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
    • danmc1309
    • By danmc1309 17th Feb 17, 9:01 PM
    • 32Posts
    • 22Thanks
    danmc1309
    Civil Enforcement LTD Hospital Fine
    • #1
    • 17th Feb 17, 9:01 PM
    Civil Enforcement LTD Hospital Fine 17th Feb 17 at 9:01 PM
    Hello all,

    First post here after receiving a letter from Civil Enforcement LTD. I apologise if I've placed this in the wrong section or missed some crucial reading but after spending an hour or so reading the forums I'm feeling a little lost and wondered if my situation warranted an appeal.

    I received a letter this week which states date issued 6th Feb 2017, however the PCN issue date is 26/10/16 and I've received no correspondence until this point.

    Thanks in advance


    hxxp://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e202/Dannymc1309/car%20park%20sign_zpsnjj9pf1t.jpg
    Last edited by danmc1309; 25-02-2017 at 12:35 AM. Reason: photo didn't work
Page 3
    • danmc1309
    • By danmc1309 20th Mar 17, 1:25 PM
    • 32 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    danmc1309
    Latest reply

    Dear xxxx
    Thank you for your reply.

    An effective ‘Notice to Keeper’ within the meaning of POFA 2012, must meet the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Act. In particular, paragraphs 6 (1) (a) and 8 (2), if a Notice to Driver has previously been issued at the time of the parking event.

    We note that you state that the Notice to Keeper does not contain the requirement as outlined in section 8(2)f of POFA which states that the notice: “must warn the keeper that if, at the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to keeper is given—

    (i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges (as specified under paragraph (c) or (d)) has not been paid in full, and
    (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,

    the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;”

    Having reviewed the Notice to Keeper, it can be seen to state: “In England and Wales if after 28 days from the date of this notice this PCN has not been paid or you have not provided us with the name and current address for service of the driver, we may have the right to recover from the registered keeper
    all unpaid amounts due.”

    As previously advised, there has not been a breach of the Code in this instance and we are therefore unable to assist you further with your enquiry.


    Yours Sincerely,

    {Text removed by MSE Forum Team}
    AOS Investigations Team
    British Parking Association
    Email: aos@britishparking.co.uk
    Web: www.britishparking.co.uk
    Last edited by MSE Andrea; 12-04-2017 at 8:40 AM.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 20th Mar 17, 8:42 PM
    • 48,831 Posts
    • 62,321 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Dear {Text removed by MSE Forum Team},

    John Gallagher at POPLA has agreed that 'within 28 days from the date of this notice' is not compliant with paragraph 8(2)f. So did the previous POPLA provider (I don't count the Wright Hassall 'conflict of interests' perceived horror show that the BPA 'provided' briefly, as they failed to act as if they were POPLA, contacted operators to fill in gaps in evidence - telling them what was needed - and their woeful decisions were never seen to be independent). London Councils POPLA and the current provider both agree that this wording is not POFA compliant.

    In addition to confirming the 8(2)f failing - as you effectively just have - are you now going to try to tell me that this NTK 'can be seen to state' the other mandatory wording in the rest of paragraph 8 of Schedule 4? Please confirm this is the BPA's formal position, that you are actually trying to tell me from the BPA's official viewpoint, that CEL NTKs are POFA versions and that a debt collector is entitled to say a keeper is liable based on that piece of paper?

    I will be passing this correspondence to the DCLG once you have confirmed the BPA's final position. This is a formal complaint and remains unresolved, each email being copied to the DVLA for their information.

    yours
    Last edited by MSE Andrea; 12-04-2017 at 8:40 AM.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • danmc1309
    • By danmc1309 20th Mar 17, 8:57 PM
    • 32 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    danmc1309
    Sent. Thanking you for your continued support Coupon-mad, i sense that you might actually be enjoying the thrill of the incompetence by this point
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 20th Mar 17, 11:29 PM
    • 48,831 Posts
    • 62,321 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I like these sort of 'dog with a bone' complaints...I am a woman of a certain middle age who never gives up on a complaint and hates to be fobbed off by rubbish.

    Also, have you seen this thread?

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5621226

    I've just suggested in another complaint email to the BPA I just wrote tonight, that people might like to drop in the line: 'please don't skirt around the issue'!

    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • danmc1309
    • By danmc1309 21st Mar 17, 8:45 PM
    • 32 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    danmc1309
    • danmc1309
    • By danmc1309 22nd Mar 17, 10:43 AM
    • 32 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    danmc1309
    Dear Xxxxx

    Thank you for your reply.

    This Notice to Keeper has been issued utilising POFA (2012) and contains the relevant information as outlined in Schedule 4 (8)2 of POFA.

    As previously advised, there has not been a breach of the Code in this instance and this case has been closed.

    Yours Sincerely,

    {Text removed by MSE Forum Team}
    AOS Investigations Team
    British Parking Association
    Email: aos@britishparking.co.uk
    Web: www.britishparking.co.uk
    Last edited by MSE Andrea; 12-04-2017 at 8:39 AM.
    • danmc1309
    • By danmc1309 24th Mar 17, 12:32 PM
    • 32 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    danmc1309
    Their email replies are getting shorter each time
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 24th Mar 17, 1:34 PM
    • 48,831 Posts
    • 62,321 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Dear Xxxxx

    Thank you for your reply.

    This Notice to Keeper has been issued utilising POFA (2012) and contains the relevant information as outlined in Schedule 4 (8)2 of POFA.

    As previously advised, there has not been a breach of the Code in this instance and this case has been closed.

    Yours Sincerely,

    {Text removed by MSE Forum Team}
    AOS Investigations Team
    British Parking Association
    Email: aos@britishparking.co.uk
    Web: www.britishparking.co.uk
    Originally posted by danmc1309
    Thank you for confirming that the BPA do not check that paragraph 8 has been complied with and actually think that a CEL NTK is a POFA one. Even CEL don't think so!

    I will now escalate this complaint to my MP and will be sending details to the Secretary of State for Transport, as a damning indictment of how the BPA has sunk to new depths in misleading consumers.
    Last edited by MSE Andrea; 12-04-2017 at 8:39 AM.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • danmc1309
    • By danmc1309 24th Mar 17, 3:11 PM
    • 32 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    danmc1309
    Thank you for confirming that the BPA do not check that paragraph 8 has been complied with and actually think that a CEL NTK is a POFA one. Even CEL don't think so!

    I will now escalate this complaint to my MP and will be sending details to the Secretary of State for Transport, as a damning indictment of how the BPA has sunk to new depths in misleading consumers.
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    Sent Coupon-mad

    Judging from the way this has gone I'm guessing this case has become unusual in the fact that it has gone beyond this point?

    Do you have details for who'm is next in line to receive this abuse?

    Thanks again
    Last edited by danmc1309; 28-03-2017 at 2:23 PM.
    • danmc1309
    • By danmc1309 29th Mar 17, 12:35 PM
    • 32 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    danmc1309
    .
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    Sorry to bother you again!
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 29th Mar 17, 1:02 PM
    • 48,831 Posts
    • 62,321 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    It is no longer unusual for the BPA to fob people off, this is the calibre of their top man (until a month ago!):

    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/03/patrick-troy-found-guilty-of-filming-up.html

    You can now complain to your MP and the DCLG (Marcus Jones) and the Under-Secretary of State for transport (Andrew Jones) about this absurd response from the BPA about a PCN that even the parking firm know full well fails dismally to comply with the POFA (Schedule 4) but the BPA continue to protest too much. Also, this ex-clamper firm has sent an image of a blue bonnet but no VRN/registration so haven't even met the bar of showing the vehicle was at the location. You could also throw in that CEL are the company which issues 'revenge claims' when kicked off sites (e.g. they sued dozens of Co-op employees & customers as revenge when the Co-op realised how nasty CEL were and ended the contract).

    Expect a claim from CEL and expect to easily see it off with no hearing, as per loads of others here.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • danmc1309
    • By danmc1309 13th Apr 17, 12:16 PM
    • 32 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    danmc1309
    Its all rather quiet here at the moment! I haven't heard from the debt collectors or CEL since they replied to our original appeal (didn't reply to them just went to BPA instead) and nothing yet as a reply from the email below sent to the suggested parties. Hoping I've written this correctly! This message was added to the whole thread conversation thus far being forwarded underneath.

    "From: xxx
    Sent: 07 April 2017 11:04
    To: marcus.jones.mp@parliament.uk; graham.stringer.mp@parliament.uk; andrew.jones.mp@parliament.uk
    Subject:xxx

    Hello all,

    Please see below (I apologise for the length!) an extended email communication from myself which has arisen as a result of receiving a parking charge. I believe that contrary to replies from the BPA that the PCN in question fails to comply with the POFA (schedule 4). Furthermore, this ex-clamper firm has sent an image of a blue bonnet but no VRN/registration so initially hasn't even met a reasonable bar of showing that the vehicle was at the location in question, in addition to apparently sending correspondence to me as the keeper which I didn't receive. It is further stated by the BPA that the firm doesn't need to state proof of sending (which they could if they have they actually sent) whereas I can't provide proof of something that I'm stating hasn't been received. I feel as though I'm being fobbed off by both firms in question and I don't trust either firm considering the embarrassing situations of until recently BPA top man Patrick Troy "https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3133778/british-parking-association-quits-film-up-skirts-patrick-troy/" and CEL issuing revenge claims after having their contract cancelled by the Co-op after realising the extent of their inability to correctly follow the law. I'm hoping for a further opinion on the subject.

    Kind regards,"
    • DoaM
    • By DoaM 13th Apr 17, 1:13 PM
    • 3,003 Posts
    • 3,035 Thanks
    DoaM
    I hope you broke that up before sending it. At the moment it's a wall of text which will probably be directed to the circular file (bin).
    Diary of a madman
    Walk the line again today
    Entries of confusion
    Dear diary, I'm here to stay
    • danmc1309
    • By danmc1309 23rd May 17, 10:35 AM
    • 32 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    danmc1309
    Today after a long wait I received this as a result of sending the above email to MPs as directed. I haven't received any correspondence from CEL/ZZPS for over 2 months now.

    "Dear Xxxt,

    Thank you for your email of the 07 April to Marcus Jones, Parliamentary-under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. I am an official working in the team that covers the subject of off-street car parking and have been asked to reply.

    The regulation of private parking companies is the responsibility of the trade association to which they belong, either the British Parking Association or the International Parking Community. The Government promotes a system of industry self-regulation by the parking industry. As such, we cannot comment on, or intervene in, individual disputes with parking companies, the trade associations, or their appeals services.

    Private car parking companies engaged in enforcement activities should act in a proportionate manner. As a result of these concerns we launched a discussion paper entitled ‘Parking reform: tackling unfair practices’, which sought thoughts and comments on the private parking sector. A summary of the responses to the discussion paper was made available on 11 May 2016, which I enclose.

    Yours Sincerely

    Phillip Dunkley
    Department for Communities and Local Government"
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 23rd May 17, 10:43 AM
    • 5,633 Posts
    • 7,272 Thanks
    beamerguy
    This is the typical rubbish that the Department for Communities and Local Government spout, still trying to con the public.

    Marcus Jones and his lapdog Phillip Dunkley

    These two are complete timewasters and are not in the interests
    of Mrs May's government

    Marcus Jones is very ignorant about the workings of the IPC, the Gladstones
    operated sham
    Last edited by beamerguy; 23-05-2017 at 11:19 AM.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 23rd May 17, 8:23 PM
    • 48,831 Posts
    • 62,321 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Today after a long wait I received this as a result of sending the above email to MPs as directed. I haven't received any correspondence from CEL/ZZPS for over 2 months now.

    "Dear Xxxt,

    Thank you for your email of the 07 April to Marcus Jones, Parliamentary-under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. I am an official working in the team that covers the subject of off-street car parking and have been asked to reply.

    The regulation of private parking companies is the responsibility of the trade association to which they belong, either the British Parking Association or the International Parking Community. The Government promotes a system of industry self-regulation by the parking industry. As such, we cannot comment on, or intervene in, individual disputes with parking companies, the trade associations, or their appeals services.

    Private car parking companies engaged in enforcement activities should act in a proportionate manner. As a result of these concerns we launched a discussion paper entitled ‘Parking reform: tackling unfair practices’, which sought thoughts and comments on the private parking sector. A summary of the responses to the discussion paper was made available on 11 May 2016, which I enclose.

    Yours Sincerely

    Phillip Dunkley
    Department for Communities and Local Government"
    Originally posted by danmc1309

    I would forward that to Jacob Rees-Mogg, MP, and your own MP, and ask whether they think it is right that genuine complaints to the DCLG about an utter scam, credit clamping (worse extortion with far worse long-term effects on finances than car-clamping ever was) are being met with such a woeful, fob-off reply. Do the DCLG - in particular does Phillip Dunkley - not know or remember that the DCLG had promised to act in November 2015 after the Beavis case, to protect consumers from this greedy cowboy industry?

    Here we are, two years later in the midst of a feeding frenzy by ex-clamper thugs making more money than they ever did, supported not only by the Supreme Court's awful decision but with the tacit support of the DCLG. And according to this terrible letter, the DCLG have now decided that this bunch of muppets can 'self-regulate' after all, despite it being proved every day that they cannot and will not rein in the worst rogue practices unless the Government forces them to do so.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 23-05-2017 at 8:25 PM.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 23rd May 17, 8:52 PM
    • 13,983 Posts
    • 21,958 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    The regulation of private parking companies is the responsibility of the trade association to which they belong, either the British Parking Association or the International Parking Community. The Government promotes a system of industry self-regulation by the parking industry.
    Then how is it that the BPA always says this:

    Thank you for your email in connection to xxxxx who are members of the BPA’s Approved Operator Scheme.

    All appeals are a matter for the landowner or operator’s procedure with the option of taking it to POPLA (where applicable) and or the courts, and as a membership association, and not a regulatory body, the BPA is unable to intervene in this situation.
    So the BPA themselves freely admit that they are not a 'regulatory body', yet the Government are stating categorically (as only a Government can):
    The regulation of private parking companies is the responsibility of the trade association to which they belong, either the British Parking Association or the International Parking Community. The Government promotes a system of industry self-regulation by the parking industry. As such, we cannot comment on, or intervene in, individual disputes with parking companies, the trade associations, or their appeals services.
    Just wtf is going on? Write back to junkley Dunkley and ask the burning question. The British public is totally confused by the nonsense put forward by a Government Department, yet which is totally refuted by the organisation they appear to be speaking on behalf of.

    Personally, I'm sick of this distortion of the facts from Civil Servants we are paying to act in our best interests. They hide behind any platitude, then hope the problem goes away!
    Last edited by Umkomaas; 23-05-2017 at 9:04 PM.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
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

4,731Posts Today

8,104Users online

Martin's Twitter