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
    • Ferritt
    • By Ferritt 11th Sep 17, 10:53 PM
    • 4Posts
    • 0Thanks
    Ferritt
    Sip PCN LBCCC received from Glastones
    • #1
    • 11th Sep 17, 10:53 PM
    Sip PCN LBCCC received from Glastones 11th Sep 17 at 10:53 PM
    Hi,

    As the title suggests a LBCCC came through the post this morning regarding a PCN from Sip dated march of this year. Its for my partner and as shes so stressed out thinking she may be taken to court I'm seeking advice/help to sort it out. Basically the story is this:

    She's been parking on and off for the last year and a bit in the same SiP carpark while at work. The all day parking charge is/was £2. Now as she's been using the carpark for so long its become routine to pay the £2 in the meter and off she goes to work. At some point SiP have increased this all day charge to £2.50 and without checking she's paid £2 as normal and gone on her way completely unaware that she now hasn't paid enough to cover the all day charge.

    The signage at the carpark is very confusing aswell as rather than make new signs to show the increase of 50p they've cheekily added a very (and I mean very small) "50" next to the £2 text. There isnt a decimal point either so i suppose it could be mistaken for £250 all day charge!! We have plenty of photos to show this from different parts of the carpark.

    So the letters came and we ignored them all but mistakenly we did reply to the 2nd but last one stating that we weren't willing to disclose who the driver was and we inclosed pictures of the signage as they letter that SiP sent kept going on about "in accordance to the signage provided".

    We got a response saying it was to late to appeal, then no word from them until today (Gladstones LBCCC). As the norm it states to pay them (Gladstones) within 14 days. The letter was dated the 30th so that gives us 3 days to respond!!!

    I've checked over the newbie section and looked at the some response templates but I'm at a loss as what to use. I don't want to send a letter to them that shows I haven't a clue.

    They haven't provided or said they have evidence that my partner was the driver etc.

    Any help/advice would be greatly received.

    Thanks
Page 1
    • Lamilad
    • By Lamilad 11th Sep 17, 11:17 PM
    • 889 Posts
    • 1,867 Thanks
    Lamilad
    • #2
    • 11th Sep 17, 11:17 PM
    • #2
    • 11th Sep 17, 11:17 PM
    Look at the newbies thread again, it tells you how to respond to an LBCCC... and you DO need to respond.

    At some point SiP have increased this all day charge to £2.50 and without checking she's paid £2 as normal and gone on her way completely unaware that she now hasn't paid enough to cover the all day charge.
    The IPC code of practice requires it's operators to make customers aware of any changes to the T&Cs via additional/ more prominent signage

    The signage at the carpark is very confusing aswell as rather than make new signs to show the increase of 50p they've cheekily added a very (and I mean very small) "50" next to the £2 text. There isnt a decimal point either so i suppose it could be mistaken for £250 all day charge!! We have plenty of photos to show this from different parts of the carpark.
    This is significant and should definitely form the key part of your response. Their cr4ppy attempt to amend their signage will not go down well in court.

    Make clear that their signage is illegible and incapable of forming a contract.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 11th Sep 17, 11:20 PM
    • 14,636 Posts
    • 23,032 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #3
    • 11th Sep 17, 11:20 PM
    • #3
    • 11th Sep 17, 11:20 PM
    Get photos urgently of the amended signage - very important. SIP are becoming more litigious, so you need physical evidence to back up your position on this.

    Respond robustly to the Gladstones LBCCC by learning how to do so from the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #2.
    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.
    • Ferritt
    • By Ferritt 12th Sep 17, 12:23 AM
    • 4 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Ferritt
    • #4
    • 12th Sep 17, 12:23 AM
    • #4
    • 12th Sep 17, 12:23 AM
    Thanks the quick replys. Heres my response letter:

    Re - Your letter before Claim Re - PCN xxxxxxxx
    This is a formal response to your ‘Letter Before Court Action’ dated 30/8/17 but received 11/9/17.
    Further to my last contact with SiP Ltd I would like to state that I do not nor have I ever gave my consent for my personally data to be passed to any 3rd party regarding this PCN, therefore you have no basis whatsoever to write to the registered keeper , except for the single purpose allowed under the DVLA KADOE rules.
    You haven't supplied any evidence photo or otherwise of the driver or a ‘contract’ nor have you clearly set out the basis at to which you are attempting to hold me liable. The driver’s identity will not be supplied. There is no dispute that the driver was entitled to drive the car and I can confirm that they were. As the keeper of the vehicle, it is my right to choose not to name the driver, yet still not be lawfully held liable if an operator is not using or complying with Schedule 4 of POFA 2012.!

    I have physical evidence of the so called ‘appropriate signage’ at the PCN location which was previously sent to Sip Ltd. The IPC code of practice states that all customers must be made aware of any changes to the T&C’s via additional/prominent signage. The ignorance on SiP Ltd part to do this and the fact customers weren’t/aren’t properly made aware of these changes are apparent in the photographic evidence I have, namely the use of unreadable font sizes and a clear lack of decimal points on basic price figures.

    You have no cause of action against me as registered keeper, should you proceed with a claim I will file a counter-claim for not less than £500 in compensation for distress caused by your unwarranted demands arising from misuse of the data you obtained from the DVLA for one purpose, yet are now processing it for another purpose not covered by the KADOE regulations.

    I expect to hear from you within 14 days to confirm that the charge is cancelled. Should you fail to cancel this PCN and/or pursue a baseless claim without supplying any evidence of any breach of a relevant contract or relevant obligation, or photographs, or the contract, or your basis for pursuing a registered keeper outwith the POFA 2012, you may consider this adequate notice of my intention to sue SiP Ltd, for the significant distress your actions have caused.

    Yours Faithfully


    Thoughts??

    Thanks
    Last edited by Ferritt; 12-09-2017 at 12:25 AM. Reason: spelling
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 12th Sep 17, 10:59 AM
    • 510 Posts
    • 607 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    • #5
    • 12th Sep 17, 10:59 AM
    • #5
    • 12th Sep 17, 10:59 AM
    KADOE has no regulations, its purely a contract.

    the line about "the driver was entitled to park" usually comes from Residential cases. Which I am assuming is not the case here. If the tariff had not been paid then clearly they werent "entitled" to park there....
    • Ferritt
    • By Ferritt 12th Sep 17, 11:02 AM
    • 4 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Ferritt
    • #6
    • 12th Sep 17, 11:02 AM
    • #6
    • 12th Sep 17, 11:02 AM
    Ok thanks I'll remove that from the response letter. Many thanks
    • Ferritt
    • By Ferritt 12th Sep 17, 11:07 AM
    • 4 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Ferritt
    • #7
    • 12th Sep 17, 11:07 AM
    • #7
    • 12th Sep 17, 11:07 AM
    Also should i include the evidence of pictures that I have?
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 12th Sep 17, 11:58 AM
    • 14,636 Posts
    • 23,032 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #8
    • 12th Sep 17, 11:58 AM
    • #8
    • 12th Sep 17, 11:58 AM
    Also should i include the evidence of pictures that I have?
    Originally posted by Ferritt
    Keep those as evidence should it actually get to a court claims stage. Showing them to Gladstones will have no effect.
    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

2,877Posts Today

7,967Users online

Martin's Twitter