JakeDerry91
Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 14:26
I've been browsing the forums but couldn't find anything that matched my situation so I thought I would post my prediciment.
The car was parked down a side street next to a Spar store on double yellow lines and went in the shop for around 3 minutes. When the driver came back out it had a parking charge notice from anpr on my windscreen. It used to be ok to park here and on the door of the spar there is a notice saying 'Do not pay Private Parking Tickets.' I ignored it and recieved this letter
The offence happened on 02/05/2013 and I received this first letter on 02/07/2013
After ignoring this again I then received
After again ignoring this i received
Then today I have received
The Northampton County Court Claim Form has a H&S Litigation Services stamp on it but no claim number.
I've been researching H&S Litigation Services and found that Paul Hargreaves who is representing ANPR Ltd. is one of two company directors for H&S shown here
https://www.kompany.co.uk/p/uk/08530908Any advice would be appreciated. Cheers
kirkbyinfurnesslad
Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 14:29
Quite simple really.
It's not a real claim form
matt285
Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 14:34
QUOTE (JakeDerry91 @ Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 15:26)
The Northampton County Court Claim Form has a H&S Litigation Services stamp on it but no claim number.
I think this is first class fraudulent misrepresentation, they put the H&S stamp on where the Court Stamp normally sits.
I would be tempted to get a real solicitor engaged for a couple of hours and then try and reclaim his cost from those guys...
Or maybe report this to Trading Standards - they are intentionally misleading you here.
But anyways, it's not a real claim form so you don't
have to do anything.
ItchyCrakus
Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 14:35
JakeDerry91
Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 14:40
Thanks for your quick reply.
Does this mean that they are breaking OFT guidelines regarding debt collection?
In the OFT debt collection practices it says
3. Unfair or Improper Business Practices
3.3 Examples of unfair or improper practice are as follows:
a. use of offical looking documents intended to, or likely to, mislead debtors as to their status. for example, documents made to resemble court documents.
Thanks, Jake
ManxRed
Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 14:41
Yes, I would be looking to report them to OfT, Trading Standards, the DVLA, and the BPA Ltd.
emanresu
Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 14:56
There is an alternative way and that is to go to Moneyclaim online and pay £25 to make a claim for £300 for harassment.
The claim would be that this company has no legal right to make a claim and the paperwork is designed to intentionally mislead.
You could go to the police but they would say it is a civil matter. TS would put it into a pile and BPA/DVLA would give a vague statement of "confused and misunderstood" - like APCOA. Real courts with real claims are a much different kettle of fish.
See the thread by Arctic Monkey and Wage Slave for the outline of how to do it.
Edit: If you do go this route use the N1 form instead and attach the copy of that "claim" form with it. It will likely be the quickest £300 you'll ever make.
dp7
Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 15:00
QUOTE (ManxRed @ Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 15:41)
Yes, I would be looking to report them to OfT, Trading Standards, the DVLA, and the BPA Ltd.
Definitely. They're already under investigation, so another complaint to add to the pile won't hurt.
JakeDerry91
Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 15:40
Thanks for the replies. It's been really helpful, I thought there was something not right.
I'll probably go down the road of reporting them to OfT and Trading Standards.
It ridiculous that they send these letters and think they can get away with it!
Edit: As mentioned earlier, it is the shop in the thread linked.
ManxRed
Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 15:44
ANPR Ltd have a bit of a reputation on here. You can search out some of their threads - put ANPR Ltd in the search box, or 'Trev' might be easier.
Let's just say that they keep us amused.
blueskier
Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 18:33
Jakederry, could i just check. On the written statement that H&S have posted to you (that will never see a court) does Paul Hargreaves state that he was the person who observed and issued the ticket?
First point, the shop owner in the linked thread is saying his neighbour does the ticketing! Could do with confirming this.
Second, if Paul Hargreaves is issuing tickets for ANPR how is he managing to run a succesful London (ahem) based litigation company?
As a side note, when i received all that nonsense the statement was written by the issuer of the ticket, interestingly a Mr Wayne Hargreaves.
Shame you never appealed as their poor attempt at a NTK was out of time limits, i.e. offence, 28 days for payment then they can get RK details and contact you WITHIN the following 28 days. No matter they are just full of bluster.
Umkomaas
Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 18:43
If the PPC had half a brain cell they would surely realise that this schoolyard attempt at extortion will surely end up with them (eventually, and yes I know Christmas is coming) with a DVLA ban and the loss of a good chunk of their (very dodgy) income.
