PPC Letter Chains & Court Papers (discussion & comments)

Crabman

Just_william wrote: »

Dear, who ever up loads these UK CPS Letters'
the letters 1,2,4,5 do not work as they give an page not found at photobucket dot com but new added letter three now works and this is now from imageshack, I noticed, so can you upload the other letters to that site too!

kind Regards (will start new thread as suggested!)

Welcome to MSE :hello:

The links in the first post are contributed by members of the forum so as soon as someone posts new links they can then be included.

(regulars: I've been busy lately but will tidy up and update this thread shortly :A)

hannahk

Hi there

I received a parking ticket from New Generation Parking on my car window for parking in an unmarked bay at my office. The car was only parked there for 57 minutes and I was not the driver. I also responded to them saying that their £65 fine was excessive for this amount of time and that I did have the right to park there as it is my place of work and can prove it. I also stated that as I am the registered keeper but not the driver I do not have to tell them who was driving.

I have now received a letter stating that if i do not tell them who was driving the car within 7 days they will issue me with court proceedings where I will have to pay the costs under the Norwich Pharmacal Order.

The letter is of quite a threatening nature with the final words being...'if necessary we will take you to court and further costs will be incurred'.

I think it is rediculous that they would be willing to take me to court over £65 and as i believe if they wished to do so under said order they would have to pay the costs.

However because of the threatening tone of the letter I am tempted to just pay it as I do not want debt letters or such being sent to my address or even the work address where the car is registered to.

Any advice is greatly appreciated.

taffy056

hannahk wrote: »

Hi there

I received a parking ticket from New Generation Parking on my car window for parking in an unmarked bay at my office. The car was only parked there for 57 minutes and I was not the driver. I also responded to them saying that their £65 fine was excessive for this amount of time and that I did have the right to park there as it is my place of work and can prove it. I also stated that as I am the registered keeper but not the driver I do not have to tell them who was driving.

I have now received a letter stating that if i do not tell them who was driving the car within 7 days they will issue me with court proceedings where I will have to pay the costs under the Norwich Pharmacal Order.

The letter is of quite a threatening nature with the final words being...'if necessary we will take you to court and further costs will be incurred'.

I think it is rediculous that they would be willing to take me to court over £65 and as i believe if they wished to do so under said order they would have to pay the costs.

However because of the threatening tone of the letter I am tempted to just pay it as I do not want debt letters or such being sent to my address or even the work address where the car is registered to.

Any advice is greatly appreciated.

Its basically rubbish, such an order will never be used in a small claims as they cost hundreds of pounds, and will have to paid for by the PPC something they will not do for £65

Could you please create a new thread with your question though as this is not meant for new questions - many thanks

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=163

nathfree

Hi all,

I've received a new letter which you didn't have regards to Euro Car Parks. I was wondering if someone could take a look and give feedback?

I have spoken to them twice. Once on the 19th January when i would not provide them with the name of the driver and requested a copy of their evidence stating that under contract law it is the driver not the owner that is liable. They acknowledged this and said they would send out the info within a week. I never received any information and thought their case done and dusted.

They then sent me the next letter dated the 13th May and I contacted them on the 18th and I followed much the same line of argument. The lady on the line argued this time saying that as the registered owner I was liable and would not budge. It got to the point where she said that we were 'going round in circles' and so she would send me a letter explaining it. This is the letter I've attached. I would be grateful of your response and insight. Also feel free to use it if it is of use on here.

As a new poster it won't let me upload it. Is there another way I could get it up on here?

Many thanks!

trisontana

nathfree wrote: »

Hi all,

I've received a new letter which you didn't have regards to Euro Car Parks. I was wondering if someone could take a look and give feedback?

I have spoken to them twice. Once on the 19th January when i would not provide them with the name of the driver and requested a copy of their evidence stating that under contract law it is the driver not the owner that is liable. They acknowledged this and said they would send out the info within a week. I never received any information and thought their case done and dusted.

They then sent me the next letter dated the 13th May and I contacted them on the 18th and I followed much the same line of argument. The lady on the line argued this time saying that as the registered owner I was liable and would not budge. It got to the point where she said that we were 'going round in circles' and so she would send me a letter explaining it. This is the letter I've attached. I would be grateful of your response and insight. Also feel free to use it if it is of use on here.

As a new poster it won't let me upload it. Is there another way I could get it up on here?

Many thanks!

Just post the link, but leave a few gaps between the letters. That way it will be treated as an ordinary sentence. We can then re-assemble the link, But why are you communicating with this bunch of clowns? you can see that they cannot engage in a proper conversation. All they want is your money.

From now on don't contact them and ignore any communication from them. That's the plan that works, not trying treat them as though they are a legitimate and ethical company.

nathfree

trisontana wrote: »

Just post the link, but leave a few gaps between the letters. That way it will be treated as an ordinary sentence. We can then re-assemble the link, But why are you communicating with this bunch of clowns? you can see that they cannot engage in a proper conversation. All they want is your money.

From now on don't contact them and ignore any communication from them. That's the plan that works, not trying treat them as though they are a legitimate and ethical company.

I think as some others alluded I panicked once it got to the stage it did and thought the best option was to fight back rather than ignore.

a1.s
photos.ak.fbcdn.net/h
photos-ak-snc6/250189_10150589737190464_594970463_18177745_3381347_n.jpg

vax2002

If the letters are franked (printed stamp) , put them back in the post box, they get charged each time it gets re-delivered

trisontana

nathfree wrote: »

I think as some others alluded I panicked once it got to the stage it did and thought the best option was to fight back rather than ignore.

a1.s
photos.ak.fbcdn.net/h
photos-ak-snc6/250189_10150589737190464_594970463_18177745_3381347_n.jpg

I can't seem to be able to resolve the above link.

nathfree

trisontana wrote: »

I can't seem to be able to resolve the above link.

this;
www
.facebook.com/#!/media/set/?set=a.10150589736175464.666775.594970463

trisontana

Got it now:-
Control Account letter

naughty, naughty Control Account talking about a "penalty". You know that's not allowed, and it's illegal to use that word. As for the RK being responsible that's just pure equine manure.