PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Parking charge for not 'displaying valid permit' but one WAS displayed.
Trixie2
post Mon, 16 Oct 2017 - 11:43
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 125
Joined: 22 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,164



Hello. Me again - sorry.

In August a parking charge was placed on a car that I'm the Registered Keeper of, at Elstree and Borehamwood train station, for apparently failing to display a valid permit.

The thing is, one *was* displayed and they even included a close up of the valid permit in their photographic evidence.

As the RK I ignored all correspondence because of this but now have their debt collectors onto me.

It's Indigo Parking Solutions. I'm very confused!

I've e mailed the debt collectors, ZZPS I think they're called, and told them to refer it back to their client, but what else can I do?

I'm stumped by the fact they took a picture of the valid permit (which I'm assuming is the payment ticket issued by the machine)!

Any advice greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

This post has been edited by Trixie2: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 - 12:53
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 50)
Advertisement
post Mon, 16 Oct 2017 - 11:43
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
ostell
post Fri, 16 Feb 2018 - 16:11
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,209
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



If it's your own case then do not hijack another thread. It's in the Rules at the top.

This post has been edited by ostell: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 - 16:11
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
FinanceRulez
post Fri, 16 Feb 2018 - 17:22
Post #42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20
Joined: 13 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,509



QUOTE (ostell @ Fri, 16 Feb 2018 - 16:11) *
If it's your own case then do not hijack another thread. It's in the Rules at the top.


Ah sorry - had not seen them! Duly edited.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Trixie2
post Sat, 24 Feb 2018 - 19:18
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 125
Joined: 22 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,164



Hello all. I received this, this morning. Who are they? QDR or Wright Hassle?



I can't be arsed to get into regular contact with them. Is there a strong 'f off now' letter I can send them?

Have they been known to go to court on non-relevant land? TIA.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Sat, 24 Feb 2018 - 19:29
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,103
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



You've already warned QDR of the consequences if they continue with demands

Carry out the threat in your own time
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Trixie2
post Sat, 24 Feb 2018 - 20:01
Post #45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 125
Joined: 22 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,164



Thanks. So just ignore for now?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Sat, 24 Feb 2018 - 21:01
Post #46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,209
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Interesting that they say the registered keeper is liable under the byelaws but the keeper can authorise the driver. Perhaps you could write back to them and ask them to point out which specific byelaw they believe specifies this.

This post has been edited by ostell: Sat, 24 Feb 2018 - 21:02
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Trixie2
post Sat, 24 Feb 2018 - 21:29
Post #47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 125
Joined: 22 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,164



I take it there's no provision in the Byelaws that holds the keeper liable then?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Sat, 24 Feb 2018 - 21:37
Post #48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16,649
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



No part can do so. The owner maybe but this would be ultra vires, as the byelaws can only control conduct on the land in question.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Trixie2
post Tue, 27 Feb 2018 - 16:47
Post #49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 125
Joined: 22 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,164



OK thanks.

By the way I just noticed Indigo wrote this in one of their letters to me:

"The Notice affixed to the car as noted above was an offer to allow you an opportunity to avoid a criminal prosecution. It has not been paid, so further administration and debt recovery charges have now been added. If this offer is not accepted, then our Client may pursue you through the Magistrates Court by way of a private criminal prosecution."

This was discussed above. It was an offer to avoid prosecution - I did not accept their offer - they chose not to prosecute within the time-frame.

Could they still go to the small claims court nonetheless?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Tue, 27 Feb 2018 - 16:58
Post #50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,103
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Cannot see how they would have any chance of success

Their letter stated that it was an offer; you didn't accept it
By definition there was no contract

It would be like a market trader shouting offers to passers-by and taking them to court if they carried on walking
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 27 Feb 2018 - 17:22
Post #51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16,649
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Also, why would there be admin costs added? It was an offer.
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: Wednesday, 20th June 2018 - 05:58
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.