UKCPS Parking fine Court papers

Coupon-mad

jonny17 wrote: »

I have just been down to the retail park and spoken to they guy, hes saying ignore it but i dont think he understands thats its gone this far even though i have told him, hes told me he is going to speak to someone he knows on the otherside that deal with the paper work side of it.

Am i right in saying there is not much chance i can defend my case now. Its my own fault at the end of the day i suppose.

It's too late if you got the Court papers and ignored them, sadly you've allowed UKCPS to get a pathetic default judgment and the best thing to do is pay it now before the date shown on the letter so that no 'unsatisfied CCJ' is marked against you.

Stroma

Don't ignore it ! And don't rely on this person to do anything at all for you. They have a judgement you are on a timeframe on this, if you don't do something a ccj will be regisistered against you, that will be on your credit records for 6 years. Is that worth the £175 ?

jonny17

Thanks guys i know you know what your talking about.

I will pay it now.

Guys_Dad

jonny17 wrote: »

Hello

Around christmas time i have parked in a disabled bay on my local retail park. I came back to my car to fine a Parking charge notice on my window, it all looked very legitimate as they do, but was wise to private companys doing this and thought i would not pay it. I did a bit of googleing to double check the company etc.
Anyway i had all the usual bulk mail off them telling me if i pay early as a good will gesture they would reduce the fine and so on. I made no contact with them at all. About a month and a half ago i got issued with a claim form stating it was from northampton county court, this got me a bit worried but i read that this was just one last good attempt to scare me so i decided to ignore it.

Today however i have just recieved a 'Judgment for Claimant' letter in the post saying i must pay £175 to the claimant.

I am not very well educated in matters like this and i am just curious as what to do.

THis is the biggest flaw in the "IGNORE IGNORE" arguments put forward by many on here.

Yes, if you are in the know, can detect the difference between a fake scammagram and genuine court papers. But not everyone is sufficiently well versed in the difference and we get to jonny's problem - it now costs more to set aside the case than it would have been in the first place to pay the robbers.

So, you need to spell some things out very clearly - not just for the OP but also for anyone using this forum as a reference site.

So I am with c-m and others who suggest that POPLA should be the default route, as long as there is sufficient basis for appeal and there is always the basic right of occupancy point for 99% of the PPC run sites.

jonny17

I have just rang up and paid the £175 Guys dad you are right, i hope people who do some research on this read this thread and get use out of it and hopefully something can come of it to stop these con artists fleecing people of hard earned money. Thanks for all your help guys

Stroma

Guys_Dad wrote: »

THis is the biggest flaw in the "IGNORE IGNORE" arguments put forward by many on here.

Yes, if you are in the know, can detect the difference between a fake scammagram and genuine court papers. But not everyone is sufficiently well versed in the difference and we get to jonny's problem - it now costs more to set aside the case than it would have been in the first place to pay the robbers.

So, you need to spell some things out very clearly - not just for the OP but also for anyone using this forum as a reference site.

So I am with c-m and others who suggest that POPLA should be the default route, as long as there is sufficient basis for appeal and there is always the basic right of occupancy point for 99% of the PPC run sites.

There is a difference between a letter from a company and a letter from a court, I'm sorry if people sometimes can't tell the difference, but we can't reply on every possible variation that could happen, the posts would be huge.

The default should always be ignore as popla may not be available because of location, timeframe or company involved. It also depends on the circumstances of the person. There are a lot of variables and we should look at the situation at hand.

Coupon-mad

jonny17 wrote: »

I have just rang up and paid the £175 Guys dad you are right, i hope people who do some research on this read this thread and get use out of it and hopefully something can come of it to stop these con artists fleecing people of hard earned money. Thanks for all your help guys

You've just bought UKCPS a new set of plush cushions and a travel kettle for their caravan outside the back of that pub in Holbeck. Watch this from 7 minutes onwards:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01qgr1l


:rotfl:

jonny17

It wont let me play it, what is it, i am in no doubt what i have done but i am not going to let £175 ruin me for 6 years. when i decided to ignore it i knew it would take nerve to ignore the threatening letters. It was through me not knowing in detail what to do and my own fault for ignoring the first court letter and not researching more on the subject.

spacey2012

Where is this number ?
Claim/ case/ judgement
Still waiting.

And where is this thread you claim you were advised to ignore everything.
We are not daft.

Half_way

jonny17 wrote: »

I have just rang up and paid the £175 Guys dad you are right, i hope people who do some research on this read this thread and get use out of it and hopefully something can come of it to stop these con artists fleecing people of hard earned money. Thanks for all your help guys

You could have a little leverage with the retail park, if the employee advised you to ignore it, a strong letter of complaint would be the best action in the hope that they may be able to sort something out for you.

One quick question - did you have any need/requirement to use a disabled space? or was parking in that bay a mistake? ( or even done on purpose)
if you had just cause to use that space then there may be some comeback
If you made a genuine error ( i have seen ssome atrocious signed/marked bays) then so be it
if it was deliberate then i could go on for a while as I beleive that these bays shouldnt be abused.