No fool like a silly old fool (or something like that
)
JakeDerry91
Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 18:50
QUOTE (blueskier @ Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 19:33)
Jakederry, could i just check. On the written statement that H&S have posted to you (that will never see a court) does Paul Hargreaves state that he was the person who observed and issued the ticket?
First point, the shop owner in the linked thread is saying his neighbour does the ticketing! Could do with confirming this.
Second, if Paul Hargreaves is issuing tickets for ANPR how is he managing to run a succesful London (ahem) based litigation company?
As a side note, when i received all that nonsense the statement was written by the issuer of the ticket, interestingly a Mr Wayne Hargreaves.
Shame you never appealed as their poor attempt at a NTK was out of time limits, i.e. offence, 28 days for payment then they can get RK details and contact you WITHIN the following 28 days. No matter they are just full of bluster.
Yes its his statement and signed by him. I was thinking of going down to the shop and having a chat with the owner to see if there was anything else.
When I originally received the NTK I came on here to check if they were in the time limits and I got this;
The difference in days between [02/05/2013] and [01/07/2013] was [60] days so the Notice to Keeper was [out of time. They can no longer hold the Keeper liable]
Edit: On a side note it turns out the signs they are using at the site don't comply with BPA guidelines either, not that it makes much of a difference but it's just another thing they've done wrong.
Umkomaas
Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 18:57
QUOTE (JakeDerry91 @ Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 19:50)
QUOTE (blueskier @ Thu, 15 Aug 2013 - 19:33)
Jakederry, could i just check. On the written statement that H&S have posted to you (that will never see a court) does Paul Hargreaves state that he was the person who observed and issued the ticket?
First point, the shop owner in the linked thread is saying his neighbour does the ticketing! Could do with confirming this.
Second, if Paul Hargreaves is issuing tickets for ANPR how is he managing to run a succesful London (ahem) based litigation company?
As a side note, when i received all that nonsense the statement was written by the issuer of the ticket, interestingly a Mr Wayne Hargreaves.
Shame you never appealed as their poor attempt at a NTK was out of time limits, i.e. offence, 28 days for payment then they can get RK details and contact you WITHIN the following 28 days. No matter they are just full of bluster.
Yes its his statement and signed by him. I was thinking of going down to the shop and having a chat with the owner to see if there was anything else.
When I originally received the NTK I came on here to check if they were in the time limits and I got this;
The difference in days between [02/05/2013] and [01/07/2013] was [60] days so the Notice to Keeper was [out of time. They can no longer hold the Keeper liable]
If 60 days then the statement is correct - not that Trev would either understand it or agree with it. Legally you're in a good place.
JakeDerry91
Mon, 19 Aug 2013 - 07:47
Oh bit of an update. I went to the citizens advice bureau to see what they had to say and, they gave me a lot of leaflets but no real advice so I decided to go to my local combined court to see what they thought of the claim form. They said h&s shouldn't be doing that as it's against court protocol and it's a scare tactic that they're not allowed to use. Anyway they took photocopies of the claim form and the cover letter from h&s and said they would get one of the judges to look at it and maybe contact the company. They also said I should prepare something if I'm planning on defending the charge.
I feel a bit unsure what to do now as I thought I'd have a solution to it by now but being to to prepare a defence has me a bit worried that it will end up in court. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
emanresu
Mon, 19 Aug 2013 - 07:57
Well done. More people should do this.
As regards planning a defence, the reason that ANPR do this is because they have no legal right to take anyone to court. So if they did and this document was produced, they would be unlikely to be leaving the court without a strong word from the judge along the lines of "bring your toothbrush" next time.
Local paper might be interested once it all pans out.
bama
Mon, 19 Aug 2013 - 19:02
I would be most interested in seeing a close up of the red seal on that form.
a close up that clearly shows the embossed text clearly.
is that possible ?
kirkbyinfurnesslad
Mon, 19 Aug 2013 - 19:06
Jakederry
STOP worrying, h n s are not taking you to court!! It's a scare tactic and it looks like it's working.
Trevs outfit is well known. So chill out and relax:)
MMM
Mon, 19 Aug 2013 - 19:18
Jakederry
Please just take a minute or two to read and understand the advice you have been given on here, its a busy place and with all the current pre court activity no one has time to give you advice that you subsequently ignore especially when may be felt that advice could have been better given elsewhere,
to summarise
ITS NOT A REAL CLAIM FORM IT WILL NOT GO TO COURT
Had you bothered to search the forum before posting to see if ANPR were "known" you would have found many threads showing they are the "in-joke" of PPC land.
