Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: notice to keeper x 2
FightBack Forums > Queries > Private Parking Tickets & Clamping
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4
hi again all
i have received 2 NTC letters from our friends at CPMS ltd (who have not paid their tax bill for last year-but i digress)

issued 2 days apart probably for the same parking .

facts i was not the driver
they want £100.00 each charge--
private car park (friends flat car park)

they say The car was not parked in a marked parking bay

i have previously received a similar letter last year again i was not the driver in the same place.
i appealed through popla and won on the grounds that the charge was disproportionate and cpms could not prove they had the right to claim any money on behalf of the landowner

what do you ll think

ignore or go through the hassle of it all again

fighting back
Kill it at POPLA, better than waiting for six years to pass for them not to be able to issue a court claim, not sure they are litigious at presence but you never know.
If they're ignored, CPMS Ltd will sell these to Mil Collections Ltd that is litigious

Attack the existence of the contract and their right to claim

It's important to be precise (why I dislike initials) and CPMS have something of an identity crisis

Car Park Management Services Ltd has never traded
Car Park Management Services (CPMS) Ltd was formed in June last year and is probably too young to be the contractor

Most likely the landowner contracted with CPMS or Car Park Management Services (not Ltd), a trading name of individuals that are known to us but never identified
The land-owner won't notice if they stick Ltd on the name and claim that they've "converted" the company

It doesn't work like that
The Limited company will still be a stranger to any contract with the land-owner
In addition they have switched from POPLA to the IPC's kangaroo court. So best to put in a strong first appeal and keep all paperwork. Base it on the your friend lease and require them to provide a full unredacted copy of any agreement that overrides your friends right to "peaceful enjoyment" - which includes inviting friends over.

You friend should also have a word with the Mgt Company. Get them to comment on it.
Ask your friend to find out the full and exact name of the contractor including any Ltd and the date of the contract
thank you all for your comments
i shall firstly object to the charges and then ask for all their evidence. IPCs kangaroo court i take it is a body created by the cr parks at it proudly promotes a win for the car park companies.

what infuriates me more than anything is the bullish letters that are sent out and the fact that some people will be scarred and cough up. i wish the government would act now
Get the evidence of the contractor's identity from your friend before making any contact with CPMS
when you refer to contractors identity , do you mean the car parking firm the landowner has appointed

Exact details are required. Parking companies add and remove "ltd" or slinky aired names all the time. Because they're shady ex clampers with absolutely no business ethics.
should i include reference to the fact that i have previously appealed to popla and won on the grounds that the CCP could not provide evidence of right to issue tickets
QUOTE (fightingback14 @ Mon, 3 Aug 2015 - 09:18) *
should i include reference to the fact that i have previously appealed to popla and won on the grounds that the CCP could not provide evidence of right to issue tickets

You can but not much need, It couldn't hurt I guess but quote the case REF not just I won against XX at XXXXX etc....
just checked out their info companies house and they have never submitted any accounts or trading info or returns. Does this mean it is a cover company
Car Park Management Services (CPMS) Ltd was only formed in June last year so accounts won't be due until next March

Car Park Management Services Ltd hasn't traded since at least 2008. It will have returns but accounts will be meaningless

CPMS is a trading name used by individuals
Companies House will have no record of sole traders, partnerships and trading names

It's why I keep reminding OPs to be very specific with identities

The directors of CPMS claim that they "became" Car Park Management Services (CPMS) Ltd
It doesn't work like that.
The assets have to be transferred properly or it's tax fraud - avoiding Capital Gains Tax
the sign that was up last year (still waiting for conformation that it hasn't changed) is here.
thoughts on this would be welcomed
does anyone know ik cpms ltd are members of the BPA. they do not appear on the website
That sign looks suspiciously like they ones used by ANPR. It even has the stupid "in breach of the contract with landowner" wording used by Trev.
Car Park Management Services resigned from the BPA in January 2014 when POPLA attacked it for displaying signs that threatened clamping

The POPLA 2014 statistics list Car Park Managements Services (UK) Ltd trading as CMS (UK)
The company went into liquidation in 2013 and was finally dissolved last month

A parking company called CPMS Ltd has never existed

The company obviously goes to great lengths to conceal who is really demanding payments
It's a certain bet that it isn't the person or company with the contract or the one that put up the signs

The whole arrangement is so contorted I'm amazed that the signs can fit straight on the wall

The BPA would be most interested to know that their logo is still displayed
Displaying a logo of a trade association of which it isn't a member is an offence that Trading Standards deals with

Wouldn't surprise me if whoever is operating there has been using the old account to access the DVLA database for your details
Ask who applied for them
They are in the IPC AOS. No start date strangely though.

