IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.

Help! Ukpc have 'photographic evidence' which isn't real

1…1718202223…25

Comments

  • bazster
    bazster Posts: 7,436 Forumite
    Combo Breaker First Post
    The_Deep wrote: »
    But Beavis only applies to a limited number of cases Mr B. Those where the car park is free for a certain amount of time, with no facility to pay for extra time, and where there is a commercial justification in imposing a penalty.


    This rules out P&D car parks, hospitals, universities, flats ands estates, airports, railway stations, contractual charge car parks, parking on hatched areas, on white lines, in disabled bays, parent and child bay, staff only spaces, etc.

    I'm aware of all that, but my point is that I don't think County Court judges will care about such details: they will regard the Beavis outcome as applying to all private parking cases. If Beavis loses they will uphold claims as a matter of course regardless of whether they fit the Beavis model.
    Je suis Charlie.
  • The_Deep
    The_Deep Posts: 16,830 Forumite
    If Beavis loses they will uphold claims as a matter of course regardless of whether they fit the Beavis model.


    And if they do, can one not appeal? You can certainly appeal about a Mags or Crown Court decision.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
  • enfield_freddy
    enfield_freddy Posts: 6,147 Forumite
    The_Deep wrote: »
    If Beavis loses they will uphold claims as a matter of course regardless of whether they fit the Beavis model.


    And if they do, can one not appeal? You can certainly appeal about a Mags or Crown Court decision.


    yup , and it ends up at the supreme court and court of appeal


    a Mr Bevis once appealed his case
  • hoohoo
    hoohoo Posts: 1,717 Forumite
    The_Deep wrote: »
    If Beavis loses they will uphold claims as a matter of course regardless of whether they fit the Beavis model.


    And if they do, can one not appeal? You can certainly appeal about a Mags or Crown Court decision.

    You can, but it costs £155 and permission to appeal is not a certainty.

    The situation is then that bottom scrapers CEL can pay £25 to get a decision, while motorists have to pay £155.
    Dedicated to driving up standards in parking
  • The_Deep
    The_Deep Posts: 16,830 Forumite
    I am not talking about asking for permission to appeal, I am talking about complaining to the MOJ/Court Service /MP/LCD/Grande Poo Bah about a decision which you believe to be flawed.


    Surely that will not cost you anything?
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
  • bazster
    bazster Posts: 7,436 Forumite
    Combo Breaker First Post
    The_Deep wrote: »
    I am not talking about asking for permission to appeal, I am talking about complaining to the MOJ/Court Service /MP/LCD/Grande Poo Bah about a decision which you believe to be flawed.


    Surely that will not cost you anything?

    And where will that get you? As far as I know the only body with the power to overturn a court judgment is a higher court.
    Je suis Charlie.
  • Minnie87
    Minnie87 Posts: 15 Forumite
    Hi all!
    Thought I best give you an update!
    Yesterday I received a letter from UKPC dated 4th September saying
    "Thank you for your recent correspondence in relation to the above parking charge. We understand your frustration and appreciate the inconvenience this has caused you. It is not our intention to cause undue worry and frustration when enforcing our clients parking regulations.
    We have investigated the appeal based on the information submitted by yourself and can confirm in this instance that the parking charge has been cancelled.
    We strive to deliver a high quality service that enhances the existing quality standards insisted upon by our client and ensure out wardens are stringently trained to meet these expected standards.
    On behalf of ourselves and our clients we apologise for any inconvenience."

    At the date of this letter I had only provided the same information to popla as I had first submitted to ukpc which they rejected! Then suddenly they decided to cancel it. Funny how it doesn't say anything about fraud lol.

    Thank you to everyone who left comments! My story along with a few others really caused a stir which forced ukpc into admitting fraud had taken place. I couldn't have done it without all your help and support and also the support of the reporters who got involved
    The lincolnite
    Alex parking prankster
    BBC radio Lincolnshire
    BBC radio 5 live
    BBC radio 4
    Lincolnshire echo
    BBC look north
    ITV calendar
    Sunday times
    Daily mail
    The mirror
    Telegraph
    I think that was everyone.
    Keep fighting for what is right! :beer::T
  • Redx
    Redx Posts: 38,084 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Photogenic
    well done, about time this one was put to bed

    keep hold of that cancellation for 6 years, just in case !
  • Minnie87
    Minnie87 Posts: 15 Forumite
    Why for 6 years?
  • trisontana
    trisontana Posts: 9,472 Forumite
    First Post Combo Breaker First Anniversary
    They didn't exactly apologize or say sorry about the scam, did they?
    What part of "A whop bop-a-lu a whop bam boo" don't you understand?
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173K Life & Family
  • 247.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards