Car Parking Partnership-- final reminder--- parked on broken double yellow lines

cloclopops123

Morning All!!

Just abit of advice and reassurement needed
I am a poor student and cant afford £80 nor can I afford a CCJ and now my parents are involved and want me to pay the fine. I am stubborn and refuse to pay it.

I was issued a ticket for allegedly parking on double yellow lines.
The lines where very broken and the point i parked on non where actually visible. There wasn't any signs in a 360 panaromic view of where i was parked. I have photos showing how bad the lines are.
due to the s.64(2) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 I shouldn't have to pay it?


ive appealed twice and they wont accept the appeal. So i am on the verge of writing a snotty letter to both northumbria and the CPP Threatening to take police and court action and highlighting to the press how poor Northumbria University are.

Where do they stand in them filing a CCJ?
and surely I can turn round to them and say they've broken numerous of laws including:


Pretending the ticket has official status - Administration of Justice Act Section 40
Fraud by false representation - Fraud Act Section 2
Possession of articles for use in fraud - Fraud Act Section 6 (for the guy who issued the ticket)

Fly-posting is the posting of stickers, posters and other advertising without the consent of the owner of the property. Street furniture in particular is afflicted.
Fly-posting is an offence under section 224(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Highways Act 1980 making it a criminal offence to display an advertisement in contravention of regulations. Advertisers can be fined up to £2,500 on conviction for this offence and in the case of a continuing offence £250 per day after a conviction.
& finally
Under section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1998 it is an offence to send an indecent, offensive or threatening letter, electronic communication or other article to another person

I am very very annoyed :mad::mad::mad::mad: they are proper bullys and nazis because ive done nothing wrong!

pogofish

Hang-on. Just which car park did you use?

Most of Northumbria University is your typical PPC operation and should be ignored, not engaged with.

IIRC they do however have an arrangement to use their permits in one council car park and that should be challenged in the usual official way.

So what exactly does it say on the ticket and who does it say to pay to?

bargepole

I presume this is a private ticket issued on the campus of Northumbria University.

Private companies cannot "file a CCJ". They can make a court claim against you (unlikely), which you have the opportunity to defend at a hearing. If you lose (extremely unlikely) and don't pay within 28 days, then you get a CCJ.

And don't call this a "fine", it's just a speculative invoice which is almost certainly not enforceable.

AlexisV

You're confusing a legitimate council Penalty Charge Notice with what you have - a speculative invoice from an ordinary private company.

Just ignore them and their threatening templated letters.

Coupon-mad

If it's not a 'Penalty Charge Notice' with a Council logo and a Traffic Act at the top then it was never a fine, never a real PCN.

You have wasted your time trying to appeal a generic scam which has already been outed in the media and on Watchdog. Your parents' naivety, in actually wanting to pay this, amazes me - please please show them this thread and this link:

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

The Solicitor shows what you should have done from the outset. This is NOT a fine, not a parking ticket, it is nothing, a nullity, zilch. The 'so-called debt' (which does not exist) is being alleged by a third party firm; it is not 'owed' to the Uni so your studies/degree are not at risk. They cannot 'file a CCJ' so your credit rating is not at risk. They cannot send the boys round so there's also zero, I mean ZERO, risk of your parents opening the door to a debt collector.

There will be no Court and no bailiff, despite the threatograms that you will receive. It is all just junk mail and then it all fizzles out because it's just junk mail, see here for previews of the letters, you can see exactly what happens:

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

Just play snap with the letters, that's what we all do with any private fake PCN. I have ignored two, but some people here have ignored dozens of the pesky flyers on the windscreen!

They are unenforceable, with as much clout as a Burger King flyer on your car if it was followed by a junk mail threat for not eating a burger...you'd snort with laughter if that happened but because THIS particular piece of paper imitates a parking ticket, you have been fooled!

Here's another legal expert opinion to add to the Watchdog solicitor's view. See the barrister's answer at the bottom:

http://www.justanswer.com/uk-law/5isk3-hi-overstayed-berkley-precinct-car-park-ecclesall-rd.html

Anyone who pays a fake PCN is a mug. May as well send money to phishing emailers.

