Aspect Parking Solutions- anyone had a PCN from them?

KJFletcher

Yes, but I had written this before I made the new thread.

HO87

Ah, not quite. Not that I enjoy "having a go" at newcomers but you posted your previous comment in this thread at 5.00pm whereas you posted your other thread at 1.00pm. Therefore I think that means that your post contains a terminological inexactitude. Would you care to expand?

KJFletcher

HO87 wrote: »

Ah, not quite. Not that I enjoy "having a go" at newcomers but you posted your previous comment in this thread at 5.00pm whereas you posted your other thread at 1.00pm. Therefore I think that means that your post contains a terminological inexactitude. Would you care to expand?

... seriously? In the grand scheme of the world's problems and all.

Personally, I didn't check the exact time of each posting. If you would like, I can try to explain my actions from weeks ago, but as my memory is not that great then I can only guess at my own actions.

If I replied to this thread after posting the other thread, then it would have probably been because I thought I might come across different people in the two threads. I tend to reopen threads I have already looked at to check for new updates, but I don't necessarily trawl through all the new threads. Or perhaps it was because different people say different things, seeing as no-one seems to be an expert on the matter. All of this site says ignore these tickets. Well, I did, and now I have a court case on my hands.

I am eternally sorry for misleading you regarding the order I posted my threads in. Now back to the point...

Coupon-mad

What's happening, have you got a Court date and have you put your defence in? Has Alexis contacted you on here or on pepipoo with a defence?

Most of all keep a pepipoo thread up to date, not here - I can't recall but I think I saw one on there from you but cannot see it on the front page, have you replied there to bump your thread up again to get more advice? You need to keep that thread current.

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showforum=30

That's a specialist forum with more experts in this field who have seen off PPC Court cases before. You can show that this Court claim is a load of unenforceable twaddle, almost all PPC Court cases lose if defended.

esmerobbo

Seems Alexis has got it covered, however do keep the thread active by adding any relevant info!


http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=61400&pid=588186&mode=threaded&start=

HO87

This is a company we probably need to keep abreast of although its precise legal status is far from clear.

It seems that it is not a limited company and the registrant of its website is also shown as a sole trader (Risk Consultants) at an address in Guildford where a limited company of the same name Risk Consultants Ltd is also registered. There is no ICO registration in the name of Aspect Parking Solutions but there is for Risk Consultants Ltd. Interestingly it reveals the name of a charity under the "Other Names" section and that too has its registered office at the Guildford address.

The link would seem to be the two directors of Risk Consultants Ltd who are coincidentally trustees/senior officers of the charity. The charity's CEO - Mr Connor - is a barrister member of Inner Temple (called last year IIRC). This may well be of relevance given the pending court case.

LindaandNicole

Thanks for that info, my vehicle was ticketed by them today (needless to say i wasn't driving!) after a two-minute pause next to Public Recycling bins (in order to use said bins!) - Nasty, disproportionate, no signage as far as I am aware (I'm going back to check now) and 'sharp practice' as far as I can see.
I'm very interested to hear about the association with a Charity - can you tell us which one? Working in the Charitable sector myself; and having been on the receiving end of a couple of Charity Commission Inspections; I'd like to write to their Trustees pointing out that if they are associated with a company trading in 'sharp practice' then they run the risk of bringing their Charity into disrepute - which breaches their duties as Charity Trustees.

KJFletcher

HO87 wrote: »

This is a company we probably need to keep abreast of although its precise legal status is far from clear.

It seems that it is not a limited company and the registrant of its website is also shown as a sole trader (Risk Consultants) at an address in Guildford where a limited company of the same name Risk Consultants Ltd is also registered. There is no ICO registration in the name of Aspect Parking Solutions but there is for Risk Consultants Ltd. Interestingly it reveals the name of a charity under the "Other Names" section and that too has its registered office at the Guildford address.

The link would seem to be the two directors of Risk Consultants Ltd who are coincidentally trustees/senior officers of the charity. The charity's CEO - Mr Connor - is a barrister member of Inner Temple (called last year IIRC). This may well be of relevance given the pending court case.

I have filed a defence against the claim, so I'll let you know if a) it goes to court b) if so, if I win...

Thanks for everyone's help

LindaandNicole

Re ASPECT PARKING SOLUTIONS - just to up-date any readers, I have also now posted my defence against the claim by Aspect against me, and indeed after I followed the advice from people here and did a bit of research it became clear that Aspect have no legal leg to stand on, despite having a 'barrister' involved as a Director. I am very sorry to report two more developments: 1) In another case where Aspect took an alleged parking offender to court, a 'Barrister' turned up, told the defendant that their case was '50/50' - but that if they lost, his legal fees would add £250 to the costs. (This is in a small claims court, where that just would not happen). Horribly intimidated, that defendant 'settled' and paid a smaller sum of money to Aspect. (Again, Aspect clearly had no legal case, so someone was being VERY misleading). 2) The 'National Centre for Domestic Violence' - seems to no longer be a registered charity, but a 'CIC'. I'm not sure yet if that means that they are no longer subject to the 'probity' requirements of the Charity Commission, but I'm looking into it.