Civil Parking Notice from CPP

Guys_Dad

Stroma wrote: »

No they can't, and they can't force people to accept these third party companies. I have yet to see a single lease that says they must accept parking scammers

No, they don't get that specific, but I have seen a copy of a lease only last week that does give the management company the leeway to take whatever measures they wish and, very regrettably, my friend is facing all sorts of non-parking issues purely because they do have discretion to act almost without restraint.

Solicitors are dealing with her case now.

I have also previously, some years ago, come across very woolly leases that confer unspecified powers upon management companies.

If the leases didn't have these escapes, just how could management companies bring in scammers without getting leaseholders' permission.

Masrati

Thanks for the advice Coupon-mad, so would I be right in thinking I appeal based on;

Parking charge not proportionate to any loss incurred.
Trespass charge
Do they have authority (This one I am not sure on as I presume the management company have given them permission in some form)
The Parking Charge exceed the appropriate amount. obviously as it there is no charge for parking there and it is a visitors bay so no one is incurring any loss?

And also the major point that I was not actually parked in a residents bay as the ticket says.

Quick edit just after posting this, just found out my mother has been in contact with the CAB and they are telling her that it should just be ignored.

Also we have looked at some other cars not everyone has a permit and those that do have one, have it for a completely different company so would they even be valid anyway?

Have also triple checked the signs and there is nothing there about visitors at all

Coupon-mad

Glad to hear that the CAB are not telling you to pay it, as we hear of that quite a lot (their old advice guide was flawed as it was written by a PPC owner!!).

Here is the newest 'Advice Guide re private parking tickets' from the CAB.

You can ignore of course, that is an option but you must be ready for the flurry of debt collector threatograms. As shown in the sticky thread 'PPC letter chains', click on the OLD pre-October link on that thread and you'll see all the pics of the sort of scary letters you have to just ignore (obviously you wouldn't ignore real sealed Court papers but that's almost unheard of and very defendable).

I should also have said that, if you decide to 'challenge it then appeal to POPLA' - the advantages being all POPLA referrals cost PPCs £27 plus VAT each time (whatever the outcome!) and if you win, the irritating piece of rubbish is cancelled - then in fact you should only send a challenge once you receive the Notice to Keeper (NTK).

That's what we now advise because it gives you more ammo for your challenge when ScammersRUs miss the deadlines and requirements for keeper liability!

http://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/keeper-liability/


HTH, so for now do nothing and when that NTK arrives in a few weeks, see which option feels right for you, bearing in mind you only have that chance of POPLA at these early stages (PCN or NTK) not later on once you are steadfastly ignoring piles of junk mail!

Masrati

Hello again,

I have finally received the Notice to Keeper but am still undecided what to do.

So far I am leaning towards ignoring any notices but we have recently found out there are permits available (£20 for a visitors permit) but the landlord had not made my mother aware of this at all!

As a further point I went to their website and entered the invoice details in as they claim there are photographs of the "offense" there. There are no photo's shown but can they log any visits etc, and use that against me?

Thanks again.

Coupon-mad

Since you last posted we've recently read the POPLA first 'annual report' (a few months worth!) and CPP have lost almost all the cases people appealed!! :rotfl:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4634471

See page 34:

Liberty Printers (AR & RF Reddin) Ltd also T/A Liberty Services Ltd
and Car Parking Partnership Ltd

lost 112 (won 10) out of total 122 appeals = 92% won by motorist


It's one of the worst records on there and shows how many people have already sussed their fake tickets as worse than useless as far as compliance and fairness is concerned. Almost everyone has won, even those with weak appeals and no forum help = fairly unusual so CPP must be absolutely terrible at the simple admin task of preparing their so-called 'evidence!

Seeing as on this forum and on pepipoo, we have seen 100% of our POPLA wording win (against all PPCs we have tried it against so far) since we sorted it out and saw what POPLA liked to see in an appeal (from around March onwards), why would you hide from this con?

Scrape them off your shoe for good and cost them £27 plus VAT to lose again. Join in the fun and blacken their name further with POPLA.

Read any threads on here about POPLA appeals, starting with 'POPLA decisions' at the top of the forum to give you a flavour of what POPLA adjudicators like to make their decisions on. Then read pretty much any other recent threads as there are links to example POPLA appeals to copy from and you could create a draft strong appeal the same day. They can't 'use anything against you' if you appeal strongly against what they did (not make excuses for what you did).

Job done. Show us your draft in a few days if you decide you are up for scoring another point against CPP at their own expense.

Masrati

I have just read that report, it isn't making my decision any easier tbh! Though I take it I would first have to appeal to CPP before any representations can be made to POPLA anyway.

That being said CPP do seem bad as they claim to have photographic evidence but have not made it available to me which I would intend to highlight.

As an aside just how enforceable are the "contracts" they attempt to enforce on drivers? They seem to make a blanket assumption that anyone reading them is capable of forming a contract, when that may not be the case at all especially in the case of 17 year old drivers or 16 year old moped riders!

Coupon-mad

Masrati wrote: »

I have just read that report, it isn't making my decision any easier tbh! Though I take it I would first have to appeal to CPP before any representations can be made to POPLA anyway.

That being said CPP do seem bad as they claim to have photographic evidence but have not made it available to me which I would intend to highlight.

As an aside just how enforceable are the "contracts" they attempt to enforce on drivers? They seem to make a blanket assumption that anyone reading them is capable of forming a contract, when that may not be the case at all especially in the case of 17 year old drivers or 16 year old moped riders!

A PPC will say they are enforceable but in practice they are not with a proper defence (and only a very small % consider trying a small claim). But that's another reason to very simply do a basic challenge to CPP written in the third person as the registered keeper, not talking about what happened nor who was driving. As is shown by Stroma on various threads here, you can copy & paste it in 2 minutes! Then you are half way to getting the scam cancelled.

Also if you ignore, the letters from CPP's chosen debt collectors are among the worst in terms of intimidating wording and the letters annoy people for months and months.

To me it's a no brainer - challenge and then win it at POPLA with our help - but it's your fake PCN.

Masrati

Just an update, sorry its taken so long but I was intent on wasting as much time of theirs as possible!

I appealed on the last possible day, on the grounds that it was a visitors bay and that they had only stated a time it was seen, not a period.

I was successful, they cancelled the ticket due to an "administrative error" so thanks for the help! No need to go to POPLA after all

Coupon-mad

Wow, a lot of successes in getting fake PCNs cancelled on here today - well done! :T