Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • SR06
    • By SR06 15th Aug 16, 10:56 AM
    • 22Posts
    • 15Thanks
    SR06
    PCS Notice to Keeper Millenium Parking Services
    • #1
    • 15th Aug 16, 10:56 AM
    PCS Notice to Keeper Millenium Parking Services 15th Aug 16 at 10:56 AM
    Hi all,

    First time posting. I have read the NEWBIES thread and looking for some more advice before I proceed with the next stage.

    My flatmate and I rent a two bed apartment in Swansea that has one allocated parking spot for our flat. The parking spot has one permit that any car can use.

    My flat mate had gone away for the week and didn't leave the permit behind at the flat. During that period, my mother's car was parked in our parking space with 'Awaiting parking permit' attached to the front windscreen wiper on a template that contains the apartment’s details. On 25/06/2016 my mother's car had a PCN from Millennium Parking Serves for 'No permit displayed'. The piece of paper had come off the windscreen and was on the floor in front of the car.

    My mother's car was then moved to the visitors spot and received another PCN on 28/06/2016 for 'Exceeded Max Stay Period'.

    The PCNs were not paid and my mother has received two PCS Notice to Keeper letters with threats of debt collectors if £150 for each ticket is not paid within 28 days of notice – this is causing her a lot of stress. The first letter relating to the 'No permit displayed' PCN has a date of sending this notice of 26/07/2016, and the second letter 01/08/2016.

    Millenium Parking Services are employed by clcproperty.

    I've done:
    1. Rang BPA to find out if they are members. BPA said that MPS are cooperate members of BPA and are members of IPC. The private parking signs state they are Member of the BPA, Accredited IPC operator, and Registered with the ICO.
    I can't find them as an approved operator on the BPA website, they are listed on an aos member on theipc website.

    2. Rang clcproperty explaining the circumstances. They didn't think my circumstances were exceptional and wouldn't be able to help.

    3. Rang Dawson's agency – the agency we went through the process of renting this apartment. They advised to write to Millennium Parking Services directly with the hope that they'd drop one of the fines.

    On the back of the Notice to Keeper letter it states:
    “At the time that the parking charge was incurred, a Notice to Driver was affixed to the vehicle or sent by post. This offered the driver the ability to appeal within 21 days of its imposition.” As this period has lapsed it goes on to say “If you consider there to be exceptional circumstances as why you should be able to appeal outside of this period then you should send your reasons in writing to us at the contact details provided.”
    If the appeal is considered and rejected, you can appeal to the Independent Appeals Service.


    How should I proceed to appeal these parking charges? Any advice is greatly appreciated.
    Last edited by SR06; 15-08-2016 at 11:02 AM.
Page 3
    • SR06
    • By SR06 9th Jul 17, 4:59 PM
    • 22 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    SR06
    Got a court date and the deadline for the WS 11th.

    Started to write the WS and we've also received theirs.

    Wondering what people think about the evidence they've submitted.

    In the OP, it was mentioned about the piece of paper attached to the windscreen that the grounds keeper had written for with the management company's details on it. They've included this as part of their evidence, with who ever took the photo holding it in their hand. Is it worth including in the WS that we tried to avoid getting a ticket by placing this notice on the vehicle's screen?

    And for the PCN received in the visitors bay, the two time stamps on the photos they've taken of the vehicle are 17:40 and 19:25 the next day. How does that prove exceeded the max stay of 24 hours? The vehicle could have left the visitors bay at 18:00 and returned say 19:00 the next day.

    Anyone got any thoughts on this? And can I use the evidence they've provided in their WS as arguments in my WS?
    Last edited by SR06; 09-07-2017 at 5:05 PM.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 9th Jul 17, 5:07 PM
    • 50,723 Posts
    • 64,127 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Please show us their WS and all attachments, sign photos and landowner contract, all evidence.

    Use Dropbox and show us all of it, and we'll help rip it apart.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • SR06
    • By SR06 9th Jul 17, 9:33 PM
    • 22 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    SR06
    Link to their WS
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/duhs3fa9be8xye0/WS_IndiaBeavan.pdf?dl=0

    In 12. they're using the notice attached to the windscreen against us.

    Our WS is based on that
    1. The lease giving right to park in the allocated bay

    2. NtK, POFA not complied with on
    a) state the period the car was parked – the Claimants Notice to Keeper states a PCN issue time of
    17:04 but does not state the period that the vehicle was parked, thus POFA not complied with
    b) inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified
    period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full - Notice to Keeper omits
    this, thus POFA not complied with.
    c) inform the keeper of any discount offered for prompt payment and the arrangements for the
    resolution of disputes or complaints that are available – rather than offer a discount for prompt
    payment, the Claimants Notice to Keeper has increased the charge from the £100 shown on the sign
    to £150. The Claimants Notice to Keeper states that that “the opportunity to appeal against this
    charge is no longer available”, thus POFA not complied with.

    3. Driver has not been identified as was the case in
    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/india-beavan-agrees-to-drop-millenium.html

    This case is very similar to ours as Millennium took a motorist to court for parking in a spot which the resident had rights to park. The keeper was not a resident, but had the resident's permission to park.

    Difference being is that the RK was not driving on the day and the driver has not been identified.


    What are your thoughts on their WS? Do you think those photos showing the vehicle parked in the visitors spot at the two different time stamps is enough to prove exceeded max stay 24 hours?

    Appreciate any input.
    Last edited by SR06; 09-07-2017 at 9:37 PM.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 9th Jul 17, 11:32 PM
    • 50,723 Posts
    • 64,127 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    LOL! Look at the WS point #24, what a crappy Gallstones error from their cut & paste robo-claim WS. It says:

    ''the rules here just happen to be that to park, they need to be an authorised vehicle actively loading and unloading to commercial premises of Heath parade'' !!

    And India Beavan has signed that, as a statement of truth. Oh Yeah? Heath Parade is a well-known scam site operated in a completely different part of the Country, by PCM UK, not her Company!

    You must question her on that at the hearing. It calls into question her truthfulness and evidence in its entirety and proves that the so called WS was not even her words. Can't have been. She would not have alluded to Heath Parade!

    I would also ask her in person to explain the relevance of 'her' football analogy in Alder v Moore. I think she will struggle because I don't think it's her words here at all in this WS which appears to have been written for her by Gallstones and she could be asked that question direct, looking at her squarely in the eyes. If she denies it, ask how the Heath Parade sentence found its way in there!

    She's not great at cross-examination, we hear:

    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/07/millenium-lose-copper-quarter.html

    Bloody unhelpful that the Blaney case was lost, and they will now all use that transcript, as has happened here in your case. Grrr. First time I've read the transcript (I knew the case was lost; a friend/contact told me...). It really does not help at all.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 10-07-2017 at 11:06 PM.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • SR06
    • By SR06 17th Jul 17, 11:18 PM
    • 22 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    SR06
    Court date is Fri for us.

    We're relying on driver not being identified and the lease giving primacy of contract as our defence.

    I'm going to be representing my Mother. Not sure on what to expect on the day...

    Tried to post our WS on here but got the ip blocked because of copying and pasting from word.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 17th Jul 17, 11:33 PM
    • 50,723 Posts
    • 64,127 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Make sure Mum knows she might still be asked questions, this surprised another Lay Rep.

    You must tear into the witness about her signing a statement of truth with spoon fed words from an old draft written by G's for PCM. The 'Heath Parade' comment cannot possibly be her words, therefore the entire statement can be viewed as suspect.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • SR06
    • By SR06 18th Jul 17, 9:07 AM
    • 22 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    SR06
    Thanks.

    Would like to submit a skeleton argument for the day. Is there a deadline for that?

    Any ideas how to get the case referenced in this article?

    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/india-beavan-agrees-to-drop-millenium.html?m=1

    Millennium Door And Event Security v Mr X. 09/06/2017. C7GF0Y0M. Swansea. DJ Scannel
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 18th Jul 17, 9:43 PM
    • 50,723 Posts
    • 64,127 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    You can't get cases unless the parties involved pay for a transcript. Almost no case has one, from county court. But you can include Prankster Blogs about cases to illustrate your skeleton, if you think it helps.

    Skeleton argument can be filed a couple of days before the hearing, along with your costs schedule.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • SR06
    • By SR06 20th Jul 17, 9:41 AM
    • 22 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    SR06
    So should I bring up that the 'Heath Parade' comment cannot possibly be her words, therefore the entire statement can be viewed as suspect at the very start of the hearing?

    Our two main arguments for the defence tomorrow are that the driver has not been identified and the lease giving rights to park.

