PPCs Illegal Terms and Conditions

daveyjp

Ta - can you state which part of the regs this breaches?

trisontana

daveyjp wrote: »

Ta - can you state which part of the regs this breaches?

I am going on the information supplied on another thread on here where somebody actually rang the BPA on this very subject complaining about another PPC who had also imposed that condition. The BPA rep said it was against their guidelines, and would contact that PPC to get them to remove that condition.

taffy056

UKPCS

UKCPS Ltd is forging the way ahead in car parking solutions and we are happy to offer our customers a solution that is a proven method to deter and eradicate unlawful parking in a non confrontational, ethical and legal manner.

If a vehicle is found to be parked without a permit or permission, or is not parked in a designated parking bay to that vehicle, the vehicle will receive a parking ticket penalty. Persistent offenders will have their vehicle removed.

we obtain the vehicles licensing and owner registration details from the DVLA and pursue the driver/owner through the courts for recovery of the debt.

http://ukcps.net/standard.php

Are 'Parking Charges' legal?

Yes. Parking on private land without permission is tresspass, a Civil offence. It is legal to levy a parking charge which has been notified (by our signs) to motorists. By parking on land we patrol you enter into a contract as indicated by our signage. Motorists do have a legal right of appeal and the parking charge notice gives full details of this.

http://ukcps.net/faq.php

Please enclose your name and address so the appeals department can reply to your letter. Enclosing payment and your parking charge notice will ensure that excess charges will not be added during the appeals procedure. If your appeal is successful a full refund will be given.

http://ukcps.net/appeal.php

trisontana

Here is another myth, this time from "Nationwide Parking Enforcement Ltd (don't you just love the fancy names these scamsters give themselves):-

One of the most common defences offered by motorists is that they were not the driver. The motorist often refuses to supply the details of the driver. When a case is taken to court the defendant will have to give the drivers details.

Under section 143 (1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 -
A keeper should know at all times who is driving a vehicle and to ensure they are insured, if a keeper allows a vehicle to be driven without insurance they are guilty of a criminal offence - By stating many people have access to a vehicle and as a result the defendant can not state who had it any one given date/time then they are confirming they did not know who was driving and therefore cannot be certain the vehicle was insured.


Of course that has nothing to do with a private parking ticket. The PPC is trying to blur the line between criminal and civil law.

trisontana

Saw this sign in an Asda car-park today, courtesy of Town and City Parking:-

Civil Penalty Charge Notice.

Coupon-mad

There's a PPC (can't recall which one) that uses Philips Recovery as their pet debt collector (Philips being very close friends with the BPA, see below*). Philips apparently delight in telling their victims in a threatogram that a 'parking fine' is a 'priority debt'.

Surely it has to be misrepresentation and misinformation to suggest their 'debts' are as important as paying your mortgage! Real debt advice websites tell you that even a Council decrim parking ticket is not a 'priority debt', let alone a spurious piece of paper from a scammer.

Easy to report this one for harassment/misrepresentation methinks.

QUOTE from Philips' website:
Who should I pay first?
You should arrange to pay priority debts before other non-priority debts. A priority debt is one that could leave serious consequences if it remains unpaid and includes companies, like Philips, who can take the strongest recovery actions against you. Priority debts include: mortgage/rent arrears, council tax or rates, maintenance, child support, parking fines, revenues & customs and magistrates court fines. Philips considers most of the arrears they are instructed to recover as priority debts.
QUOTE

and re the close relationship with the BPA:

*QUOTE
Philips' close relationship with the British Parking Association was further strengthened when the company agreed to sponsor the Association’s Autumn Seminar for 5 years.
QUOTE

and

*QUOTE
Keith Banbury OBE, one of the most respected individuals within the UK parking industry, is joining Philips Collections Services as Director of Parking Services. Keith joins Philips, now the largest independent collection and Enforcement Company in the UK, after stepping down as Chief Executive of the British Parking Association (BPA).
QUOTE

trisontana

I have just found this very interesting article on the Mirror website. It's regarding a scratch-card company that called itself the "British Awards Council" who have promised the OFT to stop using that name, because is misleading:-

Jason Freeman, legal director in the OFT's Consumer Group, said: "Traders should not give the impression that they have an official status when this is not the case. We felt these names were likely to mislead consumers as to the attributes of the trader and the sort of product they were being offered. We expect commercial communications to be truthful and not misleading.

I think that ruling could equally apply to all those PPCs who give themselves such grandiose and misleading names names as "Court Proceedings Ltd" "County Enforcement Agency" and "Civil Enforcement Limited".