PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Parking & Property Management Ltd. - Parking charge in residential car park
emergencychimp
post Wed, 2 Aug 2017 - 20:49
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 7 Sep 2013
Member No.: 65,032



So the driver got a parking charge in a residential car park in the time from leaving the car in a visitor space and going up to grab a parking permit from an outgoing tenant.

It seems this place is employing 'civilian' type attendants. No marked car, no uniform...

Anyway, of course a valid permit was in the possession of the driver.

My initial question is, do you send the appeal before the 28 days? I've read some people send it a couple of days prior. Or is the normal procedure to wait for NTK?





This post has been edited by emergencychimp: Wed, 2 Aug 2017 - 20:50
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
7 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 59)
Advertisement
post Wed, 2 Aug 2017 - 20:49
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Thu, 14 Dec 2017 - 21:20
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,282
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



And state that the sign at the bays, as shown in the operator's letters, made an offer without caveat or any charge:

QUOTE
Strictly residents' parking only


The driver was fetching the permit, which involved {going up flights of stairs/waiting for the lift, whatever} but the driver asserts this took less than ten minutes, during which time predatory tactics were used in issuing the 'PCN'. There is no evidence that the photographs shown were, in fact, taken 12 minutes apart, given that similar unreliable and very basic hand/held camera 'evidence' was used by UKPC, in the well-publicised case where the time of parking was altered.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
emergencychimp
post Thu, 21 Dec 2017 - 20:21
Post #42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 7 Sep 2013
Member No.: 65,032



Thoughts on my reply anyone.


Dear Mr Gladstones Solicitor,

My version of events was not requested. I was merely responding to your defective letter before claim. Should you wish to instigate a claim, I will only respond to a compliant letter before claim. What I need from your client is to drop this ridiculous debt claim.

For your convenience, I shall reiterate what happened and outline why you should immediately cease all further chasing of this alleged debt.

1. The driver parked in a clearly marked visitor bay. Over these visitor bays is a sign that reads 'Private property - Strictly residents parking only'. Please see your clients notice to keeper for a picture of this sign. This sign makes an offer without any caveat or charge and I'm sure you'll agree, is incapable of forming any contract.

2. When it became clear to the driver a parking permit was indeed required (despite the confusing sign), the permit was sought and was in the hands of the driver in around 10 minutes. The driver returned to the vehicle to display the permit, by which time your client had issued the penalty charge notice. The driver has retained photographic evidence of possession of permit.

3. Your client's notice to driver was not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Therefore your client has broken data protection laws by requesting my details. Your client, yourself, or anyone else has no legal authority to demand any payment from myself.

4. Your client's notice to keeper was not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. You can read the above paragraph again should you wish.

I suggest you request and review the relevant documents from your client before issuing any further threats of a court claim.

In summary, this is not a valid claim and you have no grounds to request payment from me.

Any further communication from yourself, your client or any other third party, other than confirming the PCN and debt claim has been cancelled, will be retained and used as evidence for issuing a counter claim of harassment at my discretion.

Regards.

emergencychimp
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Umkomaas
post Thu, 21 Dec 2017 - 21:38
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,575
Joined: 8 Feb 2013
Member No.: 59,842



QUOTE
Regards.

emergencychimp

Regards? That’s almost a term of endearment. These creeps are suing you - and you sign your formal response ‘Regards’?

I don’t understand.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 21 Dec 2017 - 22:21
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,936
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



3) is not true. They dint have to comply with pofa to request keeper data
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
emergencychimp
post Thu, 21 Dec 2017 - 22:27
Post #45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 7 Sep 2013
Member No.: 65,032



QUOTE (Umkomaas @ Thu, 21 Dec 2017 - 22:38) *
QUOTE
Regards.

emergencychimp

Regards? That’s almost a term of endearment. These creeps are suing you - and you sign your formal response ‘Regards’?
I don’t understand.

Ha. I can be the bigger man here.

Should I just go with
**** you,

emergencychimp

laugh.gif

QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Thu, 21 Dec 2017 - 23:21) *
3) is not true. They dint have to comply with pofa to request keeper data

Yeah. I was unsure about that part. It just made sense to me that for them to be allowed to request the registered keepers data, they had to jump through specific hoops. If they did not, then the data request was invalid. I guess it doesn't work like that. I'll remove the part about data protection laws.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 21 Dec 2017 - 22:41
Post #46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,936
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



It’s never worked like this. They can ask for keeper details to ask the keeper to tell them the drivers identity. This single purpose under kadoe has been perverted into taking keepers to court but meh, no one seems to care

The hoops to access electronically are simply to be member of an AOS. Nothing to do with pofa.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Umkomaas
post Fri, 22 Dec 2017 - 19:46
Post #47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,575
Joined: 8 Feb 2013
Member No.: 59,842



QUOTE
Ha. I can be the bigger man here.

