PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

phoenix parking solutions ltd, ignored pcn , ntk arrived on 56th day. can i still appeal?
biscuithead
post Sun, 25 Nov 2018 - 20:07
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 25 Nov 2018
Member No.: 101,122



hi, please help,
my wife was an occupant in the car. she is heavily pregnant and an insulin dependant diabetic.
on the way back from her hospital appointment (she has a weekly visit to monitor her disability closely as she's pregnant) she was having a "hypo" (low blood sugars) and needed glucose quickly. she normally has an emergency can of coke/jelly babies in the car but didn't on this occasion.
The car was parked safely in the nearest car park on the high street , went to get sugary drink , came back and within 81 seconds the pcn had been stuck to the windscreen.
This car park used to be a free car park when we last used it and in her state she didn't see a pay and display meter on route to shop.
I do not know who owns the car park? i would like to find out and speak to them and hope for mitigating circumstances!!

It is now a private car park maintained by phoenix parking solutions ltd,when i looked at the pcn it didn't look real, i assumed it was some sort of phishing scam for our data. . .scared of getting scammed i ignored it . . . .i have on the 56th day received the ntk. i have since found out the company is ipc registered.

the charge has now risen to £124 . .. .i have 5 children and another on the way and genuinely cannot afford to pay!!
my wife and i cannot sleep with the stress and truly do not know what to do next!!

can anyone please guide me, i really would appreciate it.

thank you
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 9)
Advertisement
post Sun, 25 Nov 2018 - 20:07
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Sun, 25 Nov 2018 - 20:12
Post #2


Member


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



Ignore them and come back if they try a small claim.

Or, send one response that points out the Insulin Dependence (attach proof) and state that this means the driver has protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 and the PCN pays no regard to the rights and interests of people who meet the definition of disability.

Complain to your MP, definitely!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Sun, 25 Nov 2018 - 20:46
Post #3


Member


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



Phoenix Parking Solutions is an appropriate name
There appear to be some close family links to a couple of notorious companies, Central Ticketing Ltd and Central Ticketing UK Ltd that used to feature in a lot of threads

IIRC CTL is a former clamper that turned to aggressive ticketing when its business was banned
It morphed into CTUKL to avoid paying its CCJs but continue the CTL contracts
Most landowners don't notice if the companies managing their car parks aren't the ones they contracted with

How has the charge risen to £124 ?
Who sent the Notice to Keeper ?

It sounds as if Phoenix has sub-contracted the administration to a debt collector that's already added an extra charge

It's also arguable that, as the first Notice, the charge is above the limit in the parking company's code of practice
Failure to follow the Code of Practice puts a big hole in any claim

Forget that the Notice arrived on Day 56
When was it issued ?
The Protection of Freedoms Act (POFA) says that it's delivered two working days after posting
If this calculation means that it arrives on Day 57 or later, it's out-of-time and Phoenix can't recover payment from the registered keeper if he/she wasn't driving

POFA also says that the maximum that the company can recover from the keeper is the amount outstanding the day before the Notice was issued
That has to be the amount on the sign before any additions

This post has been edited by Redivi: Sun, 25 Nov 2018 - 21:04
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
biscuithead
post Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 19:32
Post #4


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 25 Nov 2018
Member No.: 101,122



Thanks for the quick replies.
Here's a copy of the notice to keeper.
Looks like it was posted on Nov 19 (2nd class) which is day 52.
It looks like it's still Phoenix parking solutions but the company address has changed

What happens if I ignore?


QUOTE (SchoolRunMum @ Sun, 25 Nov 2018 - 20:12) *
Ignore them and come back if they try a small claim.

Or, send one response that points out the Insulin Dependence (attach proof) and state that this means the driver has protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 and the PCN pays no regard to the rights and interests of people who meet the definition of disability.

Complain to your MP, definitely!




I have a doctor's note from when we went on holiday, so she could take needles and medication through airport security. . .I think that would prove it. Am I too late to appeal ? Or am I better off ignoring ? I am no good at this sort of thing

This post has been edited by biscuithead: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 22:11
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 20:00
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,506
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



You won't be appealing but telling them as it is.

Was it definitely 2nd class? (And not franked, discounted, 1st?)

The ball is in their court whether they want to issue a court claim - they have 6 years to decide.


--------------------
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
Redivi
post Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 21:18
Post #6


Member


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



POFA 9(6) says that the Notice is delivered two working days after posting
Unlike the Interpretations Act, it doesn't distinguish between First and Second Class post

You have plenty of time to challenge it (much better mindset than appeal)

I would throw into the challenge that the demand exceeds the signs and the maximum charge in the IPC Code of Practice
Failure to follow the Code of Practice prevents them recovering the charge in Court
Always useful to bring that into play at the earliest opportunity

You've left your name in the picture

The ball is in their court whether they want to issue a court claim - they have 6 years to decide.

Was having some thoughts about this today - whether it's possible to take the initiative for a moderate cost and force a PPC to Court

1 Issue a modest claim - £75 to £100 - for improper use of personal details
2 PPC has to pay it or defend the claim
3 Defence would require a counter-claim for the unpaid parking notice
4 Discontinue original claim so that PPC has to pay hearing fee or counter-claim is struck out
5 If counter-claim is struck out, PPC has to obtain permission from Court (£255?) and provide new evidence to reinstate its claim

I'm in this situation myself so would be interested in comments

This post has been edited by Redivi: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 21:19
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
biscuithead
post Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 22:34
Post #7


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 25 Nov 2018
Member No.: 101,122



Thanks once again.
I have removed my name icon_redface.gif thanks

I'll have a look at signs and ipc code of practice and equality act 2010.
From what I've read they'll reject what ever I put anyway .

Then is it ipc (ias) before 21 days after rejection?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 22:46
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,088
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Ignore the IAS, they will reject.

They have also failed POFA, 8 (2) (e)) is not there and the warning, 8 (2) (f), is not as required. Haven't checked other items
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
biscuithead
post Tue, 4 Dec 2018 - 17:08
Post #9


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 25 Nov 2018
Member No.: 101,122



Posting an update .

I emailed them outlining mitigating circumstances and they have cancelled my ticket as a gesture of good will.

Thanks everyone for all your input
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Tue, 4 Dec 2018 - 17:11
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,898
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



Please post your E mail here. It would be interesting to see the arguments you put to them.

Well done.


--------------------
Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
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: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 17:17
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