Parking Enforcement APCOA (Luton Airport)

nugant

I thought that you might like to read my Final Warning from G White solicitors.

My clients are noe offering you a final opportunity to arrange settlement of the amount due or PROVIDE me with the information as to who was driveing the car at the time. I intend to seek my clients instructions to apply for an Application to court under the Civil procedural Rules 31-16 Before proceedings Start.
31-16-3 The court may make an order under this rule where
[a] the respondent is likely to be a part of subsaquent proceedings.

---

[c]

---

[d] discloseure before proceedings have started is desirable in order to
1 disclose fairly to the anticpeted proceedings.
2 assist in the dispute to be resolved without preceedings to save cost.
I do feel it is important for you to understand that although you as the registered keeper may not have been the driver at the time it would come within the definitation of LIKELY TO BE A PARTY TO ANY PRECEEDINGS.

This is now different they need you to tell them who was driving,just who are they taking to court.
If you have started to get phone calls contact your provider in my case BT you can puta blockon them calling you its free for the first month then £3.70 thereafter its up to you how long you keep it going.

I have not replyed to any mail or phone calls i suggest yoy do the same, remember it cost them money to go to court, they are out to make money not throw it away on a court case they are very likely to lose.

Coupon-mad

Found your letter in the top sticky thread:

http://i1232.photobucket.com/albums/ff370/trisontana/white1.jpg

It's listed under UKPC as lots of PPCs use the same scamograms!

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2214803

It may be the last one...but then again they may just revert to previous letters or even phone you up which is easily dealt with. There are tons of threads about Roxburghe phone calls, seeing as 'Graham White' don't actually exist and the letters are just from Roxburghe call centre:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=52809

If you get phone calls tell them to do one, as the alleged debt is denied and any further contact is going to be reported as harassment and a breach of OFT debt collector guidance.

Trebor16

nugant wrote: »

I thought that you might like to read my Final Warning from G White solicitors.

My clients are noe offering you a final opportunity to arrange settlement of the amount due or PROVIDE me with the information as to who was driveing the car at the time. I intend to seek my clients instructions to apply for an Application to court under the Civil procedural Rules 31-16 Before proceedings Start.
31-16-3 The court may make an order under this rule where
[a] the respondent is likely to be a part of subsaquent proceedings.

---

[c]

---

[d] discloseure before proceedings have started is desirable in order to
1 disclose fairly to the anticpeted proceedings.
2 assist in the dispute to be resolved without preceedings to save cost.
I do feel it is important for you to understand that although you as the registered keeper may not have been the driver at the time it would come within the definitation of LIKELY TO BE A PARTY TO ANY PRECEEDINGS.

This is now different they need you to tell them who was driving,just who are they taking to court.
If you have started to get phone calls contact your provider in my case BT you can puta blockon them calling you its free for the first month then £3.70 thereafter its up to you how long you keep it going.

I have not replyed to any mail or phone calls i suggest yoy do the same, remember it cost them money to go to court, they are out to make money not throw it away on a court case they are very likely to lose.

Still quoting CPR 31-16 I see. What bunch of con merchants! Don't they know that word is spreading that CPR 31-16 does not apply in the small claims court:D

curlysue2

Despite all the advice given on here, people still seem unsure of what to do and seem to get intimidated by their letters. All the legal jargon that they are stating in their letters is designed to scare you. Kind of like blinding you with science.

DO NOTHING, SAY NOTHING

HANG UP THE PHONE

PUT THE LETTERS IN THE BIN

In order to get you to pay they would have to take you to court, and win. They wont take you to court because they will not win.

Let's just assume that for some small chance they DID take you to court - why are you worried? They wont win. And here's why:
They say that you are "in breach of the terms and condition of use of the airport way"

WRONG

In order to breach terms and conditions, you have to have agreed to the terms and conditions in the first place. And to be in with any chance of winning, they would have to prove that you have read, understood and agreed to the terms and conditions.

To get anywhere close to enforcing their terms and conditions, they could put a barrier across the entrance to the airport road, and make you read a sign before pushing a button to agree to the terms of use and proceed with your journey.

So they apparantly have signs outlining their terms and conditions -
Signs? What signs?
Personally I have never read them. That's because THEY ARE TOO SMALL TO READ.
In order to read them you would have to know where they are and drive without due care and attention to read them or stop your car and get out. Since their so-called rules say you can't stop, you can't read them now, can you:) And if they expect you to read them whilst driving then they are encouraging you to break the law by driving without due care and attention.

They wouldn't be stupid enough to take anyone to court - they'd end up paying all the fees when they lose. And of course there's the chance that they person they take to court would put in a counter claim for emotional stress anxiety, travel expenses, loss of pay for time off work - oh the list could go on...

By they way - if their threats were real, why would they feel the need to put wording in their letters advising people to ignore the advice on this forum? By stating things like that they are resorting to desperation - "Oh please believe us, people aren't taking us seriously" LMAO.
Genuine threats do not need backing up like that

Kite2010

curlysue2 wrote: »

Despite all the advice given on here, people still seem unsure of what to do and seem to get intimidated by their letters. All the legal jargon that they are stating in their letters is designed to scare you. Kind of like blinding you with science.