The logo is the same, companies house has:

Company No. 09091690

But this is not the entity on the signs...?
If the sign displays the BPA logo, it had to be in place at least five months before Car Park Management Services (CPMS) Ltd was formed

By definition, it cannot be the company that was contracted

Legally a sign is no different from a paper document
It has to disclose the actual identity of who you're dealing with
some good points there Gan. BPA have confirmed cpms left in April this year. Additional signage should have been put in place even on a temp measure to let people know who they are under.
The Rookie
Indeed, it would be salient to any contract formed, after all I'd rather have a contract with a BPA member than an IPC bottom feeder, as I know that with POPLA I'd have a reasonable chance of a sensible appeal hearing with an ADR that comes close to matching the government criteria, whereas with the IAS I'd have an ADR which is little more than a rubber stamping exercise.
i have sent off my appeal and am now waiting on response. If they refuse appeal and we go to IPC and then that falls flat, do i get chance to actually go to court and defend myself.
You do get the chance to go to court but if your submission to the IPC is good and they turn it down then they would probably not dare take it to court. Come back on here for suggestions for an appeal to the IPC. (Some advise to just ignore the IPC)
WHEN they reject, reply back stating that you are prepared to consider Alternatve Dispute Resolution, but only with a service that meets the requirements of the ADR regulations (search here for the reference) - you oculd suggest POPLA as one that meets most of the criteria

This immediately rules out the IAS, and they cant use POPLA either.

If they then attempt court, you point out they have unreasonably refused access to ADR, against the ADR regulations and against the idea that court is a last resort.

It skewers them entirely.
the signs that are now in use are the same as last year except they have stuck Ltd on the end of (literally)
the address says manchester as before
I have still not had a reply from CPMS
They will take longer than 4 days.
Car Park Management Services (Cpms) Ltd co number 09091690 were incorporated 18 June 2014.

One wonders if they actually have a contract with the landowner or whether the contract is with some previous body.

The signage states the charge is for trespass. Ironically, Beavis applies - PE v Beavis states somewhere that charges for trespass are not likely to be a viable business model for predatory parking companies (not the actual wording used!)

This is well worth taking to the IAS to see them squirm and produce an epic bull*** answer to wriggle out of their responsibilities to the motorist. They invent more law than HHJ Moloney!
i have received a further 2 parking charge notice to keeper letters. one for an am time the other for a pm time on the same day . Again i was not the driver and have never been to this place. £100.00 for each occasion. As yet I have not received any response from cpms for the other 2 NTK letters they have sent.

please advise as this company are doing my head in. they have not provided any evidence I have requested and from the previous comments i dont even think they are legally allowed to do this.

can a company issue 2 tickets on the same vehicle on the same day ( Vehicle i dont think was moved)

the letters i have received are from the manchester office but at the bottom of the letter is the bristol office address
Contact DVLA and ask if they requested your details as keeper twice

If they didn't, challenge the parking notices on the grounds that you weren't the driver and they failed to meet the requirements of POFA to hold you liable as keeper. Say why.