No one here suggested to you that the CAB was an option as we know it is generally as waste of time as you have now found out.
Everthing is in your favour; a gang of chancers are misrepresenting their position and authority in the hope you will pay up and forgive me but it appears to be working. At the outset those on here that responded to your first post told you the document was nonsense.
The best advice you have had so far is to raise a claim against them.
From what you have subsequently posted the "real" court have also told you it was a false document; I cannot therefore see what you thought the CAB would bring to the party, especially when others on here told you it was nonsense paperwork from ANPR days ago.
I am sorry to say you have wasted your time at the, court and at CAB and that this time would have been better spent filing a claim against these chancers from ANPR.
This is a fightback forum we do not advise taking the easy way out we suggest you go for the kill and in this instance ANPR are so in your sights you cannot miss, however at the end of the day its up to you.
You came here for help and disregarded it, you went elsewhere and were told the same as you were told on here and still it seems you are worried and may pay up. I cannot see how you are moving forward with this when you say you are still worried it will go to court, you appear to have ignored what you have been told by those not only on this forum, but also the court and the CAB and even the shopkeeper next door.
In 1/10th of the time you have spent doing this you could have counterclaimed and put an end to this matter (as well as getting a virtual Pepipoo pat on the back) Trev at ANPR has got a **** on for people who believe his legal mumbo jumbo and fantasy parallel world interpretation of ANY legal point he comes across (be it real or wholly imagined).
Best of luck
Regards
MMM
Jlc
Mon, 19 Aug 2013 - 19:36
QUOTE
The fee for trespass is restricted by the Government to £100.
Really?
blueskier
Mon, 19 Aug 2013 - 20:24
I would love ANPR to attempt a court appearance. They do appear deluded enough to believe their own nonsense or is that just a front to their inadequacies?
It is such a shame the persecuted can not become the prosecutor.
Op, good on you for approaching the court. Go for them.
matt285
Mon, 19 Aug 2013 - 20:26
QUOTE (Jlc @ Mon, 19 Aug 2013 - 20:36)
QUOTE
The fee for trespass is restricted by the Government to £100.
Really?
Did you not know about this? Also Parliament have recently issued a new Act which has required all dictionary producers to remove the word gullible from all said dictionaries in circulation in the UK.
Check it out if you don't believe me.......
blueskier
Mon, 19 Aug 2013 - 20:35
bama, the seal says H&S litigation on the outer ring with a number in the center, maybe 8 numbers. (Probably).
bama
Mon, 19 Aug 2013 - 21:08
oh dear,
if the local judge who sees it takes umbrage they may face some tough questions
(and I don't just mean about them covering the place on the form for the court stamp though I suppose that could be seen as
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/28/section/135 )
shame about the 'probably', call me detail oriented but would love to know that number. and if its a company number
blueskier
Tue, 20 Aug 2013 - 06:32
Bama, i will pass on the info when i check when i get home tonight.
That seems like quite a penalty if it is seen as such by the judiciary.
ANPR really are pushing the boundaries it seems.
blueskier
Tue, 20 Aug 2013 - 08:10
Bama, tried to PM you but your inbox is full.
Will resend later.
bama
Tue, 20 Aug 2013 - 08:57
am having probs with PM archiving
wil lpost on here when i have cleared it, try again after that.
still haven't got PM archiving to work for me (grr)
but have made some room
PM away while it lasts
blueskier
Tue, 20 Aug 2013 - 11:33
Bama, and she's away.
JakeDerry91
Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 10:49
Dragging up my old thread because this morning I received a claim form from Money Claim Online through Northampton County Court. This time it looks legit with the correct stamp and all the accompanying Response Pack. They now want £315.00 from me. It says on the form I can respond to the claim online using the Money Claim website but I thought I would come on here first to seek some more advice. I;m quite surprised that it has gone this far after all the reassurance i got on here that it wouldn't go to court. So far I think they have gone wrong in the following ways. The NTK letter was sent out to me 60 days after the offence which as far as I'm aware is out of time and they cannot hold me liable. and, They sent me a false claim form with their own stamp on which as mentioned by bama earlier could be in breach of
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/28/section/135 As i said previously i took this form to the local court and they said that it was breaching court protocol and they would pass a copy of it onto a judge, as of now I've not heard anything back about this. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks
Jlc
Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 10:58
What's the particulars of claim and how is the amount broken down?
