Parking Charge UKCPS

[motorbiking]

edit: in reply to hawk

They send a letter before action to the person registered as keeper. If they are ignored. they issue a county court claim. If that is ignored they get a listing, if that is ignored they apply for default judgement. if that is ignored they get a CCJ. if that is ignored they apply to enforce. eventually there will be sufficient charges added that it’s worth someone collecting.

You see, it can get rather expensive ignoring things. Fine if you are broke, but plenty of people would be easy pickings for a bailiff or need to avoid CCJs

 

[securespark]

Interesting mate, still don't see how a parking company is going to take a 'presumed' registered keeper to court.

How is it presumed? If the PC gets the details from DVLA, that's not presumed, is it?

EDITED TO REMOVE STUPID APOSTROPHE.

 

[motorbiking]

If you can get them to resend the original “notice” by telling them it wasn’t received then you can reset. If they refuse you have a basis for a claim dispute.

either option puts you in a better position

 

[HawkEye244]

Court is going to issue a default summons with no proof of claim are they ?

 

[HawkEye244]

edit: in reply to hawk

They send a letter before action to the person registered as keeper. If they are ignored. they issue a county court claim. If that is ignored they get a listing, if that is ignored they apply for default judgement. if that is ignored they get a CCJ. if that is ignored they apply to enforce. eventually there will be sufficient charges added that it’s worth someone collecting.

You see, it can get rather expensive ignoring things. Fine if you are broke, but plenty of people would be easy pickings for a bailiff or need to avoid CCJs

It's not expensive ignoring parasite scum. Added charges are fraudulent as a debtor is only obliged to pay an original debt, if it exists at all for that matter. Third party interloper 'fees' are totally ignorable, third party interlopers themselves are completely ignorable. No warrant permits forceful entry to take control of goods. No court will issue a summons without proof of claim, unless the claimant is perjuring themselves (lying). No parking company will be able to argue they are somehow £100 out of pocket. No parking company will be able to prove the registered keeper is who they are making a claim against unless registered keeper commits joinder by admitting liability.

Plenty of people are easy pickings because they don't know their rights.

 

[Deleted member 63160]

Plenty of people are easy pickings because they don't know their rights.

Don't agree with some of your views but on this issue I'm plus one with you. Ignore them.

 

[noseall]

If you can't find or contact the registered keeper to serve them how are you going to take them to court?

Lol.
Hawk is fortunate enough to have an escape tunnel under his mums house and fully functioning black-out blinds. Mind, his fox disguise is a cunning play on his ginger hair.

 

[EFLImpudence]

As you did not receive the first letter, do you actually think it was sent or is this a normal ploy to frighten people when they receive what looks to be a subsequent threat of more drastic action? I know you don't know the answer.

You could say you haven't received this one, either.

If they don't send the supposed first letter, then it is unlikely they will take it further but just wait and see if anyone pays.

Who is to know what is the truth?

 

[motorbiking]

Its reasonable for one letter to go missing, but if you are going to argue they all went missing its a bit a of a stretch beyond the balance of probability.

I think its a decent scam (from their point of view) to skip the first step and go straight to debt collection - higher revenue and avoid pesky POPLA appeal process.

As it stands they have a disputable claim. Which is why I said tell them that.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Agreed - I added a bit after first posting saying similar.

 

[Judy in the sky]

I appealed against a parking ticket some years back. A company called Parking Eye. Claimed I had overstayed by 19 minutes in a car park where charges were only liable to be paid between 8am and 10pm. I had parked there at 20:25, Paid for two hours and left the car park at 22:44. First argued that "someone" had paid for two hours , which actually took them past the legal time limit for parking charges (8am -10pm) Appeal was refused and went to POPLA. At no time during the appeals did I mention who was the driver of the car, only that I was the registered owner. POPLA upheld my appeal on the basis that the driver had not been mentioned by name, nor identified, and that the parking charges were unclear about what happened after 10pm. If car parking charges were only payable up to 10pm then they assumed that parking after 10pm did not , nor could not imply a charge.

 

[securespark]

As you did not receive the first letter, do you actually think it was sent or is this a normal ploy to frighten people when they receive what looks to be a subsequent threat of more drastic action? I know you don't know the answer.

I don't know the answer, but being a cynical grumpy old man, I reckon they save time, money and postage and don't bother sending NTKs.

Thus, as you say, they can frighten people into coughing up and avoid the "appeals" possibility in one fell/ fowl sweep/ swoop (depending on where you're from!).

But if you don't get the NTK, you don't have the proof of your "misdemeanor".

 

[securespark]

Parking Eye sent Mrs Secure a £100 fine for parking in a hotel car park to give blood.

In the lobby were signs saying "no parking fees today if you are giving blood".

It was easily sorted by contacting the NHS and the hotel reception, but PE were gnashing at her heels!

 

[securespark]

Here is a draft reply:


I received a Notification Letter from you on the 17th January. In it you say 28 days have lapsed since you last wrote to me. In fact, I have not received any prior correspondence from you and I dispute your claim.


I have not received a Notice to Keeper and you have not shown me any evidence of my alleged stay that exceeded a stipulated time limit or evidence of signage in the car park detailing your terms and conditions of parking and by omitting to send this initial document, you have denied me the right to appeal the parking charge.


Please send this evidence and allow me my right of appeal, or I will be forced to dispute your claim in court.

I know those of you saying ignore will protest. What do those who suggested a reply think of the draft?

 

[motorbiking]

Too many words... you are not obliged to tell them what they must do, only that they haven't done it.

"In Reply to your letter dated 17th of January 2019, I have not received any previous correspondence from you regarding this claim or particulars of the parking charge and therefore dispute the debt. In your letter, you refer to powers under the protection of freedoms act 2012. I note that you have not complied with the necessary requirements of Schedule 4."