They will reject the challenge

That will provide you with all you need to report them to Trading Standards for fraud and aggressive business practices
i take it then a company must apply for each idividual parking ticket it sends cannot use existing records. as i have now had 4 it should have paid a total of £10.00. if they dont are they breaking the law
11(1)The third condition is that—

(a)the creditor (or a person acting for or on behalf of the creditor) has made an application for the keeper’s details in relation to the period of parking to which the unpaid parking charges relate;
fightingback14 if cpms did not do this then who best to tell
trading standards

thanks for your comments gan
It will be the DVLA and Trading Standards but wait for them to reject appeals first

fightingback14 long do i wait as still not heard back from cpms for1st 2 yet
not sent 2nd 2 off yet either as just waiting
Albert Ross
Do not let waiting for the reply from the DVLA prevent you from appealing in the usual manner with the ppc.
It will be a different dance when you do get a reply and involve trading standards.
i have sent a request off to the DVLA asking for the company/person that has requested my details and if they have done so 4 times (4 tickets). how long would this take for a reply
The Rookie
1-2 weeks, hence appeal to CPMS first and save the powder for the IAS to wriggle on that particular hook.
i have received 2 letters back stating that my appeal is over 21 days from the issuing of the car parking charge as the IPC code of practice states.
As the notice to keeper was received over 30 days after the CPC how can i have appealed in the time limit.However the NTK says the following

[i][i]"Appeals- at the time that the charge was incurred, a notice to driver was affixed to the vehicle.This offered the driver the ability to appeal within 21 days from its imposition. This opportunity has now lapsed and we regret the ability to appeal against this charge is no longer available . If you consider there to be exceptional cisrcumnstances as to why you should be allowed to appeal outside of this period then you should send your reason to us in writing at the above address.

if we consider your appeal and it is rejected then you may appeal to the Independent Appeals Service. details will be provided with the appeal rejection.

if you wish challenge the validity of this charge then you may appeal to the independent Appeals Service. Details will be provided with the appeal rejection"

I have received no details on how to appeal and i have not had any information that I requested supporting their charge. ie photo, contract with landowner, DVLA request info etc.

all they have said is i am out of time to appeal..

what's next.
Are you a victim of ghost ticketing?
ie, they say a ticket was left on the windscreen but it wasn't?
Let me know urgently
You dont now need to do anything. You could email back and simply state you rejecet their offer to pay, but are willing to resolve the matter through ADR that substantively meets the ADR regulations (search for the precise section on here)

The IAS does not comply, in the slightest, with this requirement.

As you dont have to pay until a court says you do, you then skeewer them

If they offer the IAS, you reject - it does not meet the ADR regs
If they offer a competent ADR, like POPLA, you win. Except they cannot offer POPLA
If they take you to court having refused you access to ADR, they breach the regulations AND they appear massively unfair and unreasonable as an entity. This screws them, as there is a good chance that EVEN IF they win, they have to pay your costs

Their current scam of not offering appeals after 21 days, so a keeper is never afforded the chance to appeal, will hurt them in the long run. It's a sure fire way to look bad in court
i was not the driver and have never even been to the place.

however i am not the only driver of the car
Have you contacted the DVLA yet ?
QUOTE (Gan @ Wed, 19 Aug 2015 - 10:06) *
Have you contacted the DVLA yet ?

Post 37 says they have smile.gif
yes contacted dvla to clarify they have requested 4 lots of data
i have read on these forums that agreeing to an ADR is an admission of blame / part blame. I dispute all claims from CPMS ltd

in what ways does the IAS not comply with ADR
Where have you read that? Its crap. It is saying you both dispute the facts, but view cour as a last resort. Agreeing to ACAS before an employment tribunal doesnt mean you think they have a point...

It does not comply with the ADR regulations, by e.g. not naming assessors, reversing the burden of proof, etc.
It also has to be available for at least 12 months after you've reached the end of the supplier's own dispute process
The Rookie
QUOTE (fightingback14 @ Wed, 19 Aug 2015 - 11:57) *
i have read on these forums that agreeing to an ADR is an admission of blame / part blame.

No you haven't.

We do not recommend mediation as there is no common ground (they believe you owe something, you believe you owe nothing) but again no admission of blame.

As for the IAS, you can put a kiss next to just about every requirement of an ADR as they don't meet any of them (pretty much) at all.
slightly confused. cpms have said i am out of time to appeal. they have not said what next. should i wait for the next letter or ask again for appeals procedure for IAS.i do not want to get into a letter table tennis situation. i will wait for dvla reply.
the letter from cpms refusing my appeal is from someone called lesley.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2020 Invision Power Services, Inc.