Please help with UKCPS and Court Proceedings LTD

trisontana

I think that Peternet has admitted that he works for UKCPS. This is the company that specialises in persecuting disabled drivers who make simple mistakes, such as forgetting to display their blue badge, even though they are not valid in private car-parks.

PS. Just to confirm my suspicions, UKCPS's "office manager" goes by the name of Peter Haswell. You've been rumbled my son.

Coupon-mad

trisontana wrote: »

PS. Just to confirm my suspicions, UKCPS's "office manager" goes by the name of Peter Haswell.

I don't think Peter Haswell likes the bad publicity against UKCPS and Mobilise (his friends) on this forum. There is trouble ahead with that relationship I reckon, complaints have been prepared to be made to the right places and I cannot see either party coming out smelling of roses.

Well Peter,since you're so bothered that you've registered and posted on here to gloat about a solitary case where apparently a victim has been stitched up by a clueless judge to pay an extortionate amount for no reason - how about showing us something useful?

I challenge you to show us that you actually HAVE allowed some appeals by disabled people (without being pressured at all to cancel a ticket by a third party like Mobilise, the BPA or by the retail occupier/landlord). A real, genuine decision to cancel one of your bogus PCNs due to mitigating circumstances put forward only by the victim.

I predict you won't be able to because no such cases exist.

You'll cite data protection no doubt. We'll cite the fact that Private Parking Companies' so-called 'appeals processes' are nothing more than a cruel joke against the victims they prey on. Oh, and tell us please whose brainchild was the name Court Prosecution Service (a name that surely breaks a law or two?).

Parasites is a word that springs to mind, some companies just leech off other companies' customers and have no useful service to offer anyone. Is that what some Office Managers aspire to, how very sad when they could have a proper job.

trisontana

From CAG:-

I too have just received a final final final notification of prosecution from Ukcps and signed by Peter Haswell who decribes himself as the office manager. He's going on about clearly failed to honour a contract we/I did not enter into. My crime was to be the registered keeper of a vehicle who's owner forgot to put the council issued disabled parking badge on the dash when parked in a disabled space at B&Q Aintree. For this they have wanted me to pay sums varying from £40 for a successul appeal to £320 for an unsuccessful one. I have, as yet not deigned to reply. However am I correct in assuming that should he decide to prosecute I will get court papers which will allow me the chance to have my say or will a judgement be handed down without my involvement?

trisontana

Here are two emails I received from UKCPS last month when I questioned the legality of their charges and its relationship with Mobilise. . As you see they are full of rubbish, and follow the same line as Mobilse, They must both be using the same script.:-

Disabled parking regulations do not apply on private land. However all
parking on private land is controlled by contract law. Te terms of the
contract are stipulated on signs throughout the area. If one of the terms for parking in a marked disabled bay is to have a valid disabled badge on display or pay a charge of £100 reduced to £60 for early payment, then that is simply a condition of the contract. The consideration is a parking space and it is your choice to accept or reject the contract.
With regard to our relationship with any charity WE DO NOT PASS ANY DETAILS ONTO THE CHARITY WHATSOEVER UNLESS THE PERSON GIVES US EXPLICIT PERMISSION TO DO SO.
If you have any further queries please contact me below

Peter Haswell
Office Manager
UKCPS Ltd
0113 2456080


And:-

Regardless of 'legal experts' on CAG - contract law is contract law! This has been tested in court on numerous occasions. The charge is not a penalty at all - it is a charge agreed to when you accept the contract. No coercion, terms are there for you to accept or reject. No DDA breach - simple contract terms.
As far as never taking people to court - suggest you look up

Woodman v UKCPS
UKCPS v Robinson
Davies v UKCPS
UKCPS v Khan
UKCPS v Ockendon

And many others. Please don’t be lulled into believing the amateur experts on CAG - consult a qualified contract solicitor

taffy056

Complete garbage, there are far more people out there who have ignored these scumbags, and got no court papers, those cases I suspect if true are probably ones not defended or stooges put up to fail by them.

Coblcris

peternet wrote: »

Firstly the Woodman - UKCPS case number is 0QT21890 heard, I believe, in July this year.
Secondly who or where I work is totally irrelevant - I have no intention of giving that information nor do I ask any other posters to reveal their employment status.
Thirdly and more importantly I have no connection whatsoever with Perky. I believe he owns and/or runs CPS. A search at Companies House reveals that CPS and UKCPS are totally different companies - not connected in any way - to suggest they are may be considered to be a libel by the poster who suggests this and by the forum moderators/ owners who run this forum.
I suggest that to do a real service to all those with private parking tickets that only facts are considered. i personally cannot comment on any other cases as I have not been involved in them in any capacity and cannot say how good the cases have been.

Peternet, you need to do adequate research on the issue of internet postings and libel.
Start with Neutral Citation Number: [2008] EWHC 1797 (QB)

There is evidence of a realationship between UKCPS and CPS to my knowledge. Both parties turning up in small claims court for the same case would clearly rebut your claim that there is no link between them.

daveyjp

And many others. Please don’t be lulled into believing the amateur experts on CAG - consult a qualified contract solicitor

Posters have and in Court they have argued a punitive fee for breaking a "contract" isn't a legal remedy for breach of contract. Judges have agreed and PPCs have lost.

Coupon-mad

'Please don’t be lulled into believing the amateur experts on CAG - consult a qualified contract solicitor.'

What, like Tim Cary, a legal expert on parking tickets? He's qualified:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAIcdi9niHA

I agree with you, that's the best advice I've seen posted by a troll before. Yes, everyone should indeed take the advice of a qualified contract solicitor; watch and learn from that Watchdog clip everyone.

And others should not worry about any cases cited by this Peter Haswell (unqualified Office Manager),
no doubt they were all undefended so the PPC would actually have a chance of winning!

trisontana

Peter Haswell has failed to come back onto this thread. As soon as some awkward questions and home truths are put to him he chickens out. I wanted to ask him why his so-called "ethical" company seems to specialise in persecuting disabled drivers who make simple mistakes. Instead of giving them the benefit of the doubt, they threaten to take them to court, using a debt collection company with the very intimidating name of Court Proceedings Ltd. In the words of Jim Royle "ethical, my a**e"

trisontana

Hello peternet Why does your company specialise in frightening disabled drivers and threatening them with court action, when they make simple mistakes like forgetting to display their badge. Do you call that ethical behaviour? Are you man enough to answer that?