Hi everyone

So I recieved this letter (http://tinypic.com/r/15oyngh/9) about 2 days ago from CPM. It's a PCN for 'unauthorised parking'. I recieved the letter being the registered keeper. Now I've dealt with PCNs from BPA accredited members before but this parking company is part of the IPC. How would I go about this one? This was in England btw.

Easily

Tempalte appeal for IPC members on the MSE FORUM, written by COupon Mad

Dont appeal to the IAS

This is CPM who arent that litigious.

So should the appeal be sent to them directly and then afterwards await the response?

Yes, of course you have to appeal to them first. It does tell you that on the notice, and on the NEWBIE thread.

This is the sign http://tinypic.com/r/6tk01d/9

Forbidding sign. It does not offer parking to anyone who is not authorised.

Are there any flaws in the sign?

Flaws?

A forbidding sign is one where they try to make a contractual charge to allow you to do something they forbid. That is, for example they give you permission to park without a permit when they really forbid parking without one. You get the drift?

In this case, the sign says you must display a permit, so non display is something they cannot offer as it's doing exactly what they don't allow.

If you are forbidden then they cannot get you for breach of contract. There was no contract or agreement because they are forbidding you. That means you were trespassing and only the land owner can get you for that.

I've sent them a letter using the template from MSE. I'll await their response and then write to them again using these arguments.

You wont be writing to them again. Only one appeal to the parkin company.

The main flaw has been pointed out to you. The very first thing you need for a contract is an OFFER (then acceptance, then consideration) - if they do not offer, but FORBID, then there cannot be a contrct.

But the letter has already been sent to them. It wasn't an appeal as such. I just used the template from MSE forum asking them to answer a few questions.

Because its an IPC company. THERE IS NO MEANINGFUL APPEAL. Your research here and MSE willhave told you that

The IPC are a bunch of ex clampers. who couldnt stick to the rules of the BPA so set up a sham of a company with a thin veneer to get ATA status, and since then have operated as the cowboys they always were.

So is there no hope?

Oh for...

Why do people think that no meaningful appeal means no hope?

It measn EXACTLY what I said. The appeal is NOT to get the PPC to cancel the ticket. It is so that IF, and with this company thats a very lBIG IF, they try court, you are shown to be reasonable.

IT does not mean pay. Otherwise we would have told you to pay. This is a direct forum. Stop panicking. Stop treating these scum like a legitimate company that offers any form of value,a nd that operates under any form of ethics. Theyre not.

So I recieved this response from them

http://tinypic.com/r/6y1dkw/9

http://tinypic.com/r/2h5quxc/9

File and come back if you get anything material such as a solicitors letter.

So at the moment just sit back?

Jo Carn (Post #9) explains in one sentence why their reply is legal nonsense

Even if "Authorised Vehicles only" is removed, the sign is still absurd

The driver either agrees to pay £100 to park or he parks in breach of the terms and conditions
He can't do both

YOu were told there is no meanignful appeal, and that rejection was expected. Five muinutes of research would have told you that

So where would I argue the points. If I recieve solicitor letters?

Some explanation needed methinks, although all this is freely available on other threads on here regarding IPC members.

The IPC (IAS) appeal is a sham, and will be rejected regardless of what you put. However the PPC then tends to use the IAS rejection as evidence against you should it get to court, which is why we recommend not to bother with the IAS appeal at all.

The PPC MAY try a Court Claim (unavoidable I'm afraid, they seem to think that the English Law system is a perfectly valid tool they can use to further 'scare' you into paying). You will almost certainly receive a set of toothless debt collector letters trying to scare you into paying, which you can ignore, but if you get a Letter Before Action/Claim/Similar from a firm of solicitors then come back here. THAT is when you can set out the points to demonstrate why you are not a pushover and that a court claim would be a waste of their time.

If you get a court claim it may well be from Gladstones Solicitors who have an appalling record in court and which you stand an excellent chance of defeating with help from the people in here.

But please, read up on some other threads. We're happy to help, but the information is all here that you can research, and we don't have a lot of time to spend explaining the same things over and over again. Sorry!

As above.

You really MUST do your own research. Everythign about the IAS being a kangaroo court is freely available.

You only need to argue your points further IF and ONLY IF they issue court papers or send a letter before action.

fi they do, come back here.

Dont come back panicking over debt collectors letters, or them coming round. Its never going to happen.

Youre expected to stand on your feet, with support. Not for us to carry you.

So I received another letter from them. They are still demanding payment of £100 which if not paid within 28 days will rise to £149.

OOOohhh, scary. They'll chase for as long as they hope to get payment. If they really wanted to take this all the way to court they would have done something by now.
So let them keep chasing.....

What's the deal with bailiffs? I understand they cannot send them round?

https://www.stepchange.org/debt-info/debt-c...ifferences.aspx

Bailiffs will not be appearing! You could have Googled that...but relax!

Debt collectors are powerless wastes of space.

They cannot instruct bailiffs. You'd need to have lost a court case for that!

Should I respond to the letter they gave?

Here is the debt recovery letter I've recieved. I understand they are powerless etc. But should I contact them saying I am not liable for this charge and I disupte it? It says on the letter that if I ignore, they would assume I'm taking liability for it.

They can say whatever the hell they like, doesnt make it true

Responding to them just encourages then.

IGNORE. DEBT. COLLECTORS.

Where do I find the number of court cases CPM have been through?

try the BMPA database.

Its with DRP. Theyre not wanting to try court because then DRP dont get paid.

Just to give you an idea of what a forbidding sign can do for you, here's a case that COMPLETED IN COURT TODAY FOR MULTIPLE TICKETS.

Thanks.

Is there a way to get the invoice cancelled? I don't want to wait 6 years lol

If thee was, dont you imagine we would have told you by now?

Stop stressing. Ignore DRP. Come back if you get a letter before claim or claim form from MCOL

I've received the second letter from DRP now saying that I've accepted liability as I haven't responded. Should I tell them I don't accept liability?

which part of this




or this....




or this are you having trouble understanding.

So I received this letter from Gladstone. Should it be responded to?

http://tinypic.com/r/2af0l6v/9

Nope.

...mainly because its telling you to pay DRP
What you COULD do is write to Gladstones asking them to confirm THEY sent the letter with reference... on x date
You wont get a response, but this proves they didnt send the letter - because a solicitor would happily say they sent the tetter, IF they had done so!

I now have a letter before claim. What do I do now? It's been over a year since the incident and now they are still chasing it.

http://i68.tinypic.com/2h80f12.jpg

So you respond telling thenm that they have no claim against you as there was no contract for parking. Look back on the thread and point them to those cases that were lost by the PPCs because the signs were forbidding and not offering parking.

You also ask them to supply you all the information REQUIRED under the new pre action protocol that come into effect 1st October 2015. To take action without doing so would be unreasonable as you haven’t been able to fully understand their position.