the signage. In my opinion it's not capable of forming a contract with a non-permit holder as it makes no offer of parking to a non-permit holder. It's CLOSE, but in my opinion, instead of saying 'non-permit holders CAN park here for the sum of £100' it chooses to say 'breaching the terms and conditions costs £100', which is not the same thing. A contract must have offer, consideration and acceptance. In this case there is no offer being made to a non-permit holder.

This, essentially makes it a Trespass issue, and under Trespass, only the landholder (occupier) - and that probably isn't the parking company - can take action, and only for nominal or actual damages, which certainly won't be anything like £100.

But, please, go and find some other UKCPM threads and do some research.


--------------------
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
aaa123456
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:29
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 22 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,519



Hello nosferatu1001

Sorry for not answering your question. Other UKCPM threads I have found are many and I am confused as to how I should respond because of the exact circumstances. I could carry on reading the threads, however some guidance on which threads are appropriate to my circumstances would be helpful. The sign says "authorised vehicles only", though I wasn't the person to park the vehicle.

QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 11:21) *
That isnt the question I asked

What other UKCPM threads have you found? What do they tell you to do?
For getting on SIX YEARS now "not being the driver" isnt always enough.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:35
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,084
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



No, but they all have the same advice

Find out if the NtK can hold the Keeper liable for the drivers actions using POFA2012.

Appeal once
As keeper

Was the driver authorised? A simple yes or no.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
aaa123456
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:42
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 22 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,519



Was the driver authorised? NO.

Using POFA2012 what I find is that they don't have the period the vehicle was parked. It is just a date and time on the "Formal Demand". I do recall that the NtK also only had a date and time.

QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 11:35) *
No, but they all have the same advice

Find out if the NtK can hold the Keeper liable for the drivers actions using POFA2012.

Appeal once
As keeper

Was the driver authorised? A simple yes or no.


This post has been edited by aaa123456: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 11:17
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:44
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,441
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



They are quoting paragraph 9 of POFA in their letter, which suggests there was no windscreen ticket at the time. If this is the first letter received then it is out of time. There is also no period of parking.

I think this is the appropriate response:

Sirs

Ref PCN xxxxx VRM yyyyyy

I am the registered keeper of the above vehicle and am in receipt of the PCN you issued. I have no liability on this matter as you have failed to meet the requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, failing to deliver the notice within the prescribed relevant period of 14 days, contrary to section 9 (4) of the Act. You cannot therefore transfer liability from the driver at the time to me.

There is no legal requirement to identify the driver at the time and I will not be doing so.

Any further communication with me on this matter, apart from confirmation of no further action and my details being removed from your records, will be considered vexatious and harassment. This includes communication from any Debt Collection companies you care to instruct.

Yours etc.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 11:02
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,182
Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Member No.: 21,992



QUOTE (aaa123456 @ Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:35) *
The original notice I ignored (and misplaced and I can't find it). I received a second letter:


Ostell, that isn't the first notice received. I would attack the sign, but at the end of the day, as this is IPC, then I don't suppose it matters.


--------------------
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
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 11:16
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,084
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Indeed, hence you appeal once, then ignore anything bar letter before action or court claim
Same for every IPC case.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
aaa123456
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 11:18
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 22 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,519



I've updated post#9

QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 12:16) *
Indeed, hence you appeal once, then ignore anything bar letter before action or court claim
Same for every IPC case.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
timps
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 14:57
Post #14


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 7 Oct 2014
Member No.: 73,458



I’ve just sorted a similar UK CPM one out for my friend.
The first letter I received did not contain any mention of keeper liability and the second letter was exactly the same as yours.

What I did was respond to each letter asking for more information to resolve the matter and that I was not appealing and had no intention of appealing until they supplied the information requested so I could make an informed decision of my course of action as (my friend) was not the driver at the time.

I also stated that they were out of time for keeper liability based on the first letter.

I asked
1) Inform me the keeper the advertised terms and conditions are and therefore a copy of any alleged contract with the driver.
2) What the period of parking was, the code of practice that you signed up to require “15. Grace Periods.
15.1 Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so they may make an informed decision as to whether or not to remain on the site.. “ As well as being the basis of contract law, offer, consideration and acceptance requires time.
3) Evidence of Landowner Authority therefore a copy of the contract with the landowner under which you assert authority to bring the claim.
4) Calibration certificates / paper trail of the time stamp.
5) Pictures of the signage that I can actually read.
6) Proof that it was unauthorised, the evidence provided does not show any clear contravention at all it shows a car parked at insert time.
7) A plan showing where any signs were displayed.
8) Details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed).
9) Whether you are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012.
10) Are pursuing me as driver or keeper.

As there is no evidence of Landowner Authority - UK Car Park Management is put to strict proof to provide me with an unredacted copy of the contract between your company and the landowner/landholder that provides the necessary contractual written authority for the issue and enforcement of your Parking Charge Notice.

For the avoidance of any doubt I will not take UK Car Park Management’s word for it, if you wish to bring a claim you will have to provide it.