    In their WS (https://www.dropbox.com/s/duhs3fa9be8xye0/WS_IndiaBeavan.pdf?dl=0), they are saying (page 2 of WS) their NtK (pages 13 & 17 of WS) are POFA compliant because

    a. The vehicle, land, date and time the charge was issued was specified;
    b. Paragraph 2 informed the keeper that the driver was required to pay the parking charge and that the charge has not been paid;
    c. they confrimed that a NtD (PCN) has beenissued;
    d. they confirmed that my Company does not know the name and address for the driver;
    e. They invite the keeper to pay the charge or notify my Company of the name and address for the driver;
    f. The requirement is to inform of ANY discount rate had passed;
    g. They stated how to make a payment and to whom;
    h. The date the notices were sent were specified; and
    i. They were sent in the prescribed period (within 56 days of the PCN being ussued).


    We are going to argue that the NtK, POFA not complied with on

    i) state the period the car was parked – the Claimants Notice to Keeper states a PCN issue time of
    17:04 but does not state the period that the vehicle was parked, thus POFA not complied with

    ii) inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified
    period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full - Notice to Keeper omits
    this, thus POFA not complied with.

    iii) inform the keeper of any discount offered for prompt payment and the arrangements for the
    resolution of disputes or complaints that are available – rather than offer a discount for prompt
    payment, the Claimants Notice to Keeper has increased the charge from the £100 shown on the sign
    to £150. The Claimants Notice to Keeper states that that “the opportunity to appeal against this
    charge is no longer available”, thus POFA not complied with.


    Any thoughts on how the judge will look at this? And if the judge agrees with them, does that mean that they can chase the RK? Is that the end of that part of the defence?


    On the Lease giving rights to park in allocated bay and visitor bay. I have filed evidence of this in our WS and will take the full Lease on the day. I'm guessing that they'll argue that the signage overides the Lease, how should we argue this part?


    Have read through the Blaney case a few times now... doesn't make me feel good about tomorrow.

    Really appreciate any input on the above. Thanks
    • waamo
    • By waamo 20th Jul 17, 10:30 AM
    • 2,063 Posts
    • 2,475 Thanks
    waamo
    So should I bring up that the 'Heath Parade' comment cannot possibly be her words, therefore the entire statement can be viewed as suspect at the very start of the hearing?
    Very much so. Point out her company doesn't infest that site.
    This space for hire.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 20th Jul 17, 11:40 AM
    • 50,723 Posts
    • 64,127 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    so should i bring up that the 'heath parade' comment cannot possibly be her words, therefore the entire statement can be viewed as suspect at the very start of the hearing?
    of course - yes!!!
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 23-07-2017 at 12:41 AM.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Loadsofchildren123
    • By Loadsofchildren123 20th Jul 17, 12:20 PM
    • 1,262 Posts
    • 2,154 Thanks
    Loadsofchildren123
    1. DJ Taylor held in another case that the uplifting of the charge from the discounted £60 to the full £100 IS the extra "charges" the signage says they will add on if they have to chase the RK - ie the £40 is the extra charges. So they can't then add on an extra £50 on top of that as well. Remember to raise this. The case was Link Parking v Warlow, it hasn't been reported anywhere or blogged and it was in April in Swansea (DJ Taylor is one of the Swansea DJs)


    2. I don't think the judge will care about that typo in IB's statement - its quite usual for solicitors to prepare statements for clients, it doesn't mean you can say "it's not their words, so it must all be untrue". The typo just makes them look a bit silly that's all. You can make the point but if the judge is unimpressed, just say "I can see you are not with me on that point, so I will move on".


    3. Quite a few of the DJs have recently favoured the fact that the PPC can't identify the driver. You must show that there is no obligation on the D to name the driver, they have to prove their case.


    4. Argue that you had pre-existing rights to your space and could park there yourself or invite others to do so. The lease doesn't provide for those rights to be overridden by a third party (the Claimant), but even if it does, there is no provision in the lease for payment of anything other than service charge/ground rent (ie no right to levy a separate charge for failing to comply with new parking regs introduced after the leasehold was sold to you/landlord)


    5. Argue that compliance with POFA is mandatory - compliance is strict, not voluntary, and you can't claim the protection of POFA for "largely" complying with it, only by strictly complying with it - the language used in the statute is "must" (not "may") and it clearly says that the four conditions MUST be complied with in order that a PPC may make the RK liable.
    • SR06
    • By SR06 21st Jul 17, 7:13 AM
    • 22 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    SR06
    Thank you for the above Loadsofchildren
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 21st Jul 17, 3:00 PM
    • 50,723 Posts
    • 64,127 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Court date is Fri for us..
    Originally posted by SR06
    How did it go, SR06?
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • SR06
    • By SR06 22nd Jul 17, 11:33 AM
    • 22 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    SR06
    Both claims were dismissed!