Should I just go with
**** you,

emergencychimp

laugh.gif

You could do, as long as you’re happy for a Judge to read that in the court papers you/the PPC might be submitting.

Stick to standard convention - Dear Sir/Yours faithfully. Dear Mr ..../Yours sincerely.

They’ll do nicely!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
emergencychimp
post Fri, 22 Dec 2017 - 23:15
Post #48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 7 Sep 2013
Member No.: 65,032



Yes. Of course. I wouldn't actually do that. I was just kidding.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
emergencychimp
post Sat, 10 Mar 2018 - 12:20
Post #49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 7 Sep 2013
Member No.: 65,032



So, a development on this.

Somewhat confusingly, Gladstones have sent me a court claim form. Despite knowing the NTD and NTK did not comply with POFA and issuing a defective LBC. Are they thinking I'll just get scared and pay up? Surely the court will instantly throw this out considering how inept the parking company and Gladstones have acted?

Now is all I need to do now is acknowledge the claim?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Sat, 10 Mar 2018 - 12:33
Post #50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 27,461
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



Yes but you’ll have to follow the court procedures and submit a full defence. The court will not strike it out on their own volition.


--------------------
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

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
emergencychimp
post Sat, 10 Mar 2018 - 12:50
Post #51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 7 Sep 2013
Member No.: 65,032



I take it I need to tick the 'I intend to contest jurisdiction' to move it to my local court? Does this then send me another document to allow me to tick 'I intend to defend all of this claim'? I can then make a counter claim at this time?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Sat, 10 Mar 2018 - 12:52
Post #52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,692
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



No, only contest jurisdiction if you live in Scotland or NI. It will be moved to the court of your choice later in the process.

What are you going to countclaim for?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
emergencychimp
post Sat, 10 Mar 2018 - 12:57
Post #53


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 7 Sep 2013
Member No.: 65,032



Ah. I see. I wish to counter claim for my time wasted dealing with this nonsense.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sat, 10 Mar 2018 - 13:00
Post #54


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,087
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



You would need more concrete grounds than that!


--------------------
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 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Sat, 10 Mar 2018 - 13:24
Post #55


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 761
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



That "contest jurisdiction" box causes a lot of confusion

Gladstones won't know that the NtK didn't comply with POFA
The claims process is automated and nobody looks at any documents unless the claim is defended
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Sat, 10 Mar 2018 - 13:26
Post #56


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 27,461
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



Should you win then you can claim your costs but these are severely limited at small claims unless the claimant can be shown to have been 'unreasonable'. (But there's more in a legal sense)


--------------------
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

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
emergencychimp
post Sat, 10 Mar 2018 - 13:34
Post #57


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 7 Sep 2013
Member No.: 65,032



I informed Gladstones the NTK did not comply with POFA in some correspondence after their LBC so they are aware.

I see. Costs are more to do with stuff like DPA breaches then?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Sat, 10 Mar 2018 - 13:37
Post #58


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 27,461
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



Yes, but they will pursue the keeper under the presumption they were driving.

You could counterclaim for a Data Protection breach but it's extremely hard to convince a judge. Although, a counterclaim would prevent them from vacating the hearing if they don't think they are going to win.


--------------------
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

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
emergencychimp
post Mon, 19 Mar 2018 - 18:44
Post #59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 7 Sep 2013
Member No.: 65,032



OK, so my acknowledgement of service is submitted.

Claim issued on the 6/3/18. Date of service is plus 5 days right?

So I need my defence sorted by 8/4/18 correct? Obviously the sooner the better.

Should I post the particulars of claim? I know sometimes they do not meet requirements.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eljayjay
post Mon, 19 Mar 2018 - 23:48
Post #60


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 291
Joined: 1 Apr 2017
Member No.: 91,235



I believe it is 28 + 2 days from 6 March which I make 5 April.

Yes, do post the particulars of claim (after redacting anything personal).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

7 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > » 
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: Tuesday, 24th April 2018 - 00:44
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.