DO NOTHING, SAY NOTHING

HANG UP THE PHONE

PUT THE LETTERS IN THE BIN

In order to get you to pay they would have to take you to court, and win. They wont take you to court because they will not win.

Let's just assume that for some small chance they DID take you to court - why are you worried? They wont win. And here's why:
They say that you are "in breach of the terms and condition of use of the airport way"

WRONG

In order to breach terms and conditions, you have to have agreed to the terms and conditions in the first place. And to be in with any chance of winning, they would have to prove that you have read, understood and agreed to the terms and conditions.

To get anywhere close to enforcing their terms and conditions, they could put a barrier across the entrance to the airport road, and make you read a sign before pushing a button to agree to the terms of use and proceed with your journey.

So they apparantly have signs outlining their terms and conditions -
Signs? What signs?
Personally I have never read them. That's because THEY ARE TOO SMALL TO READ.
In order to read them you would have to know where they are and drive without due care and attention to read them or stop your car and get out. Since their so-called rules say you can't stop, you can't read them now, can you:) And if they expect you to read them whilst driving then they are encouraging you to break the law by driving without due care and attention.

They wouldn't be stupid enough to take anyone to court - they'd end up paying all the fees when they lose. And of course there's the chance that they person they take to court would put in a counter claim for emotional stress anxiety, travel expenses, loss of pay for time off work - oh the list could go on...

By they way - if their threats were real, why would they feel the need to put wording in their letters advising people to ignore the advice on this forum? By stating things like that they are resorting to desperation - "Oh please believe us, people aren't taking us seriously" LMAO.
Genuine threats do not need backing up like that

And not to mention that the amounts they invoice for are unlawful contractually penalties and not estimated losses

curlysue2

Just thought I should state that I am a decent, law abiding citizen with a squeeky clean credit score, no criminal record and not even a parking ticket (with the exception of APCOA's ridiculous 'penalty' charge). I'm no vigilante trying to flout the law or get a free ride!

I think if people are so ignorant that they insist on dropping off their family (unloading 4 suitcases and kissing everyone goodbye, whilst blocking the road until they decide they want to move on) they deserve a fine (shame it can't be legally enforced). But those who simply let someone get out of the car at the traffic lights on the roundabout, without baggage, just a rucksack on their shoulder, holding up no-one, doing no-one any harm and holding up no-one - well that is just pathetic, unnecessary desperation on the part of APCOA, in order to "fine" someone.

The taxi driver on here who actually tried to get an "appeal" regarding someone who decided to get out of their cab - forget trying to "appeal" - just ignore them and all their letters. You cannot stop someone getting out of your cab - if you do then you are taking them prisoner against their will. That is a criminal charge. Ignore APCOA, END OF!

WiseRabbit

Thank you to everyone who posted with advice on the scam that APCOA are operating with at least the collusion of Luton Airport if not the help. I got an "enforcement notice" also because I happened to wait in my car (never leaving it) somewhere off road and away from the airport area while waiting fro some friends to let me know they had arrived. This of course was because of the cost of parking at Luton airport in the first place.
I then read a post from an expert on justanswer.com, which confirmed that unless: they know I was the driver; they had a contract with me; I had agreed their terms; they had suffered loss, they cannot do anything.
I then also read the forum on moneysavingexpert, which confirmed this view.

Stephen_Leak

curlysue2 wrote: »

Just thought I should state that I am a decent, law abiding citizen with a squeeky clean credit score, no criminal record and not even a parking ticket (with the exception of APCOA's ridiculous 'penalty' charge). I'm no vigilante trying to flout the law or get a free ride!

I think if people are so ignorant that they insist on dropping off their family (unloading 4 suitcases and kissing everyone goodbye, whilst blocking the road until they decide they want to move on) they deserve a fine (shame it can't be legally enforced). But those who simply let someone get out of the car at the traffic lights on the roundabout, without baggage, just a rucksack on their shoulder, holding up no-one, doing no-one any harm and holding up no-one - well that is just pathetic, unnecessary desperation on the part of APCOA, in order to "fine" someone.

The taxi driver on here who actually tried to get an "appeal" regarding someone who decided to get out of their cab - forget trying to "appeal" - just ignore them and all their letters. You cannot stop someone getting out of your cab - if you do then you are taking them prisoner against their will. That is a criminal charge. Ignore APCOA, END OF!

We do not condone careless or inconsiderate parking, or not paying or overstaying in a pay car park.

PS. The phrase "law abiding citizen" may get you some comments, though. I have no doubt whatsoever that you are, but we recently had some trouble with PPC "troll" using that as a username on here.

fil_cad

APCOA the fithty scamming gitz are contracted by wigan council, these scum infest the town centre of wigan at night on there little mopeds with L plates on hunting for cash

give_them_FA

These scammers with their made up unenforceable rules are there for just one purpose- to divert people into car parks so they can be milked. Once you did not have to pay to drop off or collect flight passengers. Then along came parasites like this.

I make a point of stopping on the road- in a safe place of course- when at airports.

Their make-believe yellow or red lines have no basis whatsoever in law.