I would also ask for the copy of the first letter sent as well.

After another letter rejecting ‘my appeal’ I sent it again stating I wasn’t appealing, after this third letter my friend received a letter stating the charge was now cancelled.

My theory was I was letting them know my friend was no push over and would attend court. The second was for the judge’s benefit should it go to court that I was asking for information to resolve the matter very early but UK CPM had refused to play ball.

This strategy obviously worked even though I never actually appealed on my friend’s behalf it is now cancelled.

Having spent time in court as an expert witness in construction I have found judges do not like ignorance so make UK CPM the bad guys because they are ignoring your requests for relevant information rather than you ignoring their made-up invoice.






Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
aaa123456
post Sun, 30 Sep 2018 - 16:40
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 22 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,519



I sent UKPCM a letter:

"I have received your letter dated 28th August 2018. I was unable to respond to the parking charge notice dated 27th July 2018 within the 14-day time period as I was away on business. Please can you forward a copy of the original parking charge notice for reference.
I have a couple of questions:
• Can you confirm the time period for which this vehicle was parked at the location described? The letter only states a date and time.
• Can you provide evidence of the contract under which the parking notice was issued? As a summary I would like to know how under contract law offer, consideration and acceptance of the terms and conditions were made known to the driver? Was the driver informed of the terms and conditions? Was an offer made to the driver to allow them to park the vehicle on the basis of a reasonable fee? Was the driver given a chance to consider the offer? Did the driver indicate their intention to reject or accept that offer?
I would like to at least point out that I will not be appealing this ticket until the full facts have been established."

To this they replied with the following:




Sometime this week I noticed that the sign had been taken down at the location where the car was. Does this mean the owner or UKPCM has terminated the claimed contract? I am going to reply to that letter with:

- Ask for an unredacted copy of the contract between the owner and UKPCM.
- Dates of termination of the contract
- Raise the fact that they did not reply to my question about the time period for which the car was parked.

Is this the right way to respond?

This post has been edited by aaa123456: Sat, 6 Oct 2018 - 15:41
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Sun, 30 Sep 2018 - 18:34
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,938
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



You need to put those letters somewhere other than dropbox. Try uploading to TinyPics or Imgur


--------------------
Cabbyman 10 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eljayjay
post Sun, 30 Sep 2018 - 20:26
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 849
Joined: 1 Apr 2017
Member No.: 91,235



You could ask them under DPA 2018 for copies of all correspondence relating to you.

If they comply, there will almost certainly be no corespondence about you which involves their (former) client.

That would, of course, mean not only that they do not have correspondence advising that your vehicle was authorised to be parked, but also that they do not have correspondence advising that your vehicle was not authorised to be parked.

See what others think.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Wed, 3 Oct 2018 - 21:18
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,983
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



I know what some other posters think.

QUOTE
Having spent time in court as an expert witness in construction I have found judges do not like ignorance so make UK CPM the bad guys because they are ignoring your requests for relevant information rather than you ignoring their made-up invoice.
That's true. Keep them replying to your SAR, etc., and come back here at court stage.

QUOTE
Sometime this week I noticed that the sign had been taken down at the location where the car was. Does this mean the owner or UKCPM has terminated the claimed contract?
If they stay down, then yes. UKCPM won't have terminated a contract, they want the money from every victim, every site. But firms like this are often kicked out.

Could be they are just late updating their privacy notices and swiftly bringing in new signs, though.

This post has been edited by SchoolRunMum: Tue, 9 Oct 2018 - 19:06
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
aaa123456
post Thu, 11 Oct 2018 - 17:25
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 22 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,519



QUOTE (SchoolRunMum @ Wed, 3 Oct 2018 - 22:18) *
I know what some other posters think.

QUOTE
Having spent time in court as an expert witness in construction I have found judges do not like ignorance so make UK CPM the bad guys because they are ignoring your requests for relevant information rather than you ignoring their made-up invoice.
That's true. Keep them replying to your SAR, etc., and come back here at court stage.

QUOTE
Sometime this week I noticed that the sign had been taken down at the location where the car was. Does this mean the owner or UKCPM has terminated the claimed contract?
If they stay down, then yes. UKCPM won't have terminated a contract, they want the money from every victim, every site. But firms like this are often kicked out.

Could be they are just late updating their privacy notices and swiftly bringing in new signs, though.


Interesting you say that since they've put the notice back up. Read this:

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Thu, 11 Oct 2018 - 17:31
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,983
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



Looks like the terms & conditions apply to Authorised Vehicles Only, if you read it that way (ambiguous sign). Ironically a trespasser has more of a defence against such a sign than a person with a permit that slipped down, IMHO. Ludicrous.

It will be interesting if - when they try a probably-doomed court claim - they try to say that new signage was in place. You have proof otherwise!

Interesting that the new notices omit the privacy notice I thought they would have been taken down, to add!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
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: Saturday, 20th October 2018 - 22:32
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.