JakeDerry91
Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 11:09
Particulars:
On (date) a motor vehicle namely (car) with registration (xxxx) trespassed in the area know to us as (road name). We therefore created and issued a Parking Charge Notice with the Ref No. xxxx. The defendant who is the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the incident, is, under schedule 4 of the data protection of freedoms act 2012, now responsible for the drivers actions. Our claim is to recoup such monies under the act. On the 28th day we applied to the DVLA for the details incurring an additional £40, within accordance of governments guidelines. After sending an invoice, two reminders, and a pre action notice we now seek assistance in court. We claim original fee £100. Adminstration cost of £40. Court and pre action admin £75. Court attendance £75 (estimated. Total £290.
Breakdown
Amount claimed £290
Court fee £25
Total £315.
In the particulars they seem to have forgotten they also sent me a faked claim form with their own seal stamped on in place of the court stamp!
Thanks.
Jlc
Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 12:02
QUOTE (JakeDerry91 @ Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 12:09)
Court and pre action admin £75. Court attendance £75
Surely these are costs to be awarded by the court if they are relevant? Not to be listed in advance. The amount that can be claimed is severely limited at small claims - read
here.
Obviously you'll be pointing out the relevant section of the PoFA that shows they don't have the right to automatically pursue the keeper. Also, how the 'trespass' generates such damages. Only the landowner can pursue trespass?
cabbyman
Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 12:10
Salmosalaris
Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 12:30
oooh this could be fun
SchoolRunMum
Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 12:59
LOL! I can't believe that ANPR Ltd reckon their flawed paperwork and signage would survive a decent defence. Have you got a picture of the signs on site? IF NOT THEN GET SOME, INCLUDING THE VIEW OF ANY SIGNS AS YOU ARRIVE AT THAT SIDE STREET (read the BPA Code of Practice section 18 and Appendix B on signs, first, so you know what to look for to find where they went wrong).
You need to acknowledge the claim and say you will defend in full, that then extends the time to 28 days from the date of service of these court papers, to get your defence submitted.
OK here are my usual links I give people to start putting together their own bullet-point skeleton defence for this stage:
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...mp;gopid=862298I see they are claiming it was
trespass, would be interesting to see what their signs actually said. To allege trespass I think only a landowner would have the locus to pursue it, and there would need to have been damage or loss. If ANPR Ltd reckon they have a contract which allows them to sue for trespass in their own name at this site, they will need to disclose that contract - so say so in your defence.
The NTK arriving too late, completely precludes there being any registered keeper liability under POFA 2012. So be very alert to your wording NOT implying who was driving (no I). You should amend your posts above in case they suggest any driver...
Umkomaas
Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 14:58
Seems like one or two more PPCs are following the PE/CEL examples and issuing court papers, more I would guess to put the frighteners on rather any desire to put in an appearance before a Judge. I wonder who Trev is going to field there - him or N Martin? Perhaps they might even offer the OP that they will put his case for him to the Judge
OP - who is named as the claimant - ANPR Ltd or H & S Litigation Services?
matt285
Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 18:12
This is going to be amazing! I can't wait having ANPR Ltd and their own red stamped claim form in front of a real judge
To the OP: Acknowledge Service and state you will defend fully. What is your local court (as this is where a hearing would happen, although I very much doubt that it will)? I am very tempted to make sure I attend this hearing for the fun of ANPR stating their case
You will have lots of fun with those monkeys, don't be scared, they are swimming in deep waters now but have left their floaties at home.
Salmosalaris
Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 18:22
the court could be full that day , you could sell tickets
matt285
Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 18:29
QUOTE (Salmosalaris @ Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 19:22)
the court could be full that day , you could sell tickets
you definitely could. Maybe this is how ANPR are planning to recover their "losses"?
kirkbyinfurnesslad
Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 19:04
Jake please advice your location. More then happy to help you in court.
Please send me a pm to advise
If it is trespass then as far as I am aware only the land owner can persue. More experienced people will confirm
JakeDerry91
Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 19:11
QUOTE (SchoolRunMum @ Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 13:59)
LOL! I can't believe that ANPR Ltd reckon their flawed paperwork and signage would survive a decent defence. Have you got a picture of the signs on site? IF NOT THEN GET SOME, INCLUDING THE VIEW OF ANY SIGNS AS YOU ARRIVE AT THAT SIDE STREET (read the BPA Code of Practice section 18 and Appendix B on signs, first, so you know what to look for to find where they went wrong).
You need to acknowledge the claim and say you will defend in full, that then extends the time to 28 days from the date of service of these court papers, to get your defence submitted.
OK here are my usual links I give people to start putting together their own bullet-point skeleton defence for this stage:
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...mp;gopid=862298I see they are claiming it was
trespass, would be interesting to see what their signs actually said. To allege trespass I think only a landowner would have the locus to pursue it, and there would need to have been damage or loss. If ANPR Ltd reckon they have a contract which allows them to sue for trespass in their own name at this site, they will need to disclose that contract - so say so in your defence.
The NTK arriving too late, completely precludes there being any registered keeper liability under POFA 2012. So be very alert to your wording NOT implying who was driving (no I). You should amend your posts above in case they suggest any driver...
I've got a picture of one of the signs, there's no mention of trespassing just that by stopping it is in breach of their contract with the landowner. I'm planning on defending because of all the things they have done wrong, I think they need making an example of.
OP - who is named as the claimant - ANPR Ltd or H & S Litigation Services?
ANPR Ltd is the claimant, which is a bit strange after they said they are passing my case onto H+S.
I can't seem to edit my old posts, i can do my posts from today but not my original posts.
Thanks for any help.
Salmosalaris
Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 19:16
where was the location ? ( send me a PM )
blueskier
Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 19:30
I suspect ANPR will just be trying it on. They are possibly just going to take one all the way to court to see how it pans out before rolling it out to every ignorer if they have any success.
Just hope that the one they pick on and the judge are fully aware of the facts the legislation and the code of practice.
Did we establish if they are claiming their usual liquidated damages nonsense on the signs?
Did you ever receive a copy of their contract which almost certainly holds no such clause?
Probably not as i think you never went the Popla route.
bama
Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 20:04
If this makes it to court the gallery will be full
but thats a hell of a big if.
Showing my bits in Lewis' window if it happens big.
SchoolRunMum
Sun, 6 Oct 2013 - 00:40
QUOTE (bama @ Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 21:04)
If this makes it to court the gallery will be full
but thats a hell of a big if.
Showing my bits in Lewis' window if it happens big.
We will hold you to that bama!
JakeDerry91
Mon, 7 Oct 2013 - 06:39
QUOTE (blueskier @ Sat, 5 Oct 2013 - 20:30)
I suspect ANPR will just be trying it on. They are possibly just going to take one all the way to court to see how it pans out before rolling it out to every ignorer if they have any success.
Just hope that the one they pick on and the judge are fully aware of the facts the legislation and the code of practice.
Did we establish if they are claiming their usual liquidated damages nonsense on the signs?
Did you ever receive a copy of their contract which almost certainly holds no such clause?
Probably not as i think you never went the Popla route.
Yeh the sign they use says "We will require you (the trespasser) via the registered keeper to pay us £100 compensation as 'liquidated damages' for our breach of contract"
Yeh I got a copy of their contract with the land owner, who's details they've tried to hide, there's no mention of 'liquidated damages in it.
I could do with the name of an administrator of the forum if anyone could give me a name.
Thanks.
kirkbyinfurnesslad
Mon, 7 Oct 2013 - 06:56
Fredd / southpaw82
Could you pm me the location pls. It woukd be worth finding out who owns the land. Land Registry is only a few quid if u can't read the land owner details.
I can't see a judge allowing this if they are claiming they have to pay the landowner yet it's not in their contract...
JakeDerry91
Mon, 7 Oct 2013 - 07:27
I can read his details, they haven't even properly covered his phone number up. Might request land registry details anyway.
Obviously the contract says that ANPR will be responsible for ticketing vehicles but there's no wording of liquidating damages.
Thanks for the administration names. Yeh I'll pm you.
dp7
Mon, 7 Oct 2013 - 08:25
Worth making a note of this from Trev;
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/20...t-of-reply.htmlQUOTE
WE legally seek and spend all of the damages.
So Trev is now taking court action to try and profit from an alleged trespass on someone else's land.
I'd love to come and watch this one (if he's stupid enough to actually proceed) too.
ManxRed
Mon, 7 Oct 2013 - 08:26
In the words of Chris Evans.....
Don't forget your toothbrush, Trev.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.