4 PCNs in 7 days in residential carpark

scrib2074 wrote: »

Thanks so much for confirming what I suspected. I definitely feel like I'm being scammed.

I've read through most of the stickies. And your links are very helpful, I had read them before.

I was thinking of replying to the last 3 PCNs with the template appeal for IPC members in the stickies. Just cut and paste with 3 in the same envelope. If you use NPM's online appeal form you have to reveal the driver, would that make a difference in this case? You also can't appeal by email. Would 3 IPC "appeals" by post be a reasonable way to proceed?

I'm really angry about the HA, how they brought these people in and then fobbed me off. Housing Services Manager person told me I'd continue to get PCNs until I got a new permit and I should ask NPM for one. Wouldn't believe me they are taking photos so you can't see the permit, let alone whether it's valid.

Yes, three separate appeals using the IPC template from the NEWBIES thread. Online is best, but if there is no other option than by post then send it first class from a Post Office counter and obtain a free proof of posting. All three in one envelope will be fine. Take a picture of all three or scan them if you can before sending. Don't use any other method of posting than the above.

Have you complained to the landowner? You should get others together to send lots of individual complaints to the MA saying they will be called as witnesses to court if these progress that far, and will also be included in a DPA breach claim as well. Ask them when they will be free to attend court.
Don't muck about with them.
In a lot of these residential cases the MA is in on the scam and gets a kick back for every ticket, or are actually the ones taking the pics themselves and get paid for every one that the motorists pay.

Do not pay, do not reveal the driver's identity.

Most important, what does your lease say about parking, and if permits are not mentioned, why are you displaying them at all? If I said you had to put a picture of Donald Trump in your car signed by you with love and kisses, you wouldn't do it if it wasn't in your lease now would you?

Here is a copy of a letter which I sent to my HA some time ago about UKPC, it achieved nothing


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I was surprised to see that TVCHA, a registered charity, employ former clampers, UKPC, to manage the car park at Branagh Court.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]You may or may not be aware that this company is one of a number of similar private parking companies who use underhand, threatening, and often unlawful methods to bully, threaten and lie to extract extortionate sums of money from people, many of whom can ill afford it, for minor alleged breaches of non existent contracts. In some cases even for parking in their own demised property for failing to display a “parking permit”, despite the fact that they are entitled to “quiet enjoyment” of their properties. Also, are the PPC allowed to conduct trade in the car park? Are business rates applicable?[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]For a few minutes overstay in a free car park in a shopping centre, where there has been no loss to anyone, they will demand up to a hundred pounds in penalties, contrary to the Law of Contract. They use legalise, threats, and scary letters from dodgy solicitors, debt collectors and bailiffs. They try to pass themselves off as police or councils, sending out fake court summonses, produce false statements from witnesses and take people to the County Court. [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]One company, Parking Eye have issued over 7,000 summonses in the last 12 months, although they rarely actually reach court as they know that they will lose most of them. However, according to an F.O.I. request, UKPC have not taken a single person to court in the last 12 months. Could this be that they know that they have no case? [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Your contractor UKPC was I believe a former clamper called Denver Security Services, and is one of the more aggressive private parking companies. So much so that in September 2011 Hull Trading Standards decided to take them to Hull Crown Court on 16 counts, unfortunately they lost 15 of these charges on technicalities. However, they were so concerned about this company's tactics that they were willing to commit £41,000 of tax payers' money to prosecute them. [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Many of these companies will take people to court, even when parked in their own demised property. This can result in whoever signed the contract with them, (i.e. the managing agents and/or the Landowners being themselves taken to court by successful defendents for damages for trespass, stress, and harassment, (see R. Davey v UKPC, Winchester Crown Court 23rd January 2013).[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I am not a lawyer, but I have read the current signs in Branagh Court and it would appear that, from the words “failure to comply ...” they are alleging breach of contract. How can people be breaching a contract they are not party to?[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]To sum up[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]These companies are vultures, preying on the ignorant and vulnerable. They are not interested in the management of car parks for the benefits of residents, but fining them for minor breaches of meaningless terms and conditions, and as a registered charity you should not be an accomplice in their near criminal activities. Unless they own the land they have no power to enter into contracts with owners, landlords and tenants of Branagh Court.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]To win a case for trespass they have to prove loss to the landowner. If the landowner is also the person they are pursuing, there can be no loss.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Unless you have granted it,UKPC has no authority to take cases to court.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]They have no legal authority to issue fines, only the Police, Councils, Tfl, and some airports and TOCs can do that.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Their so called Parking charges are merely speculative invoices, and their claims for breach are in fact unenforceable penalties.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Having read this, I am sure that you will wish to help your tenants, many of whom do not have a great deal of money, and immediately disassociate yourself from this company.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] [/FONT]

scrib2074 wrote: »

Thanks for the information about how to post. NPM's online appeal form requires me to name the driver, there is no email appeal option. Unfortunately I appealed the first PCN by the online form, they have driver information for that.

I've exchanged lots of emails with the landowner, a housing association. These finished with them saying the parking company are operating with their permission and they are meeting the regulations. No idea what regulations they were referring to. I doubt they're in on the scam but they had lots of confidence in the integrity of the private parking company. I would love to include them in a DPA breach claim, they just keep referring me back to NPM. Tell me to appeal and get a permit, although I have one.

The parking company photographer is coming between 9 and 9.30am each time. I work nights so I'm a sitting duck. The carpark is probably close to empty when s/he visits, was thinking of dropping a note in my neighbour's letterboxes to see if they've had any problems. I would also have thought if the HA were receiving lots of complaints they might take me seriously but maybe other people are paying?

Any benefit in confronting the photographer? It would be easy for me to wait up for them. Probably not.

My tenancy agreement states I have to park within marked bays and not be obstructive. Landlord can vary agreement with 28 days notice, I'm certain no such variance was brought in about parking. Must admit until receiving my first PCN a week ago I thought I had to display a permit. I'm learning.

Appealing as driver is not too bad in a residency case where the motorist already has a right to park as defined by their lease. In the unlikely event that it went to court, being able to show the judge "my lease" might actually put you in a stronger position as another poster did here recently and won.
You should most definitely complain to the DVLA about your inability to appeal as keeper.

As for regulations there are none. The private parking industry is completely unregulated.
In the case of the IPC, the people who run it are the same people that also carry out the IAS appeals and the same solicitors who would turn up in court. It is not independent at all.

Confronting the scam photographer would do no good, but there is nothing stopping you taking pictures of them taking pictures of your car. You could also take pictures of their car if you wished. Taking pictures of people or objects in a public place is not an offence. If they say anything, just walk away.
Perhaps a residents' photographic society group might like to take lots of pictures.

No variation of contract means they have no case and therefore a breach of DPA has occurred for the applications to the DVLA. If it went to court you would have the option of a counter claim or a separate claim. The advantage of a counter claim is that the scammers can't give up when they realise they aren't going to win.

Personally I would return the permit stating that there is no requirement in your lease to display one, but you were only showing it as a curtesy to the attendant who is supposed to be preventing abuse of the car park. Since you, a genuine resident with right to park is now being targeted, you are withdrawing that curtesy since none is being shown to you.
Then add that you withdraw any implied right of access to your demised parking space and will treat any contact by them to obtain your details from the DVLA as breach of the Data Protection Act. You reserve the right to issue a court claim for each and every breach. Finding in your favour for a DPA breach is normally in the region of £250 to £750. Copy this to the MA.

edited.

Having seen the post below this one, point out that you have six years to start a claim for a DPA breach.