Please show your parents this reply. I am a wife and Mum with a responsible job, enhanced CRB check and it's inherent in me not to risk my credit rating since I used to work in Bank. But I would very very happily collect more fake PCNs and I laughed at the two I did get, showed them to my OH and kids, and friends/relatives so we all see this for what it really is.

note_2

'Anyone who pays a fake PCN is a mug'

i dont know the stats but i'd bet that at least 60% of people pay up, thats an awful lot of mugs!

you cant deny that the invoices are extremely well designed and thought out that if you have little knowledge on the subject they look official!

add in harassment and 'legal precedents' they refer to and its very easy to see why so many people are intimidated into paying.

that doesnt make you a mug at all, just that your intimidated into paying because of their threats.

Coupon-mad

note wrote: »

'Anyone who pays a fake PCN is a mug'

I know it's harsh but I have said it before and stand by it. The only people I would leave out of that description would be people without access to a PC (elderly, foreign visitors etc).

Anyone else = mug because it only takes ONE Google search of the company name to see it's all a big con. Some people have more money than sense.

JagDriver

Interestingly, I'd have to disagree. I only 'found out' AFTER a hire company kindly paid a Parking Eye invoice for me then chased me for the 'debt'. I had never received any kind parking ticket before that.

Stephen_Leak

Only councils, the police, some train operators and Transport for London can issue legally enforceable fines or penalties. A private ticketing company can't. What they issue are “speculative invoices”.

Any warning signs are usually so badly positioned and worded, that they won’t have created a fair and legally binding deemed contract with a driver entering the car park in the first place. See The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1997 and Excel Parking Services vs. Cutts, Stockport, 2011.

If we assume that there is a contract, all the car park owner can claim from a driver in damages for an alleged breach of a contract is what they’ve lost as a result. If it’s in a free car park or the driver paid, this is £0.00. Demanding more has been judged to be unreasonable and, therefore, an unfair contract penalty under the terms of The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1997. See Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. Ltd. vs. New Garage & Motor Co. Ltd., House of Lords, 1914 and countless cases since.

There are also now landmark court cases, VCS Parking Control vs. Ronald Ibbotson, S!!!!horpe, 2012, HM Revenue & Customs vs. VCS Parking Control, Lower Tax Tribunal, 2012 and VCS Parking Control vs. HM Revenue & Customs (Appeal), Upper Tax Tribunal, 2012. In these cases, the judges ruled that only the car park owner can charge for parking and take alleged offenders to court. The Upper Tax Tribunal is equivalent to the High Court and, therefore, its judgements set legal precedents. No private ticketing company or car park owner has taken any alleged offender to court since.

As I suspect that you now realise, there was no point appealling to the private ticketing company. They always reject them. What’s in it for them to let anyone off?

You should write to the car park owner, advising them that they’re "jointly and severally liable" for the actions of their agents and that any further actions by the private ticketing company would be regarded as harassment under the terms of The Protection from Harassment Act 1997. This ought to make the car park owner call off the private ticketing company and, maybe, also realise the potential cost of doing business with one.

The private ticketing company, then a debt collector and then a solicitor will send you a series of letters. The debt collector and solicitor are usually the same people, but using different headed paper. These letters will threaten you with every kind of financial and legal unpleasantness imaginable to try and intimidate you into paying.

The final but more unpleasant threats usually include mentioning that, if the case goes to court, a county court judgement (CCJ) may be issued, that bailiffs may be appointed and that your credit rating may be ruined. For things to actually get to this stage, the car park owner would have to take you to court and win the case. Then, you would have to refuse to pay, to get a CCJ issued after 28 days. Then, you would have to still refuse to pay, to get bailiffs appointed.

Continue to ignore everything you get from them. Eventually, they’ll run out of empty threats and stop throwing good money after bad.

Coupon-mad

JagDriver wrote: »

Interestingly, I'd have to disagree. I only 'found out' AFTER a hire company kindly paid a Parking Eye invoice for me then chased me for the 'debt'. I had never received any kind parking ticket before that.

Ah but then the mug who paid it was someone at the hire company!

fivetide

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Anyone else = mug because it only takes ONE Google search of the company name to see it's all a big con. Some people have more money than sense.

I would also say some people's parents or older people generally (say my dad as an example) would just look blankly at you if you said "google it"

Bit harsh to say all who pay are mugs, the letters etc are very scary looking as intended and most people would appreciate they may have broken the unenforcable rules. Without the benefit of 'someone in the know' though, they would likely cough up.

However, thre are a lot of mugs out there with web access I'll grant you. Otherwise spam emails wouldn't exist.

5t.