    The DJ agreed with the Claimant that their NtKs were POFA compliant.

    We had argued that they weren't on points a), b), and g) of Schedule 4 para 8/9. And that both NtKs and NtD had to comply, not just one or the other. There was some discussion around a) and in particular the word period. The DJ agreed that it could be applied to the PCN for exceeding max stay but was irrelevant to the PCN for parking without a permit displayed.

    The DJ then moved on to the Lease. MPS were relying on the letter I posted in #11 on this thread and that we knew a parking enforcement was in place. We argued about the Lease having primacy of contract, etc. The DJ said that the contract could have been altered. We argued that the Lease didn't give rights for third-party to alter it. The DJ wasn't completely convinced on this.

    The DJ then moved onto other arguments we brought up.

    The piece of paper attached to the windscreen that MPS chose to ignore on the day. We argued that we had gone out of our way to prevent this situation, and that it was a slip of paper with the managing company's details on it.

    We also argued that the letter in post #11 says The parking enforcement was implemented purely to endure that all residents have the ability to parking in their own allotted car parking space without being impeded by residents or non-residents parking in the wrong places.

    The DJ agreed with us on both arguments and dismissed the claim for not having a permit displayed.

    We also argued against the evidence the Claimant had submitted for exceeding max stay - that their evidence didn't prove that we exceeded the max stay period. This is where the DJ pressed on who was driving the car, and how did we know the vehicle had been moved between the two time-stamps. The Claimant agreed that the vehicle could have been moved.

    The DJ agreed that it was up to the Claimant to prove it hadn't been moved and dismissed that claim also.

    Thank you to everyone who helped along the way.
    Last edited by SR06; 22-07-2017 at 11:44 AM.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 23rd Jul 17, 12:41 AM
    • 50,723 Posts
    • 64,127 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Fantastic news! WELL DONE.

    I hope that LOC123 and the Parking Prankster get to see this win, yet again v Millennium!

    Who turned up, was it India Beaven?

    Did you get to ask her about the Heath Parade sentence and to explain the relevance of Alder v Moore, after all she reckoned that was her statement of truth so they must have been her words...

    Did the Judge ask Mum any direct questions, do you mean he/she asked who was driving? And who was the Judge/which court please?
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • SR06
    • By SR06 24th Jul 17, 12:05 PM
    • 22 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    SR06
    Thank you.

    Yes, India Beavan represented MPS.

    We did ask about the Heath Parade comment. The judge then asked IB who wrote her WS, was it a template? IB said that she gets a template from Gladstones that she alters for each case.

    We forgot to ask to explain the relevance of Alder v Moore.

    The judge didn't ask any questions directly to My mother. Only if she wished to give any comments or ask anything herself.

    Yes, the judge asked who was driving on the day and how did we know the car had been moved. We said a family member was driving.

    It was DJ Taylor in Swansea.


    We're really disappointed with the way the management company (CLC) have dealt with this. Numerous times I've spoken to the block management coordinator about what happened on the day and he refused to help unless there was "reasonable cause" to do so.

    Given that we won our case based on the evidence MPS submitted themselves, and that the block management coordinator had this evidence in hand all along (he went through it with me on the phone), can we claim against them? For DPA breach, trespass? Or anything else?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 24th Jul 17, 2:58 PM
    • 50,723 Posts
    • 64,127 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Given that we won our case based on the evidence MPS submitted themselves, and that the block management coordinator had this evidence in hand all along (he went through it with me on the phone), can we claim against them? For DPA breach, trespass? Or anything else?
    See what LOC123 advises...it would be difficult to claim against a management co while family still live there, if they do?
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,455Posts Today

6,410Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @LordsEconCom: On Tuesday Martin Lewis, Hannah Morrish & Shakira Martin gave evidence to the Cttee. Read the full transcript here: https?

  • Ta ta for now. Half term's starting, so I'm exchanging my MoneySavingExpert hat for one that says Daddy in big letters. See you in a week.

  • RT @thismorning: Can @MartinSLewis' deals save YOU cash? ???? https://t.co/igbHCwzeiN

  • Follow Martin