UKPC - Change in law?

rosie_posie_3

Hi

I received a UKPC parking charge the other day. Now, I have read previous threads which tell me to ignore & eventually they will go away, as they cannot prove who was driving the car. But I read on honestjohn.co.uk that the law changed in Oct 2012 which may enable UKPC to automatically enforce charge on the registered keeper of the car, anyone know anything? Don't want to contact them/appeal.

muckybutt

rosie_posie wrote: »

Hi

I received a UKPC parking charge the other day. Now, I have read previous threads which tell me to ignore & eventually they will go away, as they cannot prove who was driving the car. But I read on honestjohn.co.uk that the law changed in Oct 2012 which may enable UKPC to automatically enforce charge on the registered keeper of the car, anyone know anything? Don't want to contact them/appeal.

UKPC are muppets, always have been always will be. Yes the law changed back in October but the advice hasnt, carry on ignoring them, you will get several letters from them and their other employed muppets, all of which you can ignore.

The only time we ever say dont ignore is if they actually go ahead with court, they rarely do but even then if you come back on here and ask for advice then we'll be able to get it quashed.....ways and means

Dont what ever you do though is contact them.

Mrs_Imp

I've had the threatening letters from UKPC, then they 'passed it on' to a debt company, who have 'passed it on' to another debt company. They've kindly offered to let me pay a reduced amount of £80 rather than £120.

All the correspondence has gone in to my 'ignore' pile

I suggest you do the same.

pogofish

No change in the law at all - This remains a totally unreasonable charge, so just ignore like before.

Much more info on what has and has not happened on this thread (and a great many others) in the Parking Forum:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4360185

thenudeone

pogofish wrote: »

No change in the law at all

except that the law now very clearly says:

The creditor has the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle.

.. which it didn't before.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

This is obviously a definition of "No change in the law at all" which I wasn't previously aware of!

However, it only covers parking charges, not "penalties", and is dependant on a number of other conditions and limitations, but it IS a change in the law.

pogofish

thenudeone wrote: »

except that the law now very clearly says:

The creditor has the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle.

.. which it didn't before.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

This is obviously a definition of "No change in the law at all" which I wasn't previously aware of!

However, it only covers parking charges, not "penalties", and is dependant on a number of other conditions and limitations, but it IS a change in the law.

Nope - The landowner has always had the right to recover genuine unpaid parking charges and that is a totally different thing to the unreasonable and illegal contract "penalties" that are the stock in trade of the typical PPC. These have never been legally recoverable and remain so.

So in that respect, nothing whatsoever has changed - stop trying to mislead people!

vaio

yep, but previously the parking charges could only be recovered from the person who incured them under contract law. Under the new law the charges can be recovered from the registered keeper who might well have no idea the charges were incurred

pogofish

vaio wrote: »

yep, but previously the parking charges could only be recovered from the person who incured them under contract law. Under the new law the charges can be recovered from the registered keeper who might well have no idea the charges were incurred

So how exactly does this have any bearing on the OP with a UKPC ticket?

You seem to be missing the somewhat critical point that no AOS member operating under POFA is the sort of firm liable to demand a reasonable and accurate charge that reflects any actual loss to the landowner. So their illegal penalties remain exactly as they were before whoever they are directed to.

And for the other firms - Not AOS, so no chance of them getting any details to pursue you with.

And VCS vs HMRC also has a very significant bearing on this, again regardless of POFA.

Crabman

I'll move this to the Parking sub-board

Stroma

thenudeone wrote: »

except that the law now very clearly says:

The creditor has the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle.

.. which it didn't before.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

This is obviously a definition of "No change in the law at all" which I wasn't previously aware of!

However, it only covers parking charges, not "penalties", and is dependant on a number of other conditions and limitations, but it IS a change in the law.

The crucial part has not changed though, it doesn't make these illegal invoices any more enforceable. The only resource a parking company has is the small claims, there is no other way that it can be enforced except there, not even popla can make people pay. Which leads to the next point.

If it went to court only the person who was driving would be liable, if the parking company took the RK to court because of the assumption that they are liable, they would royally screwed if it wasn't the RK driving. Just because this has come in, it doesn't mean that these companies can issue penalties.

SodG24

vaio wrote: »

yep, but previously the parking charges could only be recovered from the person who incured them under contract law. Under the new law the charges can be recovered from the registered keeper who might well have no idea the charges were incurred

And that shows what a pigs ear of a law POFA really is. As far as I'm aware not a single law of contract has been changed or repealed - therefore decades of contract law meaning there should be an offer and an acceptance still rules. The RK can't legally enter into a contract they know nothing about so any attempt to take an RK to court who wasn't the driver will fail making the statement "nothing has